is the Word of God and the Scripture again bears witness that the Church is Infallible and yet this way of Reasoning is not in the least defective because the Church has sufficient Credentials for the truth of its Evidence before it rereceives a Testimony from the Scripture viz. The Universal Consent of the whole Catholic Church which as is already proved is undoubtedly certain The Testimony then of Scripture bearing witness of the Church is properly speaking Argumentum ad hominâ—â— that is an Argument from a Concession or a Principle agreed upon by both Parties And now since the Protestants do agree that the Scripture is Infallibly true I hope they will hear it if it bears witness of the Infallibility of the Church Let us see then what it says upon this Subject Christ saith Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Matth. 16. verse 18. Again Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and so I am with you alway even unto the End of the World cap. 28. ver 19 20. And again I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now â— howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth John 16. ver 12 13. St. Paul writes to Timothy But if I tarry long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God the Pillar and Ground of the Truth 1 Tim. â— ver 15. You see Christian Reader that Christ promi'sd to build his Church upon a Rock and that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it that he himself continues with it â—â—â—o the end of the World That the spirit of Truth shall guide it into all Truth And St. Paul says that the Church of God is the Pillar and Ground of the Truth Now if any Man that believes the Goodness and Power of Jesus Christ to perform what he promises can shew me any Text in Scripture more Plain and Evident to prove any thing else than these do the Infallibility of the Church I shall hold my self highly oblig'd to him for that Favour If the Gates on Power of Hell for they are both the same shall not prevail against the Church surely then it shall not fell into Error For there are but two Ways of prevailing against it viz. by destroying all the Members that compose it as to their temporal Being or by corrupting their Souls with Error That the Gates of Hell hath not prevail'd as to the former our own Being is a sufficient Evidence and that they shall not as to the latter methinks a sober modest man ought to be content with the Insurance of Christ's Promise If Christ continues with the Church unto the end of the World can it be imagined that he shou'd suffer it to fall into Error since we cannot suppose him to have any other bus'ness to continue with it than to preserve it from that If the holy Ghost or as the Teâ—t calls him the Spirit of Truth will guide the Church into all Truth we must surely renounce all pretence to Reason and Christianity if we believe that any Power whether Earthly or Infernal can be able to make it err Lastly if the Church be the Ground and Pillar of Truth as St. Paul calls it certainly neither Rain nor Floods noâ— Wind can shake or throw down an Edifice so firmly founded I shall now add three or four Testimonies of the Primitive Fathers in savour of this Truth and so conclude this chapter Saint Ireneus a Father of the second Age writes thus of the Church where the Church is there is the Spirit and where the Spirit of God is there is all Grace lib. 3. c. 40. Praes in lib. per. Ar. In the third Age Origen That only is to be believed for Truth which in nothing disagrees from the Tradition of the Church And a little after We must not believe otherwise than as the Church of God has by Succession deliver'd to us In the same Age St. Cyprian Whoever divides from the Church and cleaves to the Adultress is separated from the Promises of the Church he cannot have God his Father that has not the Church his Mother Again To Peter's Chair and the Principal Church Infidelity or false Faith cannot have access Epist 55. In the fourth Age St. Jerom The Roman Faith commended by the Apostles cannot be changed in Apolog. cont Ruffin In the beginning of the fifth Age St. Augustin I know by Divine Revelations that the Spirit of Truth teacheth it the Church all truth Lib. 4. de Bap. c. 4. Again To dispute against the whole Church is insolent Madness and I my self would not believe the Gospel were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me to it cont Epist fundam c. 5. I shall not trouble the Reader with any Reflections upon these Sentences but will let them stand or fall by their own Weight perswaded as I am that no Comment or Gloss whatsoever can make them speak plainer or more to my purpose I will only mind him that these Great and Eminent Men who shin'd in the Church like so many Lights as well by the Lustre of their extraordinary Piety as by the profoundness of their Learning cou'd not be ignorant of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church of their Time Consequently wou'd never have taught so peremptorily the Infallibility of the Church unless it had been the Opinion of all the Christian World There is then an Infallible Church that is to say a Congregation of Faithful that believes holds and teaches the Doctrine of Jesus Christ 1. Upon the Universal Consent of the Christian World 2. Upon clear and plain Texts of Scripture declaring the Assistance of the Holy Ghost to guide it into all Truth 3. Upon the unanimous Consent of the Fathers of the Primitive Times a Triple Cord which neither the Power of Hell nor the Subtility of Heretics nor the Malice of the World shall ever be able to break Let us now examine what Society of Christians can justly lay claim to or be truly call'd the Catholic Church CHAP. II. The Congregation of Faithful in Communion with the Bishop of Rome and no other is the Catholic Church TO prove this Assertion I shall lay down some Principles known either by their own Light or sufficiently proved by plain Texts of Scripture and the Consent of our Adversaries I. That in the Catholic Church there is and shall be a Continued Succession of Bishops Priests and Teachers from Christ to the End of the World II. That there is but one Catholic Church III. That one Communion as well as one Faith is Essential to the Being of one Church IV. That whosoever separates from or
the Gospel Tho' the Scribes and Pharisees were notoriously known to be very wicked and had enjoyn'd the Jews the observance of some Traditions of their Fathers together with the Law of Moses yet Christ was so far from advising the Jews to separate from them that he expresly commanded them to observe and do whatsoever the Scribes and Pharisees bid them Mat. 23.2 And that because they sate in the Chair of Moses Nay what is more he says if I had not done among them the works John 15.24 which none other man did they had not had sin Intimating that it was neither Reasonable to depart from that Religion which they received from their Ancestors the Truth whereof was at several times confirm'd by True and Real Miracles nor sinful not to hear his Doctrine to the prejudice of their own unless he had done greater Works that is had wrought greater Miracles in confirmation of the Truth of it than any man before had done in confirmation of theirs And shall the Catholic Religion the Religion of Jesus Christ which is grounded upon surer and better promises than that of the Jews even upon the promise of that Word which abideth for ever shall this Religion I say be abandon'd at a Signal given by one single man rising up in opposition to all the World without a Sign or Miracle or the least reasonable pretence to it Surely this is so monstrously absurd that were we not convinced of the truth of it by our own woful experience we shou'd rather believe the whole frame of nature wou'd dissolve and all things run counter to their usual course than that any man in his wits shou'd be guilty of such a folly Obstupâ—cite Coell super hoc That one Profligate Monk who as all the World knows debauched a professed Nun whom he kept till his death contrary to his and her solemn vows of Chastity and for ough that ever I cou'd hear or learn never shewed any marks of Repentance for this his Incestuous and Crimminal Commerce That this wretched man I say without the least Mark or Character of a Divine Commission on the contrary that was branded with all the Marks wherewith Christ and his Apostles point us out the Ministers of Satan shou'd prevail upon the Credulity of so many Great and in other matters Wise and Learned Men is surely so surprising that nothing in Nature can parallel it But did the first Authors of the Reformation work no Miracles As for true Miracles I do not find they did any but somthing like Miracles or rather surprising wonders I find recorded by their own Writers but the mischief on 't is they are such as overthrow the whole Reformation if they were believed Luther tells us in his Book do missa angulari that what he wrote against the Mass was suggested to him by the Devil This Book was printed and published by his own Reformed Doctors of Wittenberg but becauses it looks now somthing scandalous to pious reformed Ears it must pass for an Imposture Bolsec a Protestant Writer tells us that Calvin agreed to give a certain man named Bruleus a sum of mony on condition he wou'd feign himself dead that he might come to Resuscitate him and when all thingâ— were prepared for this farce the new Apostle had no sooner commanded the Living to rise when his words had that strange efficacy as to strike him dead but Bruleus his poor Wife who lost both her Husband and the hopes of her Money reviled the Apostle and discovered the Imposture But this is still so offensive to the Reformation that it is meet it shou'd likewise pass for a Fable But to return Luther arose saith the Dr. and appear'd stoutly against the gross Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome and resisted the united malice and force of Antichrist and his Adherents And what are these gross Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome Even that Faith which was preach'd to his Ancestors at their first Conversion to Christianity as the best of his own Protestant Writers do confess the Truth whereof was confirm'd not by Impostures but by true Miracles as venerable Bede and all the Historians of those Times do witness As to his unchristian Railing in this Place I will say nothing to it but leave him to his own Master to account for it And indeed if Railing were the subject of our Dispute I wou'd freely yield him the Palm for I own I have no Talent that way You see then Christian Reader upon how fickle and sandy a bottom the Faith of all Sectaries stands and how firm and solid that Basis and Foundation are whereon the Catholic Faith is built namely the Universal Consent of all the Christian World which if lyable to Error we may justly doubt of the Truth of any thing in the World even of what we see with our Eyes since as 't is already prov'd it is as impossible that the Universal Consent of so many Nations shou'd conspire to declare they had received that Faith from their Ancestors if they had not as that a Wall for example shou'd not be white when I see it to be so Here I foresee it will be objected that clear Evidence destroys the Virtue of Faith which is essentially obscure as St. Gregory saith Nec bides habet meritum cui Ratio humana prebeâ— Experimentum Nor hath that Belief any merit to which humane Reason gives Experience But this is easily answer'd viz. That the Obscurity of Faith is well consistent with Evidence that the Faith was reveal'd tho' not with the Evidence of the Thing reveal'd by Faith that is one may have Evidence of the Existence of a Thing tho' his Reason can neither understand nor comprehend the Thing it self else the Apostles must have been in worse Circumstances than any other Christian for having seen with their Eyes Epist 1. chap. 1. and felt with their Hands as St. John saith most of the Mysteries of our Redemption they had the Evidence of their Senses for the Truth of their Existence consequently could have no Faith concerning them if there be any Force in this Objection This Answer is agreeable to the Definition St. Paul gives of Faith viz. That it is an Evidence of things not seen Fides est sperandarum substantia rerum Argumentum non apparentium Faith is the Substance of things hoped for the Evidence of things not seen that is grounded upon the Evidence of things not seen nor understood And thus St. Gregory's Words are to be understood for he comments upon these Words of St. John cap. 20. When the Doors were shut where the Disciples were assembled for Fear of the Jews came Jesus and stood in the midst Quomodo saith he post resurrectionem corpus Dominicum verum fuit quod clausis januis ingredi potuit Sed sciendum nobis est quod divina operatio si râ—tione comprehenditur non est admirabilis nec fides habet meritum cui ratio
humana prebet oâ—perimentum How was the Lord's Body after the Resurrection a true Body that cou'd enter the House when the Doors were shut But we must understand that if the Work of God be comprehended by Reason it is not wonderful nor hath that Belief any merit to which humane Reason gives Experience The Disciples saw Christ's Body and felt it with their Hands consequently had the Evidence of two of their Senses Yet according to St. Gregory they cou'd have Faith concerning the Truth of his Body only because they did not comprehend how it was possible for it to enter the House when the Doors were shut In like manner tho' we have Evidence of Reason that the things we believe were reveal'd by Jesus Christ yet the Reward of our Faith is nothing diminish'd because we believe such things as we neither comprehend nor understand And indeed whoever seriously considers the great Work of our Redemption he cannot but think that it was most agreeable to the infinite Wisdom and Goodness of our Divine Redeemer to leave us this Evidence Jesus Christ came to the World declar'd to a select Number of Men such high and mysterious things as seem to shock Humane Reason laid down his Life for the Salvation of Mankind sent his Apostles to publish these Mysteries over all the World and threatned with eternal Damnation all those who wou'd not believe them and that not only for a Time but also unto the End of the World Is it not then very reasonable that this mysterious Doctrine should always be attended with such Characters and Credentials of Truth as may convince the most obstinate Gainsayers of it which I am sure nothing less than either Evidence of Sense or Reason can effect For if the Evidence be less then the Doctrine is only probable and if it be only probable one may reasonably doubt of the Truth of it and if the Truth of it may be reasonably doubted the contrary for ought any one knows may be true and if the contrary may be true I am sure it does not stand with God's Goodness to condemn any Body to eternal Flames for not believing a Doctrine the contrary to which for any thing that he doth or can know may be true Here I wou'd not be understood so as to mean that none can have true Faith without clear Evidence for 't is plain that the most part of Mankind are taught the Articles of their Faith by their Parents or Pastors whose Testimony is confessedly fallible nor do I pretend that this is a Rigorous Demonstration such as Mathematicians make nor yet an Evidence of Sense but this I say that the universal Consent of so many Nations as compose the Catholic Church conspiring in the Belief of such Articles of Faith make it as evident to my Reason that the said Articles of Faith are true as any Evidence of Sense or Demonstration cou'd make them if they were capable of any In a word the Apostles and their Disciples deliver'd the Christian Faith to several Nations and convinc'd their Senses and Reason of the Truth of it by true and real Miracles and the Universal Consent of the same Nations which succeeded the Evidence of Miracles is equally convincing to us that that Faith is certainly true Consequently we have a certain and an undoubted Motive to rely upon in the Belief of the Articles of our Faith Now it is manifest and even acknowledg'd by our Adversaries that excepting those who separated themselves or were cut off from the Church by Excommunication for their obstinate Adherence to some Errors contrary to Faith and whose Opposition cannot prejudice the Truth of that Faith as I prov'd before that excepting those I say the Universal Consent of all the Christian World agrees in all the Articles of Faith that the Catholic Church holds and believes But among other Truths that are deriv'd to us by this Universal Tradition or common Consent of all Nations as afore explain'd this is one That the Holy Ghost or the Spirit of God doth assist the Church and doth guide her into all Truth necessary to Salvation Hence we conclude 1. That the Catholic Church is Infallible in all the Articles of Faith that she holds and professes For since the Holy Ghost is given to the Church to guide her into all Truth and that this Holy Spirit is Omniscient and Omnipotent it cannot be affirm'd without Impiety that it should permit her to fall into Error 2. That General Councils are Infallible in all their Definitions and Decisions of Faith For tho' a General Council be but a Representative of the whole Church yet because General Assemblies of the chief Pastors of the Church have been always look'd upon even by the Apostles themselves whose Steps in this particular the Church doth follow as the best and most effectual Means of determining any Controversie that may arise and that all Good Christians have always held themselves bound to acquiesce to their Determinations and to submit to them it is reasonable to believe that the Spirit of God doth assist and guide them 3. That the Catholic Church is Infallible in determining what Books of Scripture are Canonical and what Books are not and in declaring the true Sense and Interpretation of them For since these sacred Books and the right Interpretation of them are very necessary for the Edification of our Faith and Manners the same Spirit which guides the Church into all Truth does no doubt guide Her in these great and important Truths We shall see hereafter what Society of Christians can justly pretend to be called the Catholic Church I now proceed to prove from Scripture that the Church is Infallible But whereas the Protestants are accustomed to carp at this kind of Proof pretending that this is to Dance in a Circle as They are pleas'd to term it it won't be amiss to examine what is meant by a Circle and when it is to be admitted in Reasoning When two things bear witness mutually the one of the other we call this a Circle and when they have nothing else to support the Truth of their Evidence but their mutual Affirmation then that sort of Proof is Faulty But when both or either have such Evidence on their side as is sufficient to establish their Credit before they bear witness one of another tho' it be still a Circle yet it is good and vallid in all sort of Proof Thus God the Father bore witness of Jesus Christ and He again of the Father Thus Jesus Christ bore witness of John the Baptist and John the Baptist likewise of Him And I hope no Body will be so impious as to say these were vicious or faulty Evidences because God the Father's Testimony was known to be true tho' Jesus Christ had not confirm'd it and Jesus Christ his Works prov'd likewise his own Testimony to be true tho' his Father had not born Him witness In like manner the Church bears witness that the Scripture
guide it into all Truth surely it will not be wanting to it in this Point which is the most material of all others But I suppose the Dr. grounds his Argument upon this Axiom no Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause If he shou'd hence conclude that the supreme Judge cannot decide a Controversie concerning his own Prerogative he must certainly be a great Stranger to all Civil Laws and Constitutions in the World The King and Parliament together are the Supreme Judge of all Causes in England Now if we suppose the Rest of the people of England shou'd Dispute that Prerogative this Controversie according to the Doctor 's Principles can never be ended Not by the King and Parliament for it is their Own Cause nor yet by the Rest of the People of England for it is not Reasonable they shou'd be Judge and Party Who must judge it then No Body So that if we stretch that Axiom thus far we must leave undecided that without which nothing can be lawfully decided The true Sense of it then is this No Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause that is no Private Man who lives under Laws and Government ought to Judge for himself or be his own Carver but must have Recourse to the ordinary Judges whose Sentence he and his Adverse Party are bound to obey But this is by no means to be extended to the Supreme Legislative Power whose very Essence is to Judge all others and to be Judg'd by None As to what he says that a Controversie Who this Infallible Judge is cou'd never yet be decided in the Church of Rome I answer there never was any Controversie in the Church of Rome concerning what is of Faith in this Point namely that the Church is this Infallible Judge and what the Church is surely no Roman Catholic ever disputed Vol. 3. Edit post obit pag. 32. Object 4. If God had thought it necessary That there shou'd be an Infallible Church he wou'd have reveal'd this very thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever but this he has not done therefore he did not think it necessary Answ Let the Socinians for once answer or rather Retort this Argument upon the Doctor Had God say they thought the Knowledge of Three Persons really distinct each of them perfect God and yet but One God necessary to be believ'd by the Faithful he wou'd have reveal'd this very Thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever because it is look'd upon to be the Chiefest Mystery of Christianity but this He has not done Therefore he did not think it necessary to be believ'd Will the Doctor allow this Argument to be good If not I hope he will give me leave to have the same Thoughts of his Argument For I am certain there is no Text in Scripture that proves a Real Distinction of Three Persons whereof each is Perfect God and all but One God so plainly as it proves many other things which are not so necessary to Salvation But has not God plainly reveal'd that the Church is Infallible Tell the Church and if he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and Publican When the Spirit of Truth cometh He shall guide you into all Truth Go teach all Nations And lo I am with you alway even unto the End of the World The Church is the Ground and Pillar of Truth Are not all these clear and plain Has not Christ's own Mouth and his Apostle's reveal'd all These concerning the Church Surely then he judg'd the Infallibility of the Church necessary to be believ'd And this is to a Reasonable Man instead of a Thousand Arguments that He thought it not only necessary but even laid it down as the Chief Fundamental Point of our Belief because this once firmly establish'd wou'd easily clear the Obscurity of any other Object 5. pag. 77. We have as great need of Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice as against Errors in matters of Faith but we have no Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice consequently nor against Errors in matters of Faith Answ This Comparison is in one sense Just and Reasonable and in that sense I will be content to stand or fall by it viz. That as the assistance of the Holy Ghost infallibly secures the Church from Error so the assistance of God's Grace together with the cooperation of our Wills which is always in our power is an infallible security against Sin if put in ure For is not every Sin voluntary And if voluntary surely we may abstain from it it wou'd not be voluntary else For if we cannot abstain from it it is no more voluntary but necessary and therefore no Sin and have not we in several places of the Scripture a promise of the Assistance of God's Grace which is never wanting to our sincere Endeavours and if we have God's Grace and are able at least by this assistance to abstain from sin certainly we have an infallible Security against Sin and Vice or if we have it not how can it stand with the infinit goodness of God to condemn us eternally for that which we cannot avoid In short as it is most agreeable to his infinit goodness and mercy to condemn no Man for what he cannot help so it is but reasonable we shou'd believe he has given us such means as will infallibly secure us if it be not our own fault both from Errors in matters of Faith and from Sin and Vice in matters of Practice But with this difference that Free-will without which there can be no reward or punishment by not cooperating with Grace falls into Sin and Vice whereas the assistance of the holy Ghost depending of no such condition as to its effect infallibly attains its end and preserves the Church from Error in matters of Faith Object 6. All things necessary to be known either in Faith or Practice are clear and plain in Scripture therefore there is no need of an Infallible Church Answ This is a Fundamental Principle I think I may truly say with all Protestants The Dr. I am sure repeats it several Times and lays great Stress upon it But in establishing this Principle he does two things which I suppose he wou'd not willingly allow of had he but well consider'd them 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scripture as infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be 2. He justifies in a great measure all the Heretics that ever denied any Points of Faith on pretence that they are not plain in Scripture 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scriptures as Infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be For the Catholic Church pretends only to be Infallible in necessary Articles of Faith Now if all things necessary to be known in Faith and Practice be clear and plain in Scripture there is no Man of sense that
reads it but may be as Infallible in what is clear and plain as any Church or Churches in the World For what is clear and plain to a Man that he is as Sure and Certain of as if all the Mathematicians in the World had demonstrated it to him since a Demonstration serves for no other end than to make a thing clear and plain So that this worthy grave Doctor necessarily vests in every private Man that Infallibility which he endeavours with so much earnestness to deny to the whole Catholic Church And surely if one single Man be Infallible when he interprets Scripture concerning necessary Articles of Faith how much surer can the same privilege be ascrib'd to a learned assembly of Divines compos'd of the whole Church The Dr. is then forc'd volens nolens even by his own Principles to admit an Infallibility 2. He Justifies in a great measure all the Heretics that ever denied any Points of Faith on pretence that they are not plain in Scripture For Instance the Socinians are Generally Men of Learning and their Ingenious Writings do sufficiently witness to the World they want neither sense nor judgment yet they solemnly declare they do not find one Text in Scripture which proves clearly and plainly the Divinity of Jesus Christ or a Trinity of Persons in One God in a True and proper sense which notwithstanding is one of the Greatest Mysteries of our Faith What must we say of these Men Can we imagin they wou'd be so great Enemies to their own Salvation as to deny this great Mystery if it were clearly and plainly set down in Scripture And if it be not with what face can Protestants condemn the Socinians who openly profess to follow their Principles and do for that very Reason reject this Mistery because it is not plain in Scripture Or how will they be able to convince them upon this Principle since they are ready as they have often declar'd to believe the Mystery of the Trinity if it cou'd be made out that it is clearly and plainly contain'd in the Scripture But why do I say convince them Alas They are so far from any such thing that the Absurd and Ridiculous Systems of many of their Doctors in their Answers to the accute and Ingenious Pamphlets of these Heretics proclaim loudly to the World that the Socinians have got the better and fairly beat them at their own Weapons And thus in rejecting the Authority of the Church which Christ commands us to hear on no less penalty than of being reputed Heathens and Publicans they have open'd a door for these and all other Sects who are daily cutting their Throats with those very weapons Themselves have put into their Hands CHAP. III. Of the Pope's Supremacy VVHat we believe to be of Faith concerning this Point is this That the Pope or Bishop of Rome is the Successor of St. Peter and as such Head of the Catholic Church That the Bishop of Rome is Successor of St. Peter I hope I need not prove since there is nothing in History more universally attested by all Ancient and Modern Writers Nor was it ever yet question'd that I cou'd find 'till some Protestants in this and in the last Age without the least Grounds in Antiquity had the Assurance to dispute it whose Opinions notwithstanding are exploded by most of their own Learned Writers See Dr. Cave in the Life of St. Peter The main Bus'ness then is to shew that this Prerogative was confer'd upon St. Peter And for this we have several Texts of Scripture in which it is plain 1. That Christ confer'd this Dignity upon Him 2. That the Evangelist giving the Names of the 12 Apostles marks particularly his Primacy And 3. That after Christ's Ascension he took upon him this Character always speaking first and moving to the Rest of the Apostles whatever was to be debated 1. Christ confer'd this Dignity upon him I say unto thee that thou art Peter or â—as the Greek has it a Rock and upon this Rock I will build my Church Mat. 16. Jesus saith to Simon Peter Simon Son of Jonas Lovest thou me more than these John 21. And a little after feed my Lambs again feed my Sheep feed my Sheep And the Lord said Luke 22.31 32. Simon Simon behold Satan hath desir'd to have you that he may sift you as Wheat but I have prais'd for thee that thy Faith fail not and when thou art converted confirm thy Brethren The English Translators carrying no doubt an Eye upon this Controversie have rendred it strengthen thy Brethren because a Charge of Confirming others does too plainly denote a Superiority I shall make no other Reflections upon these Texts only desire the Reader to observe that this particular pointing out of Peter as a Rock to build the Church upon the especial Charge of feeding Christ's Lambs and Sheep by which the Holy Fathers have always understood both People and Pastors and the Confirming of his Brethren viz. The Rest of the Apostles must surely denote some particular Mark and Character above the Rest 2. The Evangelist in giving the Names of the 12 Apostles marks particularly St. Peters's Primacâ— Now the Names of the twelve Apostles are these the first Simon Mat. 10. who is called Peter 'T is certain that Peter was not the first Disciple of the twelve nor yet the eldest Man for his Brother Andrew was sooner a Disciple and older than Peter And most certainly Christ did not design the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a Primacy of Ceremony or Civility but for that of Order and Jurisdiction at least as far as it was requisite to found the peace and unity of the Church 3. After Christ's Ascension Peter took upon him this Character Acts of the Apostles cap. 1. He stands up discourses at large upon the fall of Judas and lays before the Apostles and Disciples the Necessity of substituting an other in his Room chap. 2. When the Disciples were fill'd with the Holy-Ghost and spoke with other Tongues and the Multitude thought they were drunk Peter lifts up his voice and gives an account of that miraculous Gift His Spâ—ech in the Temple cap. 3. His defence before the Rulers and Elders in Jerusalem cap. 4. His Sentence upon Ananias and Saphira cap. 5. And many other passages to this purpose found in the same Volum are convincing Proofs of this Truth but more especially that famous Council of the Apostles related cap. 15. Where after much disputing Peter rose up first shew'd the Apostles what conduct they were to keep in regard of the converted Gentils and concluded in a manner the debate with this Sentence Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a Yoke upon the neck of the Disciples which neither our Fathers nor we were able to bear c. So that if we had never been taught any thing else concerning Peters Primacy his conduct in these affairs were enough for any unprejudic'd Man to conclude that either
he was qualified by Jesus Christ for that Office or that he must be a very arrogant Man in taking so much upon him to the Diminution of the Honour and Esteem of his Fellow Apostles And if we put these three things together viz. 1. Christ's building his Church upon Peter giving him the Charge of feeding his Lambs and Sheep and the Power of Confirming his Brethren 2. The Evangelist pursuant to this Power not only reckoning him first amongst the Apostles but also calling him the First 3. Peter's exercising the Office and Charge of Head or Chief among the Apostles as aforesaid We shall plainly see that this Superiority is no Imaginary thing as our Adversaries wou'd make the World believe but a Real Truth grounded upon the Word of God And if this was confer'd upon Peter it is granted by all that the same Prerogative must necessarily devolve upon his lawful Successors the Bishops of Rome And indeed this was so publickly taught and profess'd by the Primitive Fathers and Councils as a necessary and fundamental Truth that many Learned Protestants have been forc'd to own it I shall instance in one Monsieur Blondel one of the most learned Protestants that ever writ against the Pope's Supremacy gives it this Testimony The Titles of the Apostle St. Peter saith he ought not to be put in debate since the Grecians and Pâ—otestants also do confess that it has been believ'd and that it might indeed be that he was the President and Head of the Apostles the Foundation of the Church and Possessor of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Again pag. 107. Rome being a Church consecrated by the Residence and Martyrdom of St. Peter whom Antiquity has acknowledg'd to be the Head of the College Apostolic having been honour'd with the Title of the Seat of the Apostle St. Peter might without Difficulty be consider'd by one of the most renowned Councils viz. that of Chalcedon as Head of the Church Thus far this Learned Man and surely nothing but the Evidence of this Truth cou'd extort so ingenuous a Confession from an Adversary in favour of â—â—me whose Supremacy he chiefly aim'd to pull down Now how far this Title gives him Superiority and Jurisdiction over all other Bishops I will not take upon me to determine This only I shall undertake to prove that the Fathers of the Primitive Church did believe St. Peter and his Successors the Bâ—shops of Rome to be by virtue of this Prerogative St. Peter Head and Chief amongst the Apâ—stles and the Bishop of Rome the same among all other Bishops and Center of Catholic Vnity and that the Bishop of Rome did exercise Jurisdiction as occasion offer'd over the Eastern as well as the Western Bishops even in the Primitive Times such as Excommunication receiving of Appeals Confirming and Deposing of Bishops c. For the Truth of all which we have besides the general Consent of the Church as Authentic Records next to the Scripture as for any matter of Fact whatsoever happening at so great a distance I shou'd never end if I shou'd cite all the Passages of Fathers and Councils and Ecclesiastical Writers which may be brought to prove this Point I will therefore Instance in a few only but they shall be such as will by the Greatness of their Authority and Clearness of Expression I hope be abundantly sufficient to compose this Difference And 1. St. Irenaeus speaks thus of the Church of Rome ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentierem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui undiquâ— sunt Fideles Every Church that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church by reason of her more powerful Principality lib. 3. c. 3. 2. St. Cyprian thus of St. Peter Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod erat Petrus pari consortio praediti Potestatis Honoris Primatus tamen Pâ—tro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia Cathedra una monstretur The Rest of the Apostles were the same that St. Peter was endued with a like Fellowship of Power and Honour yet the Primacy is given to Peter that the One Church of Christ and one Chair might appear lib. de Unitat. Eccles 3. St. Ambrose Andreas prius secutus est Dominum quam Petrus tamen principatum non accepit Andreas sed Petrus Andrew follow'd Christ sooner than Peter yet Andrew did not receive the Principality but Peter in 2 Cor. 12. 4. St. Jerom. Propterea inter duodâ—cem unus eligitur ut capite constituto Schismatis toâ—latur occasio One is chosen among the twelve Apostles to the end that a Head being constituted all occasion of Schism may be taken away Cont. Jovin 5. St. Chrysostom The Pastor and Head of the Church was a Fisherman Hom. 55. in Cap. 16. Mat. 6. St. Augustin In Ecclesia Romana semper viguit Apostoliâ—ae Cathedrae Principatus The Principality of the Apostolic Chair has always flourish'd in the Church of Rome Epist 162. 7. The General Council of Chalcedon We throughly consider that all Primacy and Chief Honour is to be kept for the Bishop of old Rome Act. 16. This was the General Language not only of the Fathers of this Council but even of all Antiquity both in public Assemblies and private Writings the primitive Fathers and Councils always deferring the chief Honour and Primacy to the See of St. Peter as they generally phrase it And indeed tho' the Bishops of Constantinople have always been observ'd to be very ambitious to advance their own See above all others and to have procur'd in two General Councils viz. in the first Council of Constantinople and in that of Chalcedon to have that See prefer'd to Alexandria and Antioch and plac'd next after Rome yet we do not find that any Council or Father did ever dispute with the Bishop of Rome in Point of Primacy or Jurisdiction in so much was all Antiquity perswaded and convinc'd that he was the Chief and Supreme visible Head of the whole Catholic Church Thus much concerning the Primacy of St. Peter and his Successors which yet is not the one half of what may be alledg'd for this Point Now I wou'd willingly beg of any of our Adversaries to Answer me to these few Queries Whether these Holy Fathers did not believe the Primacy of St Peter and his Successors when they spoke so plainly in favour of it Whether they did not understand and were well instructed in the Doctrine of the whole Catholic Church touching this Point Whether they had a mind to flatter the Bishop of Rome or to grant him any more Authority and Power over themselves than was justly due to him And whether it be not an excess of Folly and Weekness to say no worse in the Protestants now fifteen hundred Years after to dispute that Prerogative which is so manifestly acknowledg'd by so many Eminent Martyrs and Confessors and great Doctors of the Primitive Church That the Bishop of
Divine's Books on this subject are still extant and let even our Adversaries be the Judges whether this be not one of the most groundless Mistakes that ever any serious Man cou'd fall into 3dly That he is as far out when he says that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church Had we said that the particular Church and Diocess of Rome were the Catholic Church his Comparison wou'd then indeed have been Reasonable but surely he cou'd not be ignorant that we understand by the Roman Church all the Christian Churches over the World in Communion with the particular Church and See of Rome which we therefore call the Roman Catholic Church because Rome being the Seat of St. Peter's Successor is the Center and Principlâ— of Catholic Unity If the Doctor had a mind to make good his Thesis he shou'd have prov'd that all other Societies of Christians who are not in Communion with the Church of Rome are notwithstanding their Heresies and Schisms a Part of the Catholic Church he shou'd have prov'd that the Nestorians and Eutychians which take up the greatest part of the Eastern Christians are a Part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding they were excommunicated and cut off from the Body of the Catholic Church by the lawful Authority of two General Councils whose Decrees he and all other learned Protestants do profess to embrace that the Grecians are still Members of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their willful Schism from its Communion their ancient Error concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost their having been so often reconcil'd and united to it yet still returning to their Vomit but more especially their self-condemn'd Perverseness in their late Separation from the Communion and Fellowship of the Church of Rome which they solemnly and in the most Authentic manner gave under their Hands in the Council of Florence they wou'd hold and maintain he shou'd have prov'd that Luthor Calvin and all those who adher'd to their new broach'd Opinions are a part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their being excommunicated by the Church and their own Confession of holding these Opinions in Opposition to all the World besides All this I say the Doctor shou'd have prov'd to shew that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church But neither he nor any Body else did ever so much as attempt it on the contrary most of the learned Men of the Church of England have readily given up the Cause in regard of all the aforesaid Sects and most of all other Sects do as censoriously condemn those of the Church of England With what colour of Reason then can the Doctor suggest that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church Nay can any thing be more plain than that the Roman Church as it is understood by Catholics is the whole Catholic Church since none of the aforesaid Sects can with the least colour of Reason pretend to be a part of it since they themselves do unchurch one another since they own that the Church of Rome is a Part at least of the Catholic Church and that one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the being or Constitution of the one Catholic Church in both which Essential they own themselves to be different from the Church of Rome So that if we had no other Proof besides this last Reason is a plain Demonstration that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no part or member of it 'T is a known Truth and even vouch'd by all Protestants whatsoever that the Church of Rome is at least a Part of the Catholic Church That one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the Constitution of the Catholic Church of Christ is a Doctrine generally receiv'd by the Church of England and I suppose by all the Divines in the World besides now there is none of all the aforesaid Sects as they all unanimously agree that holds either the same Faith or Communion with the Church of Rome which yet they hold to be a Part of the Catholic Church and which together with the said Sects make up the whole Body of Christians It is then most evident that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no Part or Member of it But the latter no Protestant ever yet durst affirm for if they shou'd affirm that the Church of Rome is no part of the Catholic Church this would vacate all their Pretences to be a Church since it is from the Church of Rome they pretend to derive their Mission Ordination and spiritual Power if any they have We are then sure even to a Demonstration that if what the Protestants say be true the Roman Church is the whole Catholic Church and no less sure that neither the Protestants nor any other Sect whatsoever can be any part or member of the Catholic Church whilst they continue out of the Communion and Faith of the Roman Church 2. To prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church the Doctor requires the following Particulars shou'd be clearly shewn and made out 1. A plain Constitution of our Saviour whereby St. Peter and his Successors at Rome are made the Supreme Head and Pastors of the whole Christian Church Of this says he we have not the least Intimation in the Gospel nor in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles nay there is clear Evidence adds he to the contrary that in the Council of Jerusalem St. James was if not superior at least equal to him And St. Paul upon several Occasions declares himself equal to St. Peter But suppose it were true continues the Doctor That St. Peter were Head of the Church where doth it appear that this Authority was deriv'd to his Successors And if it were why to his Successors at Rome rather than at Antioch where â—e was first and unquestionably Bishop Answ Touching a plain Constitution c. methinks a modest good Christian might well be content with one plain Text of Scripture produc'd to that purpose much more with a great many and this surely is already done a hundred times over both from the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles where we plainly find this Charge committed to St. Peter and his frequent Exercise of it as occasion offer'd 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of his Successor at Rome Nor do we say it is necessary he shou'd be there rather than any where else For St. Peter might if he pleas'd for ought we know have as well plac'd his Chair in Canterbury but it is matter of Fact that he did not place it there but in Rome His making St. James equal if not superior to St. â—eter in the Councâ—l of Jerusalem needs no other Confutation than a bare recital of the matter of Fact which pass'd there I am sure it is as plain as words can make it
of the Protestants that it needs no farther Confutation 3. All the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ both in a literal Sense and in a Sense of Transubstantiation I shou'd fill up a Volum were I to bring all the Passages of Councils and Fathers which make for this Truth no Mistery of our Religion being ever with more Care inculcated and expounded by the Fathers in their Homilies Catechisms and familiar Discourses to the common People and that no doubt for the difficulty Men naturally have to believe it But it not being my design to write all that may be said for it but what may suffice to evince the truth of it I shall content my self with the Testimony of a few Councils and Fathers whose Authority and Weight however I hope shall make sufficient amends for the smalness of their number And 1. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense or which is the same thing believ'd the Real presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament let St. Cyril Bishop of Alexandria bear witness This great Patriarch in his Epistle to Nestorius speaks thus of the Eucharist Neque enim illam ut â—arnem communem suscipimus absit hoc neque rursum tanquam viri cujuspiam Sanctificati dignitatis unitate verbo consociati sed tanquam verè vivificam ipsiusque verbi propriam God forbid we shou'd receive it as common flesh nor yet as the flesh of a Man sanctified and united to the Word by a conjunction of dignity but we receive it as it truely is the quickening and proper flesh of the Word Himself This Letter was read and approv'd in the third General Council * Concil Ephes puncto 7. which no doubt wou'd never have been had it contain'd any thing contrary to Orthodox Faith so that having receiv'd Authority and Approbation from those Fathers we shall no more consider it as the Doctrine of a private Man but as the Faith of the whole General Council Now can it be imagin'd that this Council which represented the whole Catholic Church shou'd approve and put upon Record a Letter which declares the Real Presence as clear and plain as is possible for words to express it unless it had been at that Time the Faith of the whole Catholic Church And can it be imagin'd that the Catholic Church in those fair Days of her Youth as the Calvinists speak shou'd believe that Christ's proper Flesh as the said Letter words it was in the Sacrament unless they had understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense and receiv'd the same Doctrine from their immediate Ancestors Or can it be imagin'd that these Ancestors shou'd be of this Belief unless they had likewise receiv'd it from their Ancestors and so up to the very Apostles This is surely to any Man of Sense but more especially ought to be to the Church of England who professes to receive the Acts and Decrees of this Council instead of a Demonstration that from the begining of Christianity to the Time of this Council all the Orthodox Christians did both believe the Real Presence and understand Christ's Words in a literal Sense 2. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ this is my Body in a sense of Transubstantiation we have the unanimous consent of the ancient Fathers of the Church many whereof in their familiar Discourses to the common People Illustrate this Conversion by the change of the Water into Wine of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of the River Nilus into Blood and the like And 't is very observable that in all their Discourses upon this Subject and whenever they speak of this Change they have Recourse to the Omnipotent Power of God to which alone they ascribe it which surely wou'd be very needless had there been no real Change in the Case St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem speaks thus Concerning this Change Therefore since Christ hath said of the Bread this is my Body who durst any more doubt it And since He himself so positively affirm'd saying this is my Blood who ever doubted so as to say that it was not his Blood In Time past at the Wedding of Cana in Galilee he chang'd Water into Wine which has a certain likeness to blood and shall not we think him worthy to be believ'd that he cou'd change Wine into his Blood Again for under the appearance of Bread he gives us his Body and under the appearance of Wine he gives us his Blood And a little after tho' your Senses seem in this to oppose you yet Faith must confirm you do not judge the thing by the Taste but let Faith assure you beyond all doubt that you partake of the Body and Blood of Christ Cate. Mystag 3. Here is a great Bishop an Eminent Witness of Antiquity one who flourish'd 1300 Years since and who no doubt knew very well the Faith of the Catholic Church of his Time touching this Point Here is a careful Pastor expounding Christ's Words and Catechizing his Flock in the very Language of the present Roman Catholics He tells them that since Christ said that the Bread and Wine were his Body and Blood they must believe that the Bread and Wine were chang'd into his Body and Blood He illustrates this change by a familiar Comparison of the Water which Christ chang'd into Wine and enforces the belief of the possibility of the other by the actual Existence of this change which they both read and believ'd He tells them that under the Appearance of Bread they receive the Body and under the Appearance of Wine they receive the Blood of Christ and that tho' their senses may tell them that it is still Bread yet their Faith must correct that Mistake that they must not judge what it is by the Taste but must believe that it is the Body and Blood of Christ whatever their senses may suggest to them to the contrary Did ever any Roman Catholic speak plainer concerning Transubstantiation Can any Roman Bishop or Pastor at present enforce the belief of this Mystery with more cogent Arguments than to tell his Auditors that since Christ said this is my Body we must believe it is so since he chang'd Water into Wine we have no Reason to doubt but his Omnipotence is sufficient to change Wine into his â—lood that tho' it appears to our Eyes to our Taste to our Smell that the thing is otherwise yet we must not in this bus'ness rely upon the Relation of these senses but upon the sense of Hearing because Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God which Word we are here only requir'd to believe All which are the very Reasonings of St. Cyril Now what the Protestants may think of this great Maâ— I shall not determin but this I am sure of that had he written this since the Reformation they wou'd have all reckon'd him to be as rank a Papist as ever put Pen
the main End and Design of their meeting and what is more to the eternal damnation of their own Souls they shou'd unanimously agree to declare as an Article of their Faith what they neither receiv'd nor knew nor believ'd before In a word is it possible that any Man of sense cou'd imagin that in any Age of the Church the Pope Patriarchs Bishops Kings Princes and People shou'd all agree to receive as an Article of Faith that which the Apostles never deliver'd to their Ancestors nor their Ancestors to them And if this be absurd and not to be suppos'd as most certainly it is with what colour of Reason can any Man refuse the Evidence of this Council What shall we believe if we do not believe so great and so grave an Assembly Here are from all parts of the Christian World so many hundreds of Learned Prelats attesting on no less penalty than their eternal Damnation if false that this is the Faith which the Apostles deliver'd to the Church that this is the Doctrine which they receiv'd from their Fore-fathers Here are all the Rest of the Prelats and People of the whole Catholic Church likewise declaring by their ready Acceptance and Submission to this Doctrine that it is the same they receiv'd from their Predecessors And now if after all this Men will be so much in love with their fancies as to believe that the whole Catholic Church both in its Representatives and in the diffusive Body of Christians cou'd be induc'd to conspire together to deceive their Posterity against their own plain and True Interest against the Trust and Confidence repos'd in them the Duty and Piety of Parents to their Children the tender Care they ought to have for their Welfare and contrary to the main End and Design of the Divine goodness who put his Word into their Mouths to the end they might faithfully deliver it to succeeding Generations and all this notwithstanding the terrors of the Lord and the wrath of God reveal'd from Heaven against all impious Lyars notwithstanding the dreadful Woes and Curses pronounc'd in Scripture against false Seducers and the horrible aggravation of their own Guilt for having led so many millions into Error and Perdition Add to this the promise of the Holy-Ghost's guiding the Church into all Truth the assistance of the Divine Spirit with it to the End and consumation of the World the dear and tender Love of the great Shepherd of our Souls for his Flock and the great care and concern he has for the preservation of his Church for which he shed his most precious Blood If after all this I say Men will be so far deluded as to believe such dreams I shall only say to them as Joshua did to the Children of Israel If it seem evil to you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve but for me and my House Josh 24. we will serve the Lord and believe his holy Word Thus much concerning the Proof of this Mystery Let us now see what the Doctor Objects Never Roman Conqueror sung more Pâ—ans after Victory nor insulted over his Enemy with more Ostentation than Dr. Tillotson has on this Subject over the Roman Catholics and the Church of Rome and to compleat the Parallel if his Railing Eloquence and Unchristian Contumelies I am sorry he extorts such Words from me were of equal force to bind with that of Roman Chains no Barbarous Captives were ever worse us'd by their Insulting Conquerors than the Sons of that Mother whose Piety and Zeal brought forth in Christ his Ancestors have the fortune to be treated by the Unchristian Slanders and Calumnies of his bitter Tongue and Pen. Besides that invincible Argument if we believe him that Achilles the Evidence of Sense which he pretends to be against this Mystery and which he repeats over and over in more places of his Sermons than I can at present reckon he has oblidg'd us with a Treatise written on purpose upon this Subject which he calls a Discourse against Transubstantiation It begins vol. 3. pag. 297. In this Piece I meet with as copious a Collection of scrurrilous injurious Language of Notorious and Manifest Impositions with so much disingenuity in citing of Authors and managing their Authorities as I believe was ever possible for any Man who had never so little esteem for his Credit to bring within so narrow a Compass Now to Answer all this Discourse and to lay open all its Disingenuity to set these Passages of the Fathers which he mangles and dismembers in their due Light and to shew the Scope and End at which those Fathers aim'd woud alone require a volum of no small bulk which in no wise agrees with my design'd Brevity nor yet will my present Affairs I shall therefore be content at present to answer his main Objection taken from the Evidence of Sense which is the only Objection I find in all his Sermons but with as many faces as Protheus was said to have and some three or four more taken out of this Discourse which are the only Real Difficulties in it being resolv'd however to lay hold on the next Opportunity to answer the whole Paragraph by Paragraph Vol. 3. pag. 80 81. Vol. 5. p. 20. c. Vol. 6. pag. 165. 1. His main Objection is this Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense The Evidence of our Senses is against it 'T is contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind c. Answ This He repeats over and over and to enforce the Belief of it he tells us in several places that it destroys the External Means of Confirming the Truth of Christianity But he only repeats it for I cou'd never yet find in all his Books that he has made the least offer to prove it He wou'd have us it seems be so civil as to take it for granted For without this I believe nay I am sure he did not well know how go about to prove it And 't is a thing I often admir'd with how much Confidence his Good Man and Others wou'd press this Argument upon us without ever offering the least Proof for it when at the same time they knew very well we firmly deny it And this seems so much the more strange because the more Evident any thing is as they pretend this to be the easier it is to find Mediums to prove it But neither He nor all the Philosophers that ever were or are to come shall ever be able to make one good Argument to prove that Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense For what is Transubstantiation The Change of one Substance into another Of what Sense then is Substance the Object that such a Change may be discover'd by it 'T is of no Sense sure but of the Vnderstanding as all the World knows How can that then contradict Sense which is not the Object of any Sense since no Faculty can be employ'd but about its proper Object They might as well
Invocation of the Priest but after the Invocation are chang'd and become an other thing so the Body of our Lord after his Ascension is chang'd into the Divine Substance To which the Catholic Orthodoxus answers thus thou art caught in thine own Net because the Mystical Symbols after Consecration do not pass out of their own Nature for they remain in their former Substance Figure and Appearance and may be seen and handled as before pag. 325. 4. Pope Gelasius seems to be of the same mind Surely says he the Sacraments which we receive of the Body and Blood of our Lord are a Divine Thing so that by them we are made partakers of a Divine Nature and yet it ceaseth not to be the Substance or Nature of Bread and Wine and certainly the Image and resemblance of Christ's Body and Blood are celebrated in the Action of the Mysteries Bib Patr. tom 4. These and some more of less moment are by the Dr. very much magnified and cry'd up and to do him justice he spares no Art nor Industry to improve them to the best Advantage peremptorily concluding at the Foot of each Passage that Transubstantiation was unknown to Antiquity But before I answer them it will be requisite for the better Understanding of these Fathers to observe 1. What Conduct the ancient Fathers generally held when they treated of the Mystery of the Lord's Body and Blood in the Sacrament 2. What was the ancient Father's Belief concerning this Mystery and 3. Whence these Passages objected are taken Which if well consider'd I doubt not to make it appear that these Objections notwithstanding their plausible appearance do not in the least prejudice the Truth of Transubstantiation nor clash with the Father's Opinions who Favour this Doctrine 1. The Fathers here objected and most of the Ancients were very cautious how they spoke any thing on this Subject which might increase the Suspicion the Gentils had conceiv'd of them as if they us'd to eat Human Flesh in the Celebration of their Mysteries which no doubt was occasion'd by the Information of some Apostat Christians who upon renouncing of their Faith declar'd that the Christians us'd to eat the Flesh and Blood of Christ They were therefore to avoid the Reproach and Odium which they must hereupon necessarily incur the Gentils thinking they eat this Flesh as Men do that which is fold in the Shambles very careful to conceal this Mystery and to write nothing that was to be expos'd to the Infidels which might seem to insinuate any such Doctrine being content to glance at it and when they must to deliver their Thoughts obscurely knowing very well that by this prudent Conduct the Pagans wou'd have no just Reason to reproach them and the Christians who were carefully instructed in this Point wou'd easily understand what they hinted at So that in their Treatises against Heretics in the Books they must have expos'd to public view for the comfort and instruction of the Christians and the conversion of the Gentils but more especially in their public Sermons and Homilies where they apprehended any Pagans were present they were very careful to speak nothing out touching this Point but by hints and glances to insinuate their meaning to the Christians so as the Pagans cou'd not understand what they meant Thus Tertulian in the Book which he wrote to diswade his Wife from Marrying after his Decease Non sciet Maritus quid ante omnem cibum gustes si sciverit Panem esse credet non quod dicitur Your Husband will not know that which you taste before all other Meat and if he does he will think it is Bread and not what it is call'd Here a Pagan knows not what he means but his Wife and all other Christians might easily understand that he means the Body of Christ Thus St. Austin in several places insinuates this Mystery in obscure words and then adds these fam'd Words Nôrunt fideles Nôrunt fideles quod dico The Faithful know the Faithful know what I say Thus Theodoret in that very Dialogue objected by the Doctor puts these Words in Orthodoxus his Mouth Oro te ut obscurius respondeas adsunt enim fortasse aliqui Mysteriis non initiati I beseech you answer more obscurely for there are some perhaps here present who are not initiated in the Mysteries This he said because they were about to talk of the Eucharist as appears by the Words of the Dialogue Eranistes answers him sic audiam sic respondebo So I will hear and so I will answer It were needless to bring any more Authorities from Fathers to prove this Truth it being evident from the Conduct observ'd in respect of the Catechumens that this was the universal Practise of the primitive Church These Catechumens were Candidates for Christianity they were taught and instructed in all the other Mysteries of the Christian Faith but not one Word did they hear of or relating to the Eucharist till they had by long Tryal and Experience given sufficient Proof of their Good Resolutions and solemnly promis'd to believe whatever the Catholic Church taught and profess'd Tho' they were taught the Mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation tho' they were allow'd to hear the Gospel read and expounded and to assist at the Rest of the Divine Service yet when the Consecration and Communion of the Eucharist was to be perform'd they were by no means admitted to be present nor as much as know any thing of it but were dismiss'd and excluded from that part of the Service till by long and careful Instructions they were deem'd competent * hence the name of Competentes missa Catechume norum so often mention'd by the Canons to assist at it as they then phras'd it So careful were the Primitive Fathers that none shou'd come to the Knowledge of this Mystery but such as were very well dispos'd to believe and embrace it And now can any Man of Sense imagin that these Holy and Learned Fathers shou'd keep such a stir about the Eucharist or be so careful to conceal it were it but a Type or Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ What is more easie to be believ'd than that Bread represents the Body of Christ and Wine his Blood and that both are taken in remembrance of his Death and Passion Surely there is nothing in the world so easie to be perswaded since all Mankind knows that such arbitrary Signs or Representations depend meerly of the Will of him that institutes them and that there is nothing to be done to perswade their Belief but to tell that they are so Certainly no Pagan or Gentil cou'd ever be offended at a thing so plain or offer the least Reproach to the Christian Religion upon the account of it Consequently there wou'd be no need to conceal or speak obscurely of it nor to hinder not only Catechumens but even Pagans or Infidels to hear it taught and deliver'd But to proceed 2. What
plunge the Children into the Water when they baptize them as the Apostles and primitive Church have done They answer as before that it is not Essential to the spiritual Lotion of the Soul that the Body shou'd be wash'd by Plunging rather than any other way but that whether it be perform'd by Immersion or Aspersion or in any other manner 't is the same thing to all the Intents and Purposes of the Sacrament So that it is plain and even confess'd by our Adversaries that the Church has Power to alter and change all the Circumstances which are not of the Essence and Nature of the Sacraments All the Difficulty then consists in this whether it be Essential to the Communion to receive it in both kinds Or whether One kind be not sufficient And if it be made out that it is not Essential to the Communion to receive both but that it is enough to receive it in One kind then the Protestants must confess that the Church may lawfully command the Forbearance of the other Now that the receiving of the Eucharist in Both Kinds is not Essential to the True and Real Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ to all the Intents and Purposes of the Sacrament but that One Kind alone is sufficient I shall endeavour to shew 1. From several Texts of Scripture which affords us sufficient Grounds to conclude that for the due Participation of the Sacrament it is not necessary to receive it in Both kinds 2. From the General Practice of the Church in all Ages even in those days in which the Protestants do own the pure Word of God as they speak was preach'd and the Sacraments duely administred 3. From the Consent of our Adversaries if consistent with themselves I begin with the first And that our Adversaries may not think I design to impose upon them I will quote those places of Scripture that seem to make against as well as for me Christ says John c. 6. ver 50. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven that a Man may eat thereof and not die Ver. 51. I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven If any Man eat of this Bread he shall live for ever and the Bread that I will give is my Flesh Ver. 53. Verily I say unto you except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood ye have no Life in you Ver. 54. Who so eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood hath eternal Life Ver. 56. He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in Me and I in Him Ver. 58. This is that Bread which came down from Heaven he that eateth of this Bread shall live for ever Here are six Passages whereof three seem to be expresly for the Communion in one kind and the other three seem to be against it What shall we say to this Must we believe all Or shall we believe but three of them For they seem to contradict one another One says Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no Life in you An other If any Man eat of this Bread he shall live for ever If it be True that the Man who eateth of this Bread shall live for ever how can it be at the same time true that he cannot live except he eat the Bread and drink the Cup Must we then hold to three of these Passages and reject the rest As to the Protestants I do not see how it shou'd stand with their Principles to do otherwise For they are so far from believing that the Man who eats of this Bread shall live for ever that they constantly assert that except he drinks also of the Cup he is guilty of a Horrid Sacriledge Vol. 2. pag. 70. 't is what Dr. Tillotson expresly affirms This is no Addition to Christianity says he speaking of the Communion in One Kind but a sacrilegious taking away of an Essential Part of the Sacrament they must then necessarily deny three of these Passages if they be True to their own Principles But for R. Catholics they are not in the least perplext at this seeming Contradiction they believe them all to be both true in themselves and agreeable to their Principles For they belive that whosoever eateth of this Bread the same eateth and drinketh the Flesh and Blood of the Son of Man in the Sense he meant they shou'd eat and drink his Flesh and Blood which is not to be understood as Protestants as well as Catholics must confess tho' upon different Grounds in the strict and proper meaning of the Words as if eating and drinking his Flesh and Blood were to be perform'd by two different Acts whereof one is conversant about a sollid and the other about a liquid Thing as the Words usually and properly import but that to eat and drink his Flesh and Blood signifies no more than to participate of or to take by the Mouth his Flesh and Blood whether with one or different Acts it matters not R. Catholics then find no Difficulty in reconciling these places they believe the Flesh of Jesus Christ is the Flesh of a Living Man which cannot be so without Blood and therefore when they take it they are sure they eat and drink his Body and Blood that is they are Partakers of his Body and Blood And hence it is they do most certainly conclude that it is not Essential to the Communion to receive it in both Kinds because they receive in one all that Christ requires of the Faithful to receive that is his Body and Blood I say Protestants as well as Catholics must confess that in this Passage Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood the Words eat and drink are not to be taken in the strict and usual Sense they commonly bear For seeing they believe that in the Eucharist there is neither Flesh nor Blood nothing but Bread and Wine and that in eating and drinking these Elements to the Letter they do eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ by Faith as it is said in the 39 Articles it cannot be said that they eat and drink the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the literal and usual Sense of the Words it being impossible to eat and drink in the Elements in a literal Sense that which in a literal Sense they do not really contain as Protestants hold They must then necessarily conclude that to eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ is not to be understood in a literal but in a figurative Sense and then the meaning of these Words must be To 〈◊〉 and drink the Body and Blood of Christ that is to be Partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ and if so then 't is certain that in eating only the Body of Christ which being a living Human Body must needs contain his Blood we eat and drink his Flesh and Blood that is we are made Partakers of his Flesh
and Blood which surely is all that is requisite to the Essence or Nature of the Sacrament And now who wou'd believe that the R. Catholics had such grounds in Scripture for the Communion in one kind considering the loud and clamorous accusations yea and the horrible Sacrileges they are charg'd with upon this Subject Well! And who are those who charge us thus Why they are Great and Eminent Men Great indeed not only for the Rank and Station wherein the Powers of this World have placed them but also Great for their Learning and other Excellent Endowments But then 't is that they must so do The Protestant Religion as all the World knows was planted in these Kingdoms by open Force and Violence These Gentlemen's Predecessors possess'd Themselves of the Rich Benefices of the Church and when Men's Interest and Honor are once engag'd 't is hard if they do not stand by them Now there is no way left to justifie these Proceedings but by railing at the Church of Rome and exposing her pretended Corruptions and therefore 't is no marvel they shou'd lay these and a great deal more to her charge But take away these Fatal Byasses Let Benefices be laid a side Let the Riches of the Church be propos'd as the Reward of Virtue and Merit and then we shall see how many Eyes this will open then we shall see the Scales fall off and those who have been hitherto our Greatest Persecutors become like St. Paul the most Zealous Assertors of our Faith and Religion But this by the way There is an other Passage in St. Luke which favours the Communion in One Kind This Evangelist tells us that Christ after his Resurrection appear'd to two of his Disciples as they went to Emans who adds St. Luke constrain'd Him to aâ—ide with them and when he sate at Meat He took Bread and bless'd it and brake and gave to them and their Eyes were open'd and they knew him and he vanish'd out of their sight Now 't is certain that if this Bread which Christ bless'd and brake was the Eucharist we have at least one instance in which Christ himself gave the Communion in one kind For 't is said that after he had broke the Bread and gave it to them he vanish'd out of their sight And indeed it is very hard to conceive how the breaking of ordinary Bread as 't is usually done at Meat shou'd open these Disciples Eyes so as to know him that did it to be Christ Besides the breaking of Bread in the Acts of the Apostles is always understood of the Communion and St. Chrisostom St. Augustin venerable Bede and Theophilactus in their comments upon this place teach us that this Bread which Christ brake was the Eucharist which surely they wou'd not have done had there been the least doubt of the lawfulness of the Communion in one kind However because it is not thus interpreted by the universal consent of the Church I shall lay no more weight upon it than it can reasonably bear leaving the Reader to judge what impression the Authority of four such Great Men so well read in Antiquity is apt to make upon an unprejudic'd Mind I now proceed to shew that the Communion in Both Kinds is not Essential to the Sacrament 2. from the general practise of the Church in all Ages even in those days wherein the Protestants do confess the Pure Word of God was preach'd and the Sacraments duly administred The Protestants do pretend to pay a great deal of Respect and veneration to Antiquity and in all their Debates and Controversies of Religion whether with Us or among Themselves they are willing to Appeal to the Primitive Church which they look upon as the Rule and Measure of their Faith and Practice Now if it appears by the Practice of the Primitive Church that the Communion was given in One Kind without the other and that this was neither prohibited by the Governours of the Church nor found fault with by the People nor yet wrote against by any Man whatsoever then 't is but reasonable to hope that every Ingenious Protestant will easily be perswaded that neither the Pastors nor the People of the Primitive Church did ever believe that both kinds were Essential to the worthy participation of the Sacrament This I shall by God's Assistance endeavour to evince from the best Records and the most unquestionable Witnesses and Writers of the Primitive Times And here I find four sorts of Communion the Communion of the Sick the Communion of Infants and little Children the Communion of Private Families commonly call'd the Domestic Communion and the Public and Solemn Communion of the Church And in regard of all these I shall undertake to prove that for the first six hundred Years the Eucharist was given 1. in the Communion of the Sick under the Species of Bread alone 2. In the Communion of Infants and little Children under the species of Wine alone 3. In the Domestic or Private Communion under the species of Bread but so as to be sometimes given tho' seldom in both kinds And lastly in the public and solemn Communion of the Church sometimes in one sometimes in both kinds as the Piety and Devotion of the People carry'd them to participate of one or Both. Touching the Communion of the Sick Eusebius One of the Best Hist Eccles lib. 6. cap. 44. and most Celebrated Historians of the Primitive Church gives us an intire Letter of the Great Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria upon this Subject In this Letter Dionysus relates the Story of a certain Old Man call'd Serapion who being under Publick Pennance and falling Sick sent a Boy to a Priest that was at some distance from him to desire him to come to him and give him the sacred Communion before he had departed this Life but the Priest happening at the same time to be sick and not able to go so far gave a Piece of the sacred Bread to the Boy and order'd him to carry it to Serapion and enjoyn'd him moreover to moisten it in some Liquor and then to give it to him as his last Viaticum which when he had done saith Dionysius the good Old Man immediately gave up the Ghost Here is a Communion in one kind related by a Man who was as Great a Saint as he was a Bishop and Recorded by an other Great and Learned Bishop Both very ancient Witnesses both much celebrated by Antiquity Yet neither the one nor the other finds any fault with the Priest nor with Serapion for this Communion which our Adversaries wou'd now abhor as sacrilegious and detestable on the contrary they both admire the Goodness of God as the said Letter witnesseth in sparing this poor Man's Life 'till he had receiv'd the sacred Pledge of his Redemption And now can it be imagin'd that these two Great Men who liv'd so near the Times of the Apostles and were so well instructed in the Faith and Discipline of the Church shou'd
present Mass-book Alcuinus De Div. Off. a Famous Author of the eigth Century relates the same thing So doth Rupertus Lib. 2. c. 9. de Div. Off. Hugo de Sancto Victore and other Writers of the Eleventh Century They tell us that on Good-Friday there was no Consecration made but that the Body of our Lord which was consecrated the day before was reserv'd for that day's Communion that the Priest took the Lord's Body and some unconsecrated Wine and Water and then gave the Communion to the People under the Form of Bread alone So that there has been a perpetual Practice in the Latin Church of giving the Communion in one kind solemnly once every Year both to Clergy and Laity even to this very Time I might further bring the Authority of Sozomenus Evagrius Authors of the sixth Century and of several Great and Learned Men of the Gallican Church to confirm this Practice but I think it is sufficiently evident from what is said that the Communion was publicly givâ—ng in one kind ever since Christians had Churches for public and solemn Service I shall therefore proceed to shew in the last place That to take the Communion in both kinds is not Essential to the Sacrament from the Consent of our Adversaries if consistent with Themselves I suppose Martin Luther's Opinion in this Matter is of no small Authority for 't is but reasonable to suppose that those who have follow'd the Scheme which he drew shou'd pay their just tribute of Respect to his Opinion in this Point Let us then hear him speak If any Council says he shou'd chance to Decree the Communion in both kinds we shou'd by no means make use of Both De Miffa Ang. nay we wou'd sooner in contempt of the Council take one or neither than both and curse those who shou'd by the Authority of such a Council make use of both kinds Here I think it is very plain Luther was of opinion that both kinds was not essential to the Sacrament else surely he wou'd not have said that he wou'd sooner make use of neither than of both nor curse those who shou'd take both kinds But the Discipline of the French Protestants will afford us a more ample Testimony in this Matter In a Synod held in Potiers Anno. 1560. and in an other in Rochel 1571. It is provided that those who cannot drink Wine may receive the Communion under the Form of Bread It may not be amiss to subjoin their very Words as they are read in the 12th Chapter of their Discipline Tit. Of the Lord's Sup. Art 7. The Bread of the Lord's Supper ought to be administer'd to those who cannot drink Wine upon their making Protestation that it is not out of Contempt and upon their endeavouring what they can to obviate all Scandal even by approaching the Cup as neer their Mouths as they are able Now 't is not to be imagin'd that these Gentlemen shou'd think both kinds essential to the Communion and yet make such a Decision For there is no Body who is never so little Read in Philosophy but knows that the Essence of Things is indivisible that by separating one essential Part from the other you destroy the nature of the whole that in giving only an essential part of a thing you give nothing in regard of that whose essential part it was consequently he that gives but part of the Sacrament gives no Sacrament at all Therefore these Gentlemen who knew better Things in ordering the Bread alone to be given to those who cou'd not drink Wine cannot in Reason be suppos'd to believe that the Cup was Essential to the Communion else they wou'd have absolutely refus'd the Sacrament to those who cou'd not receive it in both kinds since to give it in one kind were to give nothing at all but rather to prophane and abuse that which is most Sacred and August in the Christian Religion whereas the natural disability of those who cannot drink Wine might reasonably excuse them from taking either kind And thus I have endeavour'd as briefly as I cou'd to prove from the practice and discipline of the Church in all Ages from public as well as private Communion from Liturgies Fathers and Historians and even from the consent of our Adversaries manifestly imply'd in their Discipline and Practice that neither the Primitive Christians nor the Catholic Church in any Age nor yet any Orthodox Believer did ever think that to take the Sacrament in both kinds was essential to the Communion And if so then it is plain and evident that the Church hath Power to and may lawfully restrain the Faithful from the Cup and confine them to One kind only Let us now see what Dr. Tillotson objects to all this And here I shall not abuse the Reader 's Patience by repeating the same thing over again for since all that can with any colour of Reason be objected is contain'd in one short Paragraph tho' the things there insisted on are often repeated in several of his Sermons but with no material Addition I will only transcribe it and offer my Exceptions to it And then says he the Communion in One kind is plainly contrary to our Saviours Institution in both kinds as they themselves acknowledge And therefore the Council of Constance being sensible of this was forc'd to decree it with an express non Obstante to the Institution of Christ and the Practice of the Apostles and the Primitive Church And their Doctrine of Concomitancy as if the Blood were in the Flesh and together with it will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and pierc'd and exhausted and drain'd of his Blood and his Blood is represented as shed and poured out so that one kind can by no means contain and exhibit both Three things the Doctor here insists upon 1. That We our selves acknowledg the the Communion in one kind to be contrary to our Saviour's Institution 2. That the Council of Constance was forc'd to decree it with a non obstante to the Institution of Christ 3. That the Doctrine of Concomitancy will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and exhausted and drain'd of His Blood I may say of these three Propositions the first is neither True nor to the purpose The second is something to the Purpose but not True The third is like the first neither True nor to the Purpose I begin with the first We our selves acknowledge that the Communion in one Kind is contrary to our Saviour's Institution For my own part I have read at least some of the best R. Catholic Casuists and Divines upon this Subject and have convers'd with many more Yet I declare I neither read nor heard any of them say that to give the Communion in one kind was contrary to our Saviour's Institution nay I think all R. Catholics do believe that the Administration of the Communion
here fasten upon us is so Gross and Palpable that it were to abuse the Reader 's Patience to insist long upon our Vindication They say we pray in an Vnknown Tongue and we say and are ready to prove that we pray in the Tongue the best known in Europe And we farther say that therefore we pray in it because it is so And I am sure They Themselves what ever they may say in the Heat of Disputes are upon all other Occasions ready to acknowledge this Truth However because we are commanded by St. Peter to be ready always to give an Answer to every Man 1 Pet. 3.15 that asketh us a Reason of the hope that is in us I shall endeavour to offer some of the Reasons why we pray in that Tongue which they call Vnknown and leave the Reader to judge whether our Adversaries have all the Reason they pretend to cry so loud 1. We make use of the Latin Tongue in our Liturgy because we wou'd not Recede from the Example and Practice of our Ancestors who from the first planting of Christianity to this Day whether in Rome or in any other Part of the Western Church us'd no other Language in the Liturgy than Latin And thus to follow the Model our Holy and Pious Fore-fathers left us the Scripture not only warrants but commands us to do Remember the Days of Old Deut. 32.7 consider the Years of many Generations Ask thy Father and he will shew thee thy Elders and they will tell thee 'T is certain and even acknowledg'd by our Aversaries that when the Christian Religion was first Preach'd in the West every Country had then as well as now it s own peculiar Language different from the Latin which tho' it was cultivated by Men of Letters and Bus'ness in all Countrys to which the Romans extended their Conquest yet the common people or Natives were generally Ignorant of And 't is no less Evident that the Apostles and Apostolical Men who preach'd and Propagated the Christian Religion in these Countrys were endued with a Power of working Miracles in Confirmation of the Truth of it and by their readiness to lay down their Lives and to shed their Blood for it gave sufficient Testimony of their Zeal and Charity for the common People as well as for the great Ones yet all the Records of Antiquity all the Ancient and Modern Liturgies together with the Universal Tradition of the Western Church and even the Consent of our Adversaries all these I say bear witness that neither the Apostles nor the Apostolical Men who first planted the Christian Faith in these Parts nor any succeeding Generation of Catholics did ever use in the public Liturgy of the Church any other Language than the Latin which 't is confess'd the common People Generally Speaking of all Countries except Italy are and have always been Ignorant of And therefore I think we may very safely tred in the steps of these our Holy Ancestors and be content with the Liturgy and Language they left us at least if we must be condemn'd for so doing we have the comfort to be condemn'd in Company with these Great and Holy Men to whose Doctrine and Practice God Himself was pleas'd to put His Seal 2. We must make use of this Language because we conceive it very necessary to have an Uniformity as much as is possible both in Faith and Practice that we may with one Heart and one Tongue Praise the Lord and Magnifie His holy Name The Catholic Church is One in Communion as well as in Faith Now how much one common Tongue in which the public Service of the Church is perform'd contributes to foment this Union the miserable Distractions and Divisions of our modern Reformers who have as many different Religions as they have different Tongues do but too manifestly Evince All the Members of the Catholic Religion ought to have Communion and Fellowship one with another They shou'd all be united in one common Faith and one uniform Worship of one God they ought all to be qualified for the Participation of the same Sacrament and to assist together at the same Public Divine Service wherever they meet else how can the Unity of their Faith and Communion subsist Now 't is hard to conceive how all this can be perform'd if we have our Liturgy in as many different Tongues as there are Countrys in the Catholic Church For how can I have fellowship with a Man whose Language I do not understand How can I joyn in Prayer or in God's public Worship with any Society of People when I cannot discern by any thing they do or say whether they are Catholics or Heretics Or how shall I receive the Sacrament in the Society of those who for any thing I can see or understand may be Jews or Blasphemers of my Holy Religion So that if we take away that Common Band that Common Language that unites and Cements all the Members of Christ's mystical Body the whole Frame of the Catholic Church will dissolve and falls to Pieces and we shall have as many different Churches as we have Tongues 3. We do not see what great loss the Common People suffer by not having the Liturgy in vulgar Tongues and if we had we are sure the good that might acrew to them by having it so is not so valuable as to be purchas'd at the Expence of the common Union and Peace of the whole Catholic Church which as experience shews is necessarily consequent upon such an Indulgence The most Part of the common People are taught at least to read in their own Language and if we except some of the Commonality of Ireland and the Highlands of Scotland who are industriously barr'd all sort of Education there is not one in a hundred even of the meanest of the Common sort who want this Help And then they have the whole Mass the Epistles and Gospels and Collects of all the Sundays in the Year together with all the Psalms in vulgar Languages in their Prayer-books which they may read to themselves in their own Tongue whilst the Priest reads them in Latin and which no doubt contributes more to their Edification than if the Priest had spoke in their own Tongue considering that in Catholic Countries where some Thousands are assembled it is not possible for the hundreth part of the Audience to hear what is said in what ever Language he speaks Add that the greatest part of the Mass is pronounc'd so low that scarce any that is present hears what is said the Rubric so commanding that the Priest may in the Silence of Recollection and Meditation be the better dispos'd to perform the Office in that August and Adorable Mystery with the Gravity and Decency that becomes it Besides on all Sundays and great Festivals throughout the Year there are in Catholic Countries public Sermons and Exhortations perform'd in Vulgar Language yea and public Prayers read in the Pulpit either before or after the
Supplications put up for all Men. Do not we then constitute one another Mediators between God and our selves Does not St. Paul make the Ephesians Mediators between God and himself Most certainly as much as we make the Saints for we only desire the Saints to pray for us and St. Paul desir'd the Ephesians to pray for him and we desire every Day the same thing of our Brethren And do these Mediators derogate from the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ God forbid Ay but says the Doctor the Saints are in Heaven and these Men were on Earth Well and does their being Present or Absent their being in Heaven or on Earth make them the more or less Mediators when they are made such or do the Office of Mediators Is any Man the less a Mediator who sues for the Pardon of an other because he is present or in the same Town or Country with him for whom he sues Sure there is not to use the Doctor 's own Phrase a Controversie of Scripture against Scripture or of Reason against Reason but of down right Imp * Discourse against Transub Vol. 3. p 299. against the plain meaning of Scripture and all the Sense and Reason of Mankind I forbear that uncivil Word the Reader may find it at Length with the Dr. in the place pointed at in the Margin Well! But the Saints are in Heaven What then Why if we desire them to pray for us we make them Mediators But do not the Saints in Heaven pray for us Yes the Dr. grants they do Vol. 2. 2. edit obit pag. 93. They make themselves Mediators then No says he they are not Mediators and Intercessors properly so call'd for continues He all Intercession strictly and properly so call'd is in virtue of a Sacrifice offer'd by him that intercedes Here He pulls down all that He built before and justifies our Practice as fully as we cou'd desire All Intercession strictly and properly so call'd is in virtue of a Sacrifice offer'd by him that intercedes Say you so Why then the Saints can by no means be Mediators or Intercessors properly so call'd whether we desire them to pray for us or they do it of themselves since they did not offer any Sacrifice by virtue whereof they may in a strict and proper sense be called Mediators or Intercessors and then we may desire them to pray for us or they may do it of themselves and yet be no Mediators or Intercessors and consequently not derogate from the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ And thus the Doctor has very judiciously and in my Opinion very truly interpreted St. Paul's Words and justified us into the bargain 2. That in the public and solemnly Service of the Church excepting the Litanies c. as aforesaid we put up no Prayers to Saints or Angels but all our Prayers are address'd to Almighty God and to Jesus Christ our only Saviour and Redeemer This will appear by a thoro ' Examination of those Books wherein the public Service of our Church is contain'd which are the Mass-book and the Breviary the first containing the solemn Service of the Mass and the latter the Canonical Office namely Matins Hours Even-song and Compline And here I can in truth aver that I have read both these Books at least ten Times yet excepting the Litanies the general Confession some few Hymns Anthems and Versicles whereof one or two are read in the Breviary on the Feasts of B V. Mary and other Saints which yet are not properly Prayers and which only mention these Words Pray for us intercede for us or the like I do profess I do not know one single Prayer appointed for the public and solemn Service of the Church in either of them address'd directly to either Saint or Angel or the B. V. Mary As for the Mass-book which is the public Liturgy of the Church excepting the General Confession there is not one Prayer in it aderess'd to any but God-Almighty no not on the Feasts of Saints or of the B. V. Mary no nor in the Book at all excepting this one Versicle which is I think four times read Mother of God intercede for us Which yet is seldom read in any public and solemn Service of the Church and one single Anthem wherein the like Words are found on the Feast of St. Michael And for the Truth of all this I appeal to the Books themselves There is indeed a Little Office of the Virgin Mary annex'd to the Breviary wherein the aforesaid Words Pray for us intercede for us or the like are some nine or ten times repeated in Hymns Anthems and Versicles but this being read neither Publicly nor Privately in the Church Service cannot Reasonably be said to pertain to it Now these two Books are an Extract the Mass-Book of what is most Moving and Ravishing in the Psalms of David of what is most Edifying and Instructive and most sit to declare the Praises of God and to shew his loving Kindness and Mercy to Mankind in the Old Testament and of the most useful and necessary Precepts and Instructions of Faith and Good Manners contain'd in the New suited and adapted to all the Seasons of the Year together with many Devout and Fervent Prayers all tending to praise Almighty God to thank him for His Benefits and Blessings and to implore Mercy and Pardon for our Sins The Breviary of all the Psalms most of the History of the Old Testament a Summary of all the Epistles of the Apostles and the Revelations some Verses of the Gospel of every Feast and Sunday in the Year with the Homilies of the Ancient Fathers of the Church upon these Texts together with a Brief Account of the Lives of the most Eminent Saints and Martyrs that flourish'd in the Church with a great many Pious and Godly Prayers Anthems Hymns and Versicles address'd to God-Almighty and put up in the Name and thro' the Merits of our Lord Jesus Christ We do indeed Commemorate the holy Apostles the B. V. Mary and the Saints in the Public Service of the Church because we have sufficient Warrant for it in the Scripture and Practice of the Primitive Church David says the Righteous shall be in Everlasting Remembrance Psal 112. and Dr. Tillotson himself has a Sermon upon this Subject wherein he proves from the Practice of the Fathers and from Reason that it is Lawful to give due Honor and Respect to the Saints but we do not put up any Formal Prayers to them in the public Service And this will appear from the Collects in the Mass-Book and Breviary where their Names are mention'd I will transcribe two or three of them and leave the Reader who desires farther Satisfaction to consult these Books whether all the Rest of the Collects where the Saints are mention'd be not of the same Tenor. A Collect on the Annunciation of the B. V. Mary O God who hast been pleas'd that thy Word shou'd take Flesh in the Womb of the B. V. Mary when
nothing so frequent in the Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers as the Recommendation of it In a Word there is not one Doctrine or Practice of the Catholic Religion deliver'd with so full and unquestionable a Tradition no not the Mystery of the Trinity no nor the Incarnation nor the Necessity of Baptism nor even the Truth of the Scriptures So that a Man may lib. de Cor. Militis lib. de Monog de vita Const lib. 4. c. 71. In Enchir cap. 110. lib. 9. Confes cap. 13. as well make an Apology for being a Christian as for this Tertulian tells us that in his Days they made yearly Oblations for the Dead and pray'd for their Souls Eusebius that all the Congregation pray'd for the Soul of the Emperor Constantin the Great St. Austin that it is not to be denied that the Souls of the Dead are eas'd by the Pitty of their living Friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offer'd for them That his Mother Monica her last Injunctions to him was to remember her at the Altar That the Tradition of the Fathers is observ'd by the whole Church Serm. 32. de Verb. Apost viz. That they shou'd pray for those who dy'd in the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ in that place of the Sacrifice where the Dead are recommended In short I shou'd never end shou'd I relate all the Sayings of Fath rs and Councils and Eccl siastical Writâ—rs upon this Subject so that I may confidently affirm there is not one Point in the Christian Religion more unanimously believ'd or more religiously practic'd over all the Catholic Church in all Ages than this of praying for the Dead and offering the Sâ—crifice of the Mass for their Souls And this is so well known that â—o Sober and Learned Protestant ever yet denied the immemorial Antiquity of it at least that ever I met with But being sensible how necessarily and inevitably the Belief of Purgatory or a Third Place where Souls are detain'd for a Time is consequent upon this Practice they have recourse to certain suâ—terfuges and Evasions They tell us that Prayers were made from the second Age for the Apostles and Martyrs and Confessors Exposit of the Doctrine of the Church of England pag. 31. and even for the Blessed Virgin Mary all which they thought in Happiness and never touch'd at Purgatory that therefore it does not follow there is a Purgatory because they prayed for the Dead To which I answer that these Gentlemen wou'd very much oblige us if they wou'd be so good as to instance in some of those Prayers which they say were put up for the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary which I never yet met with in any of their Writings And this very thing gives me a shrewd Suspicion that they are not able to produce any Examples of that kind at least to the purpose considering how liberal and even prodigal they are of Quotations of Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers when they seem to make for them This I am certain of that the primitive Church did only believe their Prayers available for those whom they thought not to have so well lived as that they shou'd not need their Charitable Assistance 'T is what St. Austin says De Civit. Dei lib. 21. cap. 24. Pro defunctis quibusdam Ecclesiae exanditur oratio quorum in Christo regeneratorum nec usque adeo vita in corpore malè gesta est ut tali Misericordia judicentur digni non esse nec usque adeo berè ut talem Misericordiam reperiantur necessariam non habere The Prayers of the Church are heard for such as are regenerated in Christ whose Lives have not been altogether so bad as not to be thought worthy of such a Mercy nor altogether so good as not to need such a Mercy And the same Father tells us that it were to injure the Martyrs to pray for them to whose Prayers we ought rather to have our selves commended But do not the Ancient Liturgies make mention of Prayers and Thanksgivings put up to God for or in Honor of the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary And does not the Roman Missal we now use do the same Yes most certainly for we pray to God and thank Him for and in Honour of the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary and so did all Antiquity But then these Prayers are not intended for the Delivery of their Souls from any Pains but to thank Almighty God for crowning the Martyrs and Saints and to praise his Holy Name for bringing them to that happy State they how are in as the Prayers and Oblations of the Prâ—â—ative Church and those we new make for the Souls of such as die in the Communion of the Church of whose perfect Innocence and Holiness we are not assur'd are intended to beg of God that he wou'd be merciful to them and forgive them those sins for which they did not fully satisfie in this Life And this St. Austin tells us was the Design and End of all the Prayers put up for the Dead whether Apostles or Martyrs or other Christian Souls These are his Words The Oblations and Alms usually offer'd in the Church for all the Dead De Enchiridio ad Lau. cap. 100. who receiv'd Baptism were Thanksgivings for such as were very Good Propitiations for such as were not very Bad but for such as were very wicked tho' they gave no Relief to the Dead yet were they some Consolation to the Living And is not this the very Doctrine we hold this Day Do not we offer the Sacrifice of Christ's Body as this Father calls it on the Feasts of the Apostles and Martyrs c. in Thanksgiving to God for the blessed Estate of the Saints in Heaven And do not we pray and give Alms and offer the same Sacrifice for the Propitiation of those whom we charitably believe to have died in the Peace and Communion of the Church Does our praying to God for the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary as aforesaid hinder us to believe that there is a Place wherein other Souls are detain'd till they have satisfied the Divine Justice No sure And why must the like Prayers hinder the Primitive Church to believe the same Nay rather does it not necessarily follow that the Primitive Church as well as We did believe there was such a place because they put up Prayers to God for Pardon and Forgiveness of Sins for such as they reasonably believ'd to have died in the Communion of the Body of Christ as the Fathers speak but not so perfect as that they shou'd not need their Prayers since it were both vain and superfluous to have pray'd for them upon this Score had they believ'd they were immediately receiv'd into Heaven or thrust into Hell This I am confident no Man of Sense can reasonably deny So that it is a most shameful Evasion to conclude that the Primitive Church did not believe
Purgatory because they pray'd for the Virgin Mary and the Apostles and Martyrs c. else why do they not conclude that we do not believe it because we do the same To sum up all these Evidences then I reason thus The Primitive Church pray'd to God for some Souls departed that they might be deliver'd out of Prison that their Faults and Sins might be forgiven them that they might be eas'd of their Pain that they might be sav'd from the Punishment of Fire that they might be receiv'd into Heaven but such Prayers are inconsistent with a Belief that the Souls departed are immediately taken into Heaven or condemn'd to Hell Therefore the Primitive Church believ'd there was a Third Place wherein some souls departed were detain'd and were capable of being assisted and better'd by their Prayers The first Proposition is taken from the very Words of the Fathers and acknowledged by our Adversaries to be true The second a very small portion of Natural Reason with never so little insight in Scripture and Christian Religion which assure us that Prayers of that nature for those that are in Heaven or Hell are needless and vain will easily discover to be likewise True And I think the consequence is rightly infer'd I now proceed to the Objections 3. The Doctor objects first Vol. 2 Pag. 63. that the Doctrine of Purgatory is not founded in Scripture nor can be prov'd from it and that some of our own Eminent Men do acknowledge it cannot To which I answer that I have produc'd two Passages from Scripture and cou'd produce as many more which the most Eminent Fathers of the Primitive Church have interpreted of Purgatory and therefore I think I may safely tell the Dr. that with submission He was mistaken As to those Eminent Men of our Church who say that the Doctrine of Purgatory cannot be prov'd from Scripture when any one in his behalf names them and points at the place in their Works where they say so I will return him as satisfactory an Answer as I can In the mean time I may reasonably presume they say no such thing Seeing he was never backward in giving citations when they made any thing for him All the Eminent Men He vouches for this is Estius who by the Dr's own confession only says that in his Opinion the Passage of St. Paul above cited does not evince Purgatory but does not say that other Passages of Scripture do not and if he had I shou'd oppose to his Opinion that of Tertulian St. Cyprian St. Ambrose St. Jerom St. Austin and many more of the Ancient Fathers whose Authority in this matter ought I think to weigh more with any reasonable Man than that of any modern Writer whatsoever Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 307. His second Objection is borrow'd from a Text in the Revelations Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from hence forth Yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them cap. 14.13 Here says the Dr. the Spirit pronounces them happy who die in the Lord because they rest from their Labours which adds He they wou'd not do were they to be tormented in Purgatory Fire Ergo c. Answ This Passage is confessedly obscure as to the meaning of some Words in it and the Time whence the blessing there mention'd is to Commence and the Doctor 's bestowing six full Pages upon the Explication of it shews it to be so and for that Reason I think it is against the Rules of Logic to pretend to more Evidence in the conclusion than the Premises will afford But it seems he forgot in his second Sermon upon this Text that in his First he had told us that the Dead which die in the Lord in Scripture Phrase are those who die or are put to death for the Lord's Cause that is as he expresly says suffer Martyrdom for the Lord I say he must have forgot this else he wou'd not have objected that Text against Purgatory since he cou'd not be ignorant that we believe that all the Martyrs who suffer for the Faith of Christ and even other Eminent Saints who do not suffer Martyrdom but live the life of Martyrs do rest from their Labours and pass not thro' the Fire of Purgatory Wherefore in my opinion he shou'd have given us an other Interpretation of this Text or have let Purgatory alone but 't is no new thing to find the Doctor pulldown in one place what he had built in an other and therefore I am not surpriz'd to see Purgatory brought in by Head and Shoulders and spoken against in Season and out of Season 'T is Purgatory that reproaches the Sacrileges and Depredations of the Doctor 's Ancestors of worthy Memory and Bears hard upon their Posterity and upon that account it must be Cry'd down lest the horrid guilt of the Sacrileges of the Fathers shou'd fly in the Face of their Children and give them that Purgatory in this Life which He wou'd perswade them they shall not meet with in the next For a third Objection the Doctor tells us Vol. 2. Edit Post ob Pag. 310. we have a very considerable and substantial Reason to exempt as few as possibly we can from going to Purgatory because says he the more we put in fear of going thither the Market of Indulgences as he calls it riseth the higher and the profit thence accruing to the Pope's Câ—ffers and the more and greater Legacies will be less â—o the Priests to hire their saying of Masses for the delivery of Souls out of the Place of Torments Answ After my hearty thanks to the Dr. for his Charitable Opinion of us I must observe from what is above said that it seems this Market of Indulgences is of a very long standing and that the Ancient Fathers of the Church took great care it shou'd not sink But to be serious 'T is well known and even acknowledged by the Learned of his Church that in the Time of Gregory the Great now a Thousand Years since the Doctrine of Purgatory and all the Practices consequent upon it were believ'd and us'd as they are now And did that great Saint exempt as few as he cou'd from Purgatory only to raise the Market of Indulgences Did all the Bishops of the Western Church nay and of all the World concur with him in this only to fill his Coffers Alas The good Holy Man had but few Coffers and as little Money to fill them with Conversion of Souls not Money was his bus'ness Did St. Austin design the raising of the Market of Indulgences or the putting of the People into a fear of going to Purgatory when he earnestly desires the Readers of his Confessions to pray for his Mother Monica's Soul for the remission of her Sins And had St. Jerom any thoughts of filling the Pope's Coffers when he wrote that much benefit wou'd accrue to the Souls departed by the commemoration made of
Repentance that to encourage others to follow their Examples they were admitted to the Communion and Fellowship of the Faithful tho' they had not compleated the Time prescrib'd by the Canons Partly but more especially at the Intercession of the Martyrs For when any Martyrs were to be executed and had begg'd of the Bishops to indulge those Penitents whom they recommended to them the Bishops who cou'd not in Reason refuse any thing in their Power to Men who were ready to lay down their Lives and shed their Blood for the Christian Faith did commonly grant their Requests And this the Fathers call'd as in very deed it is Indulgence It were endless to instance in all the Examples which might be brought from the Fathers of the second and third Age upon this Subject St. Cyprian is most remarkable in this Bus'ness We have several of his Epistles wherein he tells us that having very often granted Indulgences to Penitents at the request of Martyrs he was forc'd at last being too much importun'd for People who did not deserve that Favor to write to the Martyrs themselves to beg of them that they wou'd not recommend but such as were worthy of that Grace at least that they shou'd not take it ill if he shou'd not grant their Request lest the Discipline of the Church shou'd be enervated upon that Score The same Father complains in his Letters to the Clergy of Rome and to others that some of his own Priests in his Absence had presum'd to give Indulgences which the Bishops only cou'd do In short there is nothing more frequently mention'd both by Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers or more universally practic'd for the four first Ages than these Indulgences Now the Roman Catholic Church neither means by Indulgences nor pretends to any more than the same Power which the Primitive Fathers both had and practic'd that is of dispensing with or remitting the Ronances prescrib'd by the Canons nor did she ever pretend to dispense with any Man from Repentance for Sins or Obedience to the Law of God On the contrary the R. C. Church teaches and has always taught that all the Indulgences in the World do signifie nothing without a hearty Contrition and sincere Sorrow for Sin which is the Spirit and Essence of Christian Devotion But Canonical penances being meerly of Ecclesiastical Institution and pertaining to Discipline it cannot be denied but that the Church has Power to Intend or Remit them according to the different Circumstances of Time Place and Persons especially since Christ himself has given her Power to remit and retain Sins in which Power this Relaxation is manifestly implied 'T is true the R. C. Church does not now impose such rigorous Penances upon Sinners as the primitive Church did Nor does she expose them publickly in the Church in Penitential Weeds as was practic'd in the primitive Times but then the Reason on 't is because no Body now wou'd undertake these Penances because she is convinc'd that Men wou'd sooner break off with Christ and turn Heathens than purchase Heaven at so dear a Rate So far has Wickedness and Dissolution prevail'd in the World In the Infancy of the Church Piety Devotion Mortification Austerity were lovely Things Christians affected them very much of themselves and therefore readily undertook them when they had the misfortune to fall into any grievous Sin Besides they had before their Eyes frequent Examples of the Constancy and Resolution of their Pastors They saw them expose their Lives with the greatest contempt of the World and bear the Torments of Racks Gridirons Wheels and other hellish Instruments Episcopacy in those days being but one remove from Martyrdom with as much chearfulness and as little concern as if these cruel Engins had been Bays and Laurels and therefore it is not to be admir'd that the Blood of Martyrs then reeking hot shou'd warm their inclinations to sufferings and mortification and stir them up to a contempt of the allurements and pleasures of a wicked World not knowing how soon they themselves shou'd be call'd to the like Fiery Tryal But no sooner did the Blood of Martyrs grow cold and the Terrors of Death were taken away by the Peace and Quiet which Constantine the Great restor'd to the Church when the Primitive Piety and Devotion began to decay and Christians multiplied their Sins as they did their Riches No sooner were the Sangninary Laws and cruel Edicts of Pagan Emperors repeal'd and Christians put in Possession of great Fortunes and promoted to Honors and Dignities when they forgot their former Condition wax'd wanton against Christ and spurn'd at Discipline So that in a few Ages after you might as well expect Grapes from Thorns or Figs from Thistles as the primitive Penances from modern Christians And therefore it was necessary to mitigate the Severity of that Discipline lest the generality of I may say all Christians shou'd throw off all care of their Salvation and either return to Pagan Idolatry or follow the Delusions of their own Fancies However since the Apostles and Apostolical Bishops whose Conduct ought to be the Rule and Measure of all future Ages have prescrib'd and declar'd what Penances ought to be impos'd upon Sinners according to the degree of their Sins the Church hath always taught that all Christians who have been or are so unfortunate as to fall into grievous Sins are still lyable to these Penances unless they are dispens'd with by the Church or Commuted for some other Works of Piety And that the discipline of the Church might be preserv'd and upheld as much as the Wickedness of the Times will bear all Pastors and Confessors are commandded to impose such Penances upon Sinners as will bear some proportion with the greatness of their Sins tho' not to that degree as the primitive Canons require Leaving the rest to be dispens'd with or Indulg'd by the Chief Pastors of the Church according to the power which Christ has given them and as general Councils have determin'd And this in as few Words as I cou'd well deliver it is truly and plainly the Case of Indulgences and the reason why they are so often given is the great decay of Piety and Devotion in Christians and the tender affection of the Church for their eternal Welfare not a desire of Money or any filthy Lucre as our Adversaries do most injustly suggest On the contrary I am confident that there is not one Divine or Casuist in our Church who does not hold that it is Sinful and Diabolical even the Sin of Simon Magus to give or receive any Money for Indulgences And several General Councils and Pope's Decrees have expresly declar'd that to give or receive any sort of Gift either directly or indirectly for either Indulgences or any other Spiritual Grace is perfect Sâ—mony which surely is sufficient to justifie us from any sinister dealing in this particular As to the Abuses of Indulgences which I do not deny to have sometimes happen'd we
are so far from countenancing or abbetting them that it is our earnest wishes and the desire of our Hearts that all such shou'd be intirely abolish'd and taken away We cover no more than that all Christians in Time of Jubileâ—s and Plenary Indulgences shou'd think on their way in the bitterness of their Sâ—als shou'd repent and be sorry for their Sins shou'd have a strong hope and confidence in the Mercy of Almighty God giâ—â— Alâ—â—â— to the Poor and by their 〈◊〉 and servent Prayers dispose themselves 〈◊〉 God is Grace to receive the Indulâ—â—â—â— of Permission of those Canonical Penances which neither the Condition of the Persons nor the Wickedness of the Times nor yet the great Decay of Piety will permit us to require they shou'd fully perform And this we do because we find the same thing practic'd in the best and purest Times of Christianity even in the First Second Third and Fourth Ages especially being warranted by the Word of God who gave to his Church the Power of remitting and retaining Sins And now having found nothing in Dr. Tillotson's Sermons upon this Subject that requires any particular Consideration besides what is here explain'd I shall conclude this Treatise with my Hearty Prayers to the Father of Light that He wou'd be mercifully pleas'd to open the Eyes of our Adversaries that they may see the Innocence and Reasonableness of our Doctrine and give them the Grace to lay seriously to Heart how dangerous it is to reject those Things which the Catholic Church declares to have been deliver'd by Christ and His Apostles Our and Their Creed says I believe the Holy Catholic Church And they own that the Catholic Church before the Reformation did hold and Declare those Things wherein we differ from them to be Truths deliver'd by Christ and His Apostles How then can they believe the Catholic Church when She declares these Things if they do not hold and believe these Things themselves Or how can they in Reason reject them if they believe the Catholic Church which tells them they are Divine Truths But there is yet something more desperate which I beg of Almighty God to give them the Grace to consider Our Saviour saith to His Apostles Go and teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy-Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you Mat. c. 28.19 20. And St. Mark adds He that believeth and is Baptiz'd shall be Sav'd but he that believeth not shall be Damn'd Cap. 16.16 Now if those Things which make the Subject of our Dispute be Truths given in charge to the Apostles then our Adversaries are to my great grief I must say it lost for ever For it is not enough according to Christ's own Words to Believe in the Trinity to Believe the Incarnation to believe in the Holy-Ghost to believe Baptism the Eucharist c. But we must believe all Things whatsoever Christ commanded and that on pain of Damnation But if it shou'd happen as no doubt it cannot that the Points in Dispute were not commanded by Christ or His Apostles where is the harm in believing them since we are commanded to do so by the Church which our Creed tells us we must believe Christ our Saviour doth often reproach the Jews for their Incredulity and the Scripture in several places gives us an Account of the Punishment of such as wou'd not believe the Messengers sent by God to declare His Will to them But we do not find that ever He reproach'd any Body for having too much Faith especially when the Things to be believ'd were declar'd to them by the Messengers of God which sure the Bishops and Priests of the Church are On the contrary we read in the Scripture that Christ has upon several Occasions highly commended and extoll'd Men's readiness to believe O Woman Great is thy Faith Mat. 14.28 Where lyes then the Harm of believing Transubstantiation or the Real Presence which are so plainly deliver'd in Scripture Where is the Harm of allowing due Honor and Respect to be given to Saints and of desiring them to pray for us since it is what we do and are commanded to do to one another in this Life If they hear our Prayers and Intercede for us well and good But if they do not what do we loose by it Where is the Harm in praying for our deceas'd Friends Sure we do but declare our pious Affections to them tho' our Prayers had done them no good And where is the Harm in all this How can it hurt any Body to believe that the Church hath Power to give Indulgences that is to Remit all or part of the Temporal Punishment due for Sins since it is plainly exprest in Scripture that Christ gave to His Apostles and the Apostles to their Successors the Power of Remitting and Retaining Sins and that whatsoever they Loose on Earth shall be Loosed in Heaven How can this hurt any Body I say or where lies the Hazard in believing those Things tho' we had not as much assurance of their being Divine Truths as of other Things since they are not contrary to any other Article of our Faith nor to Right Reason or Good Manners But there is Infinit Hazard in not believing them since they have been declar'd by the Church which our Creed and the Scripture command as to believe and hear on pain of being reputed Heathens and Publicans Now that they are Divine Truths besides what is already offer'd to prove each Point in particular We have all the Eastern Churches on our side All the Greek Church together with the Nestorians Euâ—ychians Monothelites the Christians of St. Thomas in a Word all the Oriental Sects of what Denomination soever do Practice and Believe Transubstantiation the Real Presence the Sacrifice of the Mass Seven Sacraments the Use of the Liturgy in a Tongue which the Common People do not understand Invocation of Saints Veneration of Relicks and Images and Prayers for the Dead See the Critical History of the Learn-Father Simon Of the Religion and Customs of the Eastern Churches 'T is done into English printed in London and very much esteem'd by the Learn'd Seeing then that the Latin Church which together with the Greek and other Eastern Churches make up the whole Body of the Christian World and that all these Churches did hold and profess the said Doctrine when the Reformation began and do still hold and believe the same I think I may confidently affirm that it is Catholic and Orthodox I shall therefore once more beg of Almighty God thro' the Merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and by that Blood which was shed for our Redemption that he wou'd please in His Mercy to Soften the Hearts of our Adversaries and give them Grace to entertain Thoughts of Peace of His Holy Church from which they have so long gone astray To the end that They and We may with one Heart and one Tongue praise and magnifie His Holy Name all the Days of our Lives and when it shall please His Infinite Goodness to call us to Himself that we may meet together at the Resurrection of the Just thro' the Merits of the Death and Passion of our only Saviour and Redeemer Jesus Christ to whom with the Father and Holy Ghost be Honor and Glory now and for ever Amen FINIS