and another knowing me unable to pay it gives me so much to pay the Debt this is no more than what may be called strict Payment as to the Creditor but if the Creditor himself gives me this 100 l. to pay himself with will any Man call this strict Payment He may call it so himself if he pleases but that only shews his Kindness and Favour but it doth not look very modestly or gratefully for the Debtor to insist upon it as true legal Payment Just so it is in good Works done by the Power of God's Grace which we could never have done without it and therefore such cannot be truly meritorious 2. What is truly meritorious must not be defective because the Proportion is to be equal between the Act and the Reward due to it which being perfect requires that there be do Defect in the Acts which merit it But this can never be said of Good Works of justified Persons that they have no Defects in them We do not say they are not Good Works but they are not exact and perfect for although the Grace of God as it comes from him be a perfect Gift yet as it acts upon Mens Minds it doth not raise them to such a degree but that they have Imperfections in their best Actions And whatever is defective is faulty whatever is faulty must be forgiven whatever needs forgiveness cannot be truly meritorious But not only their Good Works are defective but if they would merit they ought to have none but Good Works whereas the mixture of others renders the good uncapable of being meritorious because there is so much to be pardoned as takes away all claim of Merit in the good they perform And themselves do not pretend that Men can merit the Grace of Remission but it is very strange that those who cannot deserve to be forgiven should deserve to have an infinite Reward bestowed upon them 3. There must be an exact Proportion between the Act and the Recompence for to merit is to pay a Price for a thing and in such Acts of commutative Justice there must be an Equality of one thing with another But what Equality can there be between the imperfect Good Works of the best Men and the most perfect Happiness of another World especially when that consists in the fruition of the Beatifical Vision For what Proportion can there be between our Acts towards God and God's Acts towards the Blessed in Heaven Let the Acts be of what Person soever or of what Nature soever or from what Principle soever as long as they are the Acts of finite imperfect Creatures it is impossible there should be any Equality or exact Proportion between them and the Eternal Favour of God which is the Reward promised 4. Where Acts are truly meritorious there follows an Obligation of strict Justice to pay the Recompence due to them But what strict Justice can there be between the Creator and his Creatures to recompence the Service they are bound to perform when their very Being Power to act Assistance in acting and Recompence for it are all from his Bounty and Goodness But our Author would avoid all this by saying that though Good Works are truly meritorious yet it is through the Merits of Christ and as they proceed from Grace and through his Goodness and Promise that they are so i. e. they are truly meritorious because it appears from all these things they neither are nor can be meritorious For 1. How come the Merits of Christ to make good Works truly meritorious Are the Merits of Christ imputed to those Good Works Then those Good Works must be as meritorious as Christ's own Works which I suppose he will not assert Or is it that Christ hath merited the Grace whereby we may merit But even this will not make our personal Acts truly meritorious and the Nature of Merit relates to the Acts and not to the Power 2. How comes the Power of Grace to make them truly meritorious when the Power of Grace doth so much increase the Obligation on our side If it be said That the state of Grace puts men into a capacity to merit we might more reasonably infer the contrary that it puts them out of a capacity of meriting because the Remission of Sins and the Favour of God are things for which we can never make him any recompence 3. How comes a Divine Promise to make Acts truly meritorious For God's Promise is an Act of meer kindness which is very different from strict Justice and although by the Promise God binds himself to performance yet how come those Acts to be more meritorious of Heaven than the Acts of Repentance are of Remission of Sins Yet none will now say that there can be any Acts meritorious of that Yet certainly there is a clear promise of Pardon upon Repentance as there is of Heaven upon Good Works And if the Promise in the other case doth not make Repentance meritorious of Pardon how can it make Good Works truly meritorious of Eternal Life But notwithstanding we do not deny God's Fidelity to his Promise may be called Iustice and so God as a Righteous Iudge may give a Crown of Righteousness to all that follow St. Paul's Example without making Good Works to be truly meritorious VII Of Confession HE believes it part of his Religion to make Gods of Men foolishly thinking that these have power to forgive sins And therefore as often as he finds his Conscience oppressed with the guilt of his Offences he calls for one of his Priests who are commonly more wicked than himself and falling at his feet he unfolds to him the whole state of his Soul and having run over a Catalogue of his Sins he asks of him Pardon and Forgiveness And what is most absurd of all he is so sillily stupid as to believe That if his Ghostly Father after he has heard all his Villanies in his Ear does but pronounce three or four Latin words making the sign of a Cross with two fingers and a thumb over his head his sins are forthwith forgiven him although he had never any thoughts of amendment or intention to forsake his wickedness HE believes it damnable in any Religion to make Gods of Men. However he firmly holds that when Christ speaking to his Apostles said Ioh. 20.21 Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven and whose sins you shall retain they are retained He gave to them and their Successors the Bishops and Priests of the Catholick Church Authority to absolve any truly penitent sinner from his sins And God having thus given them the Ministry of Reconciliation and made them Christ's Legates 2 Cor. 5.18 19 12. Christ's Ministers and the Dispensers of the Mysteries of Christ and given them power to loose on Earth whatsoever was to be loosed in Heaven Mat. 18.18 he undoubtedly believes that whosoever comes to them making a sincere and humble confession of his sins with a
out by many Christian Writers And if the Church cannot add to the Scripture and our Author thinks it damnable to do it how can it make any Books Canonical which were not so received by the Church For the Scripture in this sense is the Canon and therefore if it add to the Canon it adds to the Scripture i. e. it makes it necessary to believe some Books to be of infallible Authority which were not believed to be so either by the Iewish or Christian Church as appears by abundant Testimonies to that purpose produced by a learned Bishop of this Church which ought to have been considered by the Representer that he might not have talked so crudely about this matter But however I must consider what he saith 1. He produces the Testimony of Greg. Nazianzen who is expresly against him and declares but Twenty two Books in the Canon of the Old Testament but how doth he prove that he thought these Books Canonical He quotes his Oration on the Maccabees Where I can find nothing like it and instead of it he expresly follows as he declares the Book of Iosephus of the Authority of Reason concerning them So that if this proves any thing it proves Iosephus his Book Canonical and not the Maccabees 2. He adds the Testimony of S. Ambrose who in the place he refers to enlarges on the Story of the Maccabees but saith nothing of the Authority of the Book And even Coccius himself grants that of old Melito Sardensis Amphilochius Greg. Nazianzen the Council of Laodicea S. Hierom Russinus and Gregory the Great did not own the Book of Maccabees for Canonical 3. Innocentius ad Exuperium speaks more to this purpose And if the Decretal Epistle be allowed against which Bishop Cosins hath made considerable Objections then it must be granted that these Books were then in the Roman Canon but that they were not received by the Universal Church appears evidently by the Canon of the Council of Laodicea c. 60. wherein these Books are left out and this was received in the Code of the Universal Church which was as clear a Proof of the Canon then generally received as can be expected It is true the Council of Carthage took them in and S. Augustine seems to be of the same Opinion But on the other side they are left out by Melâ—to Bishop of Sardis who lived near the Apostles times Origen Athanasius S. Hilary S. Cyril of Ierusalem Epiphanius S. Basil Amphilochius S. Chrysostom and especially S. Ierom who hath laboured in this point so much that no fewer than thirteen places are produced out of him to this purpose by the forementioned learned Bishop of our Church who clearly proves there was no Tradition for the Canon of the Council of Trent in any one Age of the Christian Church But our Author goes on 4. It is of little concern to him whether these Books were ever in the Hebrew Copy I would only ask whether it be of any concern to him whether they were divinely inspired or not He saith It is damnable to add to the Scripture by the Scripture we mean Books written by Divine Inspiration Can the Church make Books to be so written which were not so written If not then all it hath to do is to deliver by Tradition what was so and what not Whence should they have this Tradition but from the Iews and they owned no Divine Inspiration after the time of Malachy How then should there be any Books so written after that time And he that saith in this matter as he doth It is of little concern to him whether they were in the Hebrew Canon doth little concern himself what he ought to believe and what not in this matter 5. Since the Churches Declaration he saith no Catholicks ever doubted What doth he mean by the Churches Declaration that of Innocent and the Council of Carthage Then the same Bishop hath shewed him that since that time there have been very many both in the Greek and Latin Church of another Opinion And a little before the Council of Trent Catharinus saith That a Friend of his and a Brother in Christ derided him as one that wanted Learning for daring to assert these Books were within the Canon of Scripture and it is plain Card. Cajetan could never be perswaded of it But if he means since the Council of Trent then we are returned to our Difficulty how such a Council can make any Books Canonical which were not received for such by the Catholick Church before For then they do not declare the Canon but create it XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible HE makes no Conscience of abusing the Scripture and perverting for the maintenance of his Errors and Superstitions And therefore though he dares not altogether lay it by lest he should by so doing lose all claim to Christianity Yet he utterly disapproves it as it is in its genuine Truth and Purity and as allow'd in the Church of England and crying this down he believes it unlawful to be read by any of his Communion And then puts into their hands another Volume which in its Frontis-piece bears the Title indeed of the Word of God with the names of the Books and Chapters but in the context of it is so every where full of Corruptions Falsifications and intolerable Abuses that it almost every where belies its Title and is unfit for any one who professes himself a Christian. HE believes it a damnable sin to abuse the Scripture or any ways to pervert it for the maintenance of Errors or Superstitions and thinks himself oblig'd rather to lay down his life than concur to or approve of any such Falsifications or Corruptions prejudicial to Faith or Good Manners For this reason being conscious that in all Ages there has been several Copies of this Sacred Volume quite different from the Originals in many places either through the mistake of the Transcribers or malice of others endeavouring by this means to gain credit to their new Doctrines He is commanded not to receive all Books indifferently for the Word of God that wear that Title but only such as are approv'd by the Church and recommended by her Legitimate And such is that he daily uses commonly known by the name of the Vulgar Translation which has been the principal of all other Latin Copies in all Ages since the Primitive times much commended by St. Augustine and never altered in any thing but once heretofore by the Holy Studies of St. Hierome And twice or thrice since being review'd by Authority and purg'd of such mistakes as in length of time had crept in by Transcribers or Printers faults And that this Translation is most pure and incorrupt as to any thing concerning matter of Belief or differences in Religion is not only the Doctrine of his Church but also the Sentiment of many Learned Men of the Reformation who approve this Version and prefer it before any
which of all those Senses is that intended by the Holy Ghost and leading to Truth and which are Erroneous and Antichristian He is taught to believe that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular person not that there is any thing wanting on the Scripture-side but because no private person can be certain whether amongst all the several meanings every Text is obnoxious to that which he understands it in is the Right or no. And without this certainty of Truth and security from Error he knows there 's nothing capable of being a Rule XIII Of the Scriptures as a Rule of Faith THE only thing insisted on here is That it is not the Words but the Sense of Scripture is the Rule and that this Sense is not to be taken from Mens private Fancies which are various and uncertain and therefore where there is no security from Errors there is nothing capable of being a Rule To clear this we must consider 1. That it is not necessary to the making of a Rule to prevent any possibility of mistake but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault For Certainty in it self and Sufficiency for the use of others are all the necessary Properties of a Rule but after all it 's possible for Men not to apply the Rule aright and then they are to be blamed and not the Rule 2. If no Men can be certain of the right Sense of Scripture then it is not plain in necessary things which is contrary to the design of it and to the clearest Testimonies of Antiquity and to the common Sense of all Christians who never doubted or disputed the Sense of some things revealed therein as the Unity of the Godhead the making of the World by him the Deluge the History of the Patriarchs the Captivity of the Jews the coming of the Messias his sending his Apostles his coming again to Judgment c. No Man who reads such things in Scripture can have any doubt about the Sense and Meaning of the Words 3. Where the Sense is dubious we do not allow any Man to put what Sense he pleases upon them but we say there are certain means whereby he may either attain to the true Sense or not be damned if he do not And the first thing every man is to regard is not his security from being deceived but from being damned For Truth is made known in order to Salvation If therefore I am sure to attain the chief end I am not so much concerned as to the possibility of Errors as that I be not deceived by my own fault We do not therefore leave Men either to follow their own fancy or to interpret Scripture by it but we say They are bound upon pain of Damnation to seek the Truth sincerely and to use the best means in order to it and if they do this they either will not err or their Errors will not be their Crime XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture HE believes that his Church which he calls Catholick is above the Scripture and profanely allows to her an uncontrollable Authority of being Judge of the Word of God And being fondly abus'd into a distrust of the Scriptures and that he can be certain of nothing even of the Fundamentals of Christianity from what is deliver'd in them though they speak never so plainly he is taught to rely wholly upon this Church and not to believe one word the Scripture says unless his Church says it too HE believes that the Church is not above the Scripture but only allows that Order between them as is between the Iudge and the Law And is no other than what generally every private Member of the Reformation challenges to himself as often as he pretends to decide any doubt of his own or his Neighbours in Religion by interpreting the Scripture Neither is he taught at all to distrust the Scripture or not to rely on it but only to distrust his own private Interpretation of it and not to rely on his own Iudgment in the Resâ—lution of any doubt concerning Faith or Religion though he can produce several Texts in favour of his Opinion But all such cases he is commanded to re-cur to the Church and having learnt from her the sense of all such Texts how they have been understood by the whole Community of Christians in all Ages since the Apostles and what has been their Receiv'd Doctrine in such doubtful and difficult Points he is oblig'd to submit to this and never presume on his own private Sentiments however seemingly grounded on Reason and Scripture to believe or preach any New Doctrine opposite to the Belief of the Church But as he receives from her the Book so also to receive from her the Sense of the Book With a Holy Confidence that she that did not cheat him in delivering a False Book for the True one will not cheat him in delivering a False and Erroneus Sense for the True one her Authority which is sufficient in the one being not less in the other And his own private Iudgment which was insufficient in the one that is in finding out the True Scripture and discerning it from all other Books being as incapable and insucffiient in the other that is in certainly discovering the meaning of the Holy Ghost and avoiding all other Heterodox and mistaken Interpretations XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture 1. THE Question is not Whether Men are not bound to make use of the best means for the right Interpretation of Scripture by Reading Meditation Prayer Advice a humble and teachable Temper c. i. e. all the proper means fit for such an end but whether after all these there be a necessity of submitting to some infallible Judge in order to the attaining the certain Sense of Scripture 2. The Question is not Whether we ought not to have a mighty regard to the Sense of the whole Christian Church in all Ages since the Apostles which we profess to have but Whether the present Roman Church as it stands divided from other Communions hath such a Right and Authority to interpret Scripture that we are bound to believe that to be the infallible Sense of Scripture which she delivers And here I cannot but take notice how strangely this matter is here misrepresented for the Case is put 1. As if every one who rejects their pretence of Infallibility had nothing to guide him but his own private Fancy in the Interpretation of Scripture 2. As if we rejected the Sense put upon Scripture by the whole Community of Christians in all ages since the Apostles times Whereas we appeal in the matters in difference between us to this universal Sense of the Christian Church and are verily perswaded they cannot make it out in any one Point wherein we differ from them And themselves cannot deny that in several we have plainly the Consent of the first Ages as far as appears by the Books remaining
on our side as in the Worship of Images Invocation of Saints Papal Supremacy Communion in both kinds Prayer and Scripture in known Tongues and I may safely add the Sufficiency of the Scripture Transubstantiation Auricular Confession Publick Communions Solitary Masses to name no more But here lies the Artifice We must not pretend to be capable of judging either of Scripture or Tradition but we must trust their Judgment what is the Sense of Scripture and what hath been the Practice of the Church in all Ages although their own Writers confess the contrary which is very hard But he seems to argue for such a Submission to the Church 1. Because we receive the Book of Scripture from her therefore from her we are to receive the Sense of the Book An admirable Argument We receive the Old Testament from the Iews therefore from them we are to receive the Sense of the Old Testament and so we are to reject the true Messias But this is not all If by the Church they mean the Church of Rome in distinction from others we deny it if they mean the whole Christian Church we grant it but then the force of it is quite lost But why is it not possible for the Church of Rome to keep these Writings and deliver them to others which make against her self Do not Persons in Law-Suits often produce Deeds which make against them But there is yet a further Reason it was not possible for the Church of Rome to make away these Writings being so universally spread 2. Because the Church puts the difference between true and false Books therefore that must be trusted for the true Sense of them Which is just as one should argue The Clerks of the Rolls are to give an account to the Court of true Records therefore they are to sit on the Bench and to give Judgment in all Causes The Church is only to declare what it finds as to Canonical Books but hath no Power to make any Book Canonical which was not before received for such But I confess Stapleton saith the Church if it please may make Hermes his Pastor and Clemens his Constitutions Canonical but I do not think our Author will therein follow him XV. of Tradition HE believes the Scripture to be imperfect And for the supplying of what he thinks Defective in it he admits Humane Ordinations and Traditions of Men allowing equal Authority to these as to the Scriptures themselves thinking himself as much oblig'd to submit to these and believe them with Divine Faith as he does whatsoever is written in the Bible and confessedly spoken by the Author of all Truth God himself Neither will he admit of any one to be a Member of his Communion although he undoubtedly believes every Word that 's written in the Scripture unless he also assents to these Traditions and gives as great credit to them as to the Word of God although in that there is not the least footstep of them to be found HE believes the Scripture not to be imperfect nor to want Humane Ordinations or Traditions of Men for the supplying any defects in it Neither does he allow the same Authority to these as to the Word of God or give them equal credit or exact it of others that desire to be admitted into the communion of his Church He believes no Divine Faith ought to be given to any thing but what is of Divine Revelation and that nothing is to have place in his Creed but what was taught by Christ and his Apostles and has been believ'd and taught in all Ages by the Church of God the Congregation of all True Believers and has been so deliver'd down to him through all Ages But now whether that which has been so deliver'd down to him as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles has been by Word of Mouth or Writing is altogether indifferent to him he being ready to follow in this point as in all others the command of St. Paul that is To stand fast and hold the Traditions he has learn'd whether by Word or by Epistle 2 Thess. 2.15 And to look upon any one as Anathema That shall preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd Gal. 1.9 So that as he undoubtedly holds the Scripture to be the Word of God penn'd by Prophets and Apostles and inspir'd by the Holy Ghost because in all Ages from Moses to Christ and from Christ to this time it has been so Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd successively by the Faithful and never scruples the least of the truth of it nor sticks to assent to it with a stedfast and Divine Faith altho' they are not nor have not at any time been able to prove what they have thus taught and deliver'd with one Text of Scripture In the like manner he is ready to receive and believe all that this same Congregation has together with the Bible in all Ages successively without interruption Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assent to it with Divine Faith just as he does to the Bible and esteems any one Anathema that shall Preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd And although some may seriously endeavour to convince him that several Points of Faith and other Religious Practices which he has thus receiv'd and believes are not the Doctrine of Christ nor Apostolical Institutions but rather Inventions of Men and Lessons of Antichrist and should produce several Texts of Scripture for the proving it He is not any thing surpriz'd at it As well knowing that he that follows not this Rule of Believing all to be of Christ that has been universally taught and believ'd as such by the Church of Christ and of understanding the Scripture in the same sense in which it has in all Ages been understood by the same Church may very easily frame as many Creeds as he pleases and make Christ and his Apostles speak what shall be most agreeable to his Humour and suit best with his Interest and find plain proofs for all And make no more difficulty in producing Scripture against Christ's Doctrine than the Iews and the Devil did against Christ's Person who never wanted their Scriptum est It is written when 't was necessary to carry on their designs And if there were any thing in these sort of Arguments to make him doubt of the truth of any Point of Doctrine thus receiv'd he thinks it might make him call in question the Truth of the Scripture and the Bible it self as soon as any thing else They all standing upon the same foundation of the Church's Tradition which if it fail in one leaves no security in any XV. Of Tradition 1. THE Question is not about Human Traditions supplying the Defects of Scripture as he misrepresents it but whether there be an Unwritten word which we are equally bound to receive with the Written word Altho these things which pass under that Name are really but Humaâ—e Traditions yet we do not
deny that they pretend them to be of Divine Original 2. We do not deny but the Apostles might deliver such things by Word as well as by Epistle which their Disciples were bound to believe and keep but we think there is some difference to be made between what we certainly know they delivered in Writing and what it is now impossible for us to know viz. what they delivered by word without writing 3. We see no ground why any one should believe any Doctrine with a stedfast and divine Faith which is not bottom'd on the Written word for then his Faith must be built on the Testimony of the Church as Divine and Infallible or else his Faith cannot be Divine But it is impossible to prove it to be Divine and Infallible but by the Written word and therefore as it is not reasonable that he should believe the Written word by such a Divine Testimony of the Church so if any particular Doctrine may be received on the Authority of the Church without the Written word then all Articles of Faith may and so there would be no need of the Written word 4. The Faith of Christians doth no otherwise stand upon the Foundation of the Churches Tradition than as it delivers down to us the Books of Scripture but we acknowledg the general Sense of the Christian Church to be a very great help for understanding the true sense of Scripture and we do not reject any thing so delivered but what is all this to the Church of Rome But this is still the way of true Representing XVI Of Councils HE believes that the Faith of his Church may receive new Additions every day And that he is not only oblig'd to believe what Christ taught and his Apostles but also every Definition or Decree of any General Council assembled by the Command of the Pope So that as often as any thing is issued out by the Authority of any of these Church-Parliaments and order'd to be believ'd he thinks himself under pain of Damnation immediately bound to receive it and having added it to his Creed to assent to it with as Firm Stedfast and Divine a Faith as if it had been Commanded by Christ himself and Decreed in the Consistory of Heaven And by this means he never comes to understand his Religion or know what he is to Believe but by the continual Alterations Additions Diminutions Interpretations of these Councils he is preserv'd in a necessary Confusion and tho he changes often yet he fondly thinks himself always the same HE believes that the Faith of his Church can receive no Additions and that he is oblig'd to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defin'd and commanded to be believ'd even by Ten thousand Councils he believes it damnable in any one to receive it and by such Decrees to make Additions to his Creed However he maintains the Necessity and Right of General Councils lawfully Assembled whose business it is not to coin new Articles of Faith or devise Fresh Tenets but only as often as any Point of Receiv'd Doctrine is impugned or call'd in question to debate the matter and examine what has been the Belief of all Nations who are there present in their Prelates in that Point And this being agreed on to publish and make known to the World which is the Catholick Doctrine left by Christ and his Apostles and which the new-breach'd Error And by this means to prevent the loss of infinite number of Souls which might otherwise be deluded and carried away after new inventions not being capable by their own knowledge and abilities to distinguish betwixt Truth and Falshood and discover the subtilties of every crafty Deceiver And in this case he believes that he is oblig'd to submit and receive the Decrees of such a Council the Pastors and Prelates there present being by Christ and his Apostles appointed for the decision of such Controversies They having the care of that stock committed to them over which the Holy Ghost has made them Overseers to feed the Church of God Acts 20.28 and to watch against those men who should arise from among themselves speaking perverse things tâ— draw Disciples after them Ib. vers 30. And he having receiv'd Command as likewise the whâ—le Flock of Christ to obey their Prelates and to be subject to them who watch and are to render an account for their Souls Heb. 13.17 with an assurance That He that heareth them hearch Christ and he that despiseth them despiseth Christ Luke 10.16 And withal being taught that as this way of the Ancients of the Church and Prelates meeting in case of any danger threatning their Flock or any new Doctrine arising was the means instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles in the first planting of the Church for the preventing Schisms and preserving Vnity among the Faithful and that they should speak and think the same thing and be perfectly joyn'd together in the same mind and same judgment 1 Cor. 1.10 So it ought to be the means in all succeeding Ages for the preventing Divisions and conserving Vnity among the Faithful And that therefore as that Controversy concerning the necessity of Circumcision Act. c. 15. arising in the Apostles times was not decided by any private Person nor even by Paul and Barnabas who nevertheless had received the Holy Ghost and one would have thought might have pretended to the Spirit and a Heavenly Light but by a General Meeting of the Apostles and Elders of the Church at Ierusalem who were consulted by Paul and Barnabas about this Question So all other Disputes and Difficulties of Religion arising in succeeding Ages ought to be referr'd to the Successors of the Apostles whose Charge Dignity and Office is to continue to the end of the World tho' they are dead in Person who are to consider of the matter Acts 15.6 as the Apostles did while all the Multitude keeps silence ver 12. without any one presuming on any Learning Gift Virtue Prayers or Inspiration to intermeddle in the Dispute or put an end to the Question This being none of their business or obligation but only with all Patience and Humility to expect the Determination of their Prelates and Elders and receive it with the same expressions as those good Christians did heretofore who rejoyced for the Consolation Acts 15.31 And unless this that the Apostles did and their Obsequious Flock be taken as a Pattern in all Ages for the ending such-like difficulties he believes 't is impossible that Believers should stand fast in one Spirit with one Mind Philip. 1.27 and be not carried away with divers and strange Doctrines Hebr. 13.9 XVI Of Councils 1. WE are glad to find so good a Resolution as seems to be expressed in these words viz. That he is obliged to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defined
Universities And why should the Actions of some few Popes with the Private Opinions of some Speculative Doctors be so often and vehemently urg'd for the just charging this Doctrine upon the Faith of the Church of Rome which to a Serious Impartial Considerer are only meer Fallacies capable of Libelling all Societies in the World of overthrowing all States and Kingdoms and only fit Arguments for Knaves to cheat Fools withal There being no Government in the World which might not be easily proved Tyrannical No Religion Perswasion or Society which might not plausibly be indicted of Atheism If the Actions Pretences Claims and endeavour of some few of their Governours and Leading Men the Opinions Writings Phansies of some Authors be allow'd as sufficient Evidence for the bringing in the Verdict of Guilty upon the whole When Malice therâ—fore and Envy have done their worst in this point to render the Papists bloody and barbarous to the World yet ' ds certain after all that Popish Princes sit as safe in their Thrones enjoy as much Peace and Security as any other Princes whatsoever and that the Papists in England can give as good proofs of their Loyalty as the best of those that clamour so loud against them They can bid defiâ—nce to their Adversaries to shew any one Person of Honour and Estate amongst them or even four of any condition whatsoever that bore Arms against Charles the First during the whole time of his Troubles They can make good that there was scarce any amongst them that did not assist his Majesty either with Person or Purse or both And they can say that Charles the First was murder'd in cold blood by his Protestant Subjects after many hundred Papists had lost their Lives for the preventing that Butchery and that Charles the Second being pursued by the same Subjects for his Life sav'd it amongst the Papists XX. Of the Deposing Power TO bring this matter into as narrow a compass as may be I shall first take notice of his Concessions which will save us a labour of Proofs 1. He yields that the Deposing and King-killing Power hath been maintained by some Canonists and Divines of his Church and that it is in their opinion lawful and annexed to the Papal Chair 2. That some Popes have endeavoured to act according to this Power But then he denies that this Doctrine appertains to the Faith of his Church and is to be believed by all of that Communion And more than that he saith The affirming of it is a malicious Calumny a downright Falsity Let us now calmly debate the matter Whether according to the received principles of the Church of Rome this be only a particulâ—r opinion of some Popes and Divines or be to be received as a matter of Faith The Question is not Whether those who deny it do account it an Article of Faith for we know they do not But whether upon the Principles of the Church of Rome they are not bound to do it I shall only to avoid cavilling proceed upon the Principles owned by our Author himself viz. 1. That the sense of Scripture as understood by the Community of Christians in all Angels since the Apostles is to be taken from the present Church 2. That by the present Church be understands the Pastors and Prelates assembled in Councils who are appointed by Christ and his Apostles for the decision of controversies and that they have Inâ—allible assistance 3. That the Pope as Head of the Church hath a particular assistance promised him with a special regard to his Office and Function If therefore it appear that Popes and Councils have declared this Deposing Doctrine and tâ—ey hâ—ve received other things as Articles of Faith upon the same Declarations why should they then stick at yielding this to be an Article of Faith as well as the other It is not denied that I can find that Popes and Councils for several Ages have asserted and exercised the Deposing Power but it is alledged against these Decrees Acts. 1. That they were not grounded upon Universal Tradition 2. That they had not Universal Reception Now if these be sufficient to overthrow the Definitions of Councils let us consider the consequences of it 1. Then every Man is left to examin the Decrees of Councils whether they are to be embraced or not for he is to judge whether they are founded on Universal Tradition and so he is not to take the sense of the present Church for his Guide but the Universal Church from Christs time which overthrows a Fundamental Principle of the Roman Church 2. Then he must reject the pretended Infallibility in the Guides of the Church if they could so notoriously err in a matter of so great consequence to the Peace of Christendom as this was and consequently their Authority could not be sufficient to declare any Articles of Faith And so all Persons must be left at Liberty to believe as they see cause notwithstanding the Definitions made by Popes and Councils 3. Then he must believe the Guides of the Roman Church to have been mistaken not once or twice but to have persisted in it for Five hundred years which must take away not only Infallâ—bilâ—ty but any kind of Reverence to the Authority of it For whatever may be said as to those who have depended on Princes or favour their Partâ—es against the Guides of the Church it cannot be denied that for so long time the leading Party in that Church did assert and maintain the Deposing Power And therefore Lessius truly understood this matter when he said That there was scarce any Article of the Christian Faith the denial whereof was more dangerous to the Church or did precipitate Men more into Heresie and Hatred of the Church than this of the Deposing Power for he says they could not maintain their Churches Authority without it And he reckons up these ill Consequences of denying it 1. That the Roman Church hath erred for at least five hundred years in a matter fundamental as to Government and of great Moment Which is worse than an Error about Sacraments as Penance Extream Unction c. and yet those who deny the Church can err in one hold that it hath erred in a greater matter 2. That it hath not only erred but voluntarily and out of Ambiâ—ion perverting out of Design the Doctrine of the Primive Church and Fathers concerning the Power of the Church and bringing in another contrary to it against the Right and Authority of Princes which were a grievous sin 3. That it made knowingly unrighteous Decrees to draw persons from their Allegiance to Princes and so they became the Causes of many Seditions and Rebellions and all the ill Consequences of them under a shew of Piety and Religion 4. That the Churches Decrees Commands Judgments and Censures may be safely contemned as Null and containing intolerable Errors And that it may require such things which good Subjects are bound to disobey 5. That Gregory VII
because the Church doth not forbid it but this last he saith is not the general but the more probable Opinion 3. A Man may eat something when he drinks to prevent its doing him hurt besides his good Meal he may take what quantity he pleases of Sweet-meats or Fruit he may have a good Reflection at Night and yet not break this strict Precept of Fasting For the eating as often as one drinks it is the common Opinion saith the same Casuist who was no Iesuit That it is not forbidden because it is taken by way of a Medicine and he quotes a great number of their Casuists for it A Collation at evening is allowed saith he And Lessius saith There is no certain Rule for the Quantity of it And Card. Tolet saith very large ones are allowed at Rome by the Pope's Connivence even in the Court of Rome saith Reginaldus And now I leave the Reader to judge of the severity of Fasting required in the Church of Rome XXIX Of Divisions and Schisms in the Church HE is of a Religion in which there are as many Schisms as Families And they are so divided in their Opinions that commonly as many as meet in company so many several Tenets are maintain'd Hence arise their infinite and endless Disputes and disagreement of their Divines who pretend to give a true and solid explication of the Mysteries of the Christian Faith and yet differ in as many Points as they write of Besides what variety of Iudgments are there in their Religious Houses and Cloisters none agreeing with another in their Foundation Institution and Profession This being of the Religion of St. Dominick That of St. Francis a third of St. Bernard Others of St. Benedict and so without number so that as many Orders as many Religions And yet they pretend to Christian Unity amidst this diversity growing upon them every day HE is of a Religion in which there are no Schisms or Separations all the Members of it however spread through the World agreeing like one man in every Article of their Faith by an equal submission to the Determinations of their Church And no one of them tho' most Learned and Wise ever following any other Rule in their Faith besides this of assenting to all that the Church of God planted by Christ assisted and protected by the Holy Ghost proposed to the Faithful to be believ'd as the Doctrine of the Apostles and receiv'd as such in all Ages Which is all unanimously to believe as the Church of God believes No one of his Communion ever doubting of this or scrupling to receive any thing after his Churches Declaration And now tho they all thus conspire in every point of Faith yet there is great diversity among School men in their Divinity-points and Opinions of such matters as are no Articles of Faith and have no relation to it but as some circumstance or manner which being never defin'd by their Church may be maintain'd severally either this or that way without any breach of Faith or injury to their Religion And of these things only they dispute and have their Debates in manner of a School-Exercises without any disagreement at all in their Belief but with a perfect Unity The like Unity is there amongst their Religious Orders all which say the same Creed own the same Authority in the Church of Christ and in every thing profess the same Faith and have no other differences than as it were of so many several steps or degrees in the practice of a Devout and Holy Life some being of a more severe and strict Discipline others of a more gentle and moderate some spending more time in Praying others more in Watching others more in Fasting some being intended for the Catechising and breeding up of Youth others for taking care of Hospitals and looking after the Sick others for going amongst Infidels and Preaching to them the Gospel of Christ and for such-like Pious and Christian Designs to the greater Glory and Honour of God which differences make no other difference in the several Professors than there was between Mary and Martha who express'd their Love and Service to their Lord in a very different Imploy but both commendably and without any danger of prejudicing the Unity of their Faith XXIX Of Divisions and Schisms in the Church TWO things he saith upon this Head 1. That they are all agreed in matters of Faith 2. That they only differ in some School Points from whence he infers That they have no Schisms or Separations among them But that this is no just consequence will appear by the Schisms and Separations among us made by such who profess to agree in all matters of Faith Yet let us see how he proves that they agree in all matters of Faith because they agree to submit equally to the Determinations of the Church Now this very way evidently proves that they do not all agree because they do not equally submit to the Churches Determinations For 1. Some say they are bound to submit to the Churches Determinations as it represents the Universal Church Others say no but as the Churches Power is virtually lodged in the Guides of it Now this is a very material Difference for if it be on the former Account then not the Popes and Councils Declarations are to be regarded but as they express the sense of the Universal Church and so the Majority of Votes the Numbers in the Representative and Diffusive Church is chiefly to be regarded And on this Ground some reject the Deposing Power tho plainly decreed by Popes and Councils but they unhinge their Churches Authority by it Now how is it possible for them to agree about matters of Faith who differ fundamentally about the way how any things come to be matters of Faith If they be decreed by Popes and Councils say some and so the Deposing Power is become an Article of Faith No such matter say others for a greater Number in the diffusive Church oppose it as in the Gallican Church and elsewhere Very well But how then can these Parties be said to agree in matters of Faith and an equal Submission to the Determinations of the Church 2. Some again say That it is not the consent of the present Church can make any Article of Faith but there must be an Universal Tradition from the Apostles times And so they tell us the Deposing Power can never be an Article of Faith because it wants the Consent of all the Ages before Gregory VII So that upon this Ground there can be no Article of Faith which cannot be proved to be thus delivered down to us Others again say this is in effect to give up their Cause knowing the impossibility of proving particular Points in this manner and therefore they say the present Church is wholly to be trusted for the sense of the foregoing Now these differences are still on foot in their Church and from these do arise daily disputes about matters of Faith
Mother-Tongue of Instruction and Devotion wherein is explâ—cated the whole Duty of a Christian every Mystery of their Faith and all the Offices and Ceremonies perform'd in the Church that they must be very negligent or else very meanly parted who do not arrive to a sufficient knowledge of theâ—r Obligation in every respect And whosoever has seen the great pains and care some good men take abroad in Explicating on Sundays and Holy-days in their Churches and on Week-days in the Streets the Christian Doctrine to the crowds of the ignorant and meaner sort of People not omitting to reward such as answer well with some small gifts to encourage Youth and provoke them to a commendable Emulation will never say that the Papists keep the poor people in Ignorance and hide from them their Religion but rather that they use all means for instructing the Ignorant and omit nothing that can any ways conduce to the breeding up of Youth in the knowledge of their Faith and letting them see into the Religion they are to profess Neither does it seem to him even so much as probable that if the Church-Offices and Service c. were perform'd in the vulgar-tongue that upon this the now-ignorant and blinded People would immediately discover so many idle Superstitions sensless Devotions and gross Errors that they would in great numbers upon the sight become deserters of that Communion in which now they are profess'd Members For since there is nothing done but in a Language which the Learned Judicious and Leading Men of all Nations do every where understand and yet these espy no such Ridiculosities which fright them from their Faith but notwithstanding the seeing all thro' and thro' they yet admire all for solid holy and Apostolical and remain stedfast in their Profession how can it be imagin'd that the vulgar weak and unlearned sort did they but understand all as well as they would espy any such Errors and Superstitions which these others with all their Learning and Judgment cannot discover No he thinks there 's no reason to fear that what passes the Test among the Wise and Learned can be groundedly call'd in question by the Multitude XXXIV Of breeding up People in Ignorance THE Misrepresenter charges them with this on these accounts 1. By keeping their Mysteries of Iniquity from them 2. By performing Divine Service in an unknown Tongue 3. By an implicite Faith To which the Representer answers 1. That they give encouragement to Learning and he instances in their Universities and Conventual Libraries But what is all this to the common People But their Indices Expurgatorii and prohibiting Books so severely which are not for their turn as we have lately seen in the new one of Paris argues no great confidence of their Cause nor any hearty love to Learning And if it could be rooted out of the World their Church would fare the better in it but if it cannot they must have some to be able to deal with others in it 2. As to the common People he saith They have Books enough to instruct them Is it so in Spain or Italy But where they live among Heretâ—cks as we are called the People must be a little better instructed to defend themselves and to gain upon others 3. If the People did know their Church Offices and Service c. they would not find such faults since the Learned approve them Let them then try the Experiment and put the Bible and their Church-Offices every where into the Vulgar Tongues But their severe Prohibitions shew how much they are of another Opinion What made all that Rage in France against Voisins Translation of the Missal Such Proceedings of the Assembly of the Clergy against it such Complaints both to the King and the Pope against it as tho all were lost if that were suffered Such an Edict from the King such a Prohibitâ—on from the Pope in such a tragical Stile about it Such a Collection of Authors to be printed on purpose against it Do thâ—se things shew even in a Nation of so free a temper in Comparison as the French any mighty Inclination towards the encouraging this Knowledg in the People And since that what stirs have there been about the Mons Testament What Prohibitions by Bishops besides a Bull from this very Pope against it What vehement Opposition by others So that many Volumes have already been written on the occasion of that Translation And yet our Author would perswade us That if we look abroad we shall find wonderful care taken to keep the People from Ignorance but we can discern much greater to keep them in it XXXV Of the Uncharitableness of the Papists HIs Church teaches him to be very uncharitable it being her constant Doctrine that none out of her Communion can be saved So that let a man be never so honest in his Dealing never so just to his Neighbour never so charitable to the Poor and constant in his Devotion to his Maker yet all this shall avail him nothing if he be not a Member of his Church 'T is not enough for him to believe in Iesus Christ to confess him his Redeemer to believe that he died for our Sins that he rose again and ascended into Heaven unless he believes and assents to every Article and Tenet declar'd by any of his General Councils for that obstinately to deny any one of these does as certainly place him at the Left Hand of the Judge as if he perversly stood out against the truth of Christianity and denied Jesus Christ to be God And by this means as many as by his Church are mark'd out for Schismaticks or Hereticks are to expect nothing but Damnation or rather are condemned already HIs Church teaches him no uncharitableness at all and the Doctrine she delivers concerning the desperate Estate of Hereticks and Schismaticks is nothing but what she has learnt from the mouth of Christ and his Apostles Among the last advices recommended by our Saviour at his Ascension is found the Sentence of Doom pronounced against all such as would not receive the Doctrine preach'd by the Apostles Preach the Gospel says Christ Mark 16.16 to every Creature he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned And this is all his Church delivers in this point repeating the same Sentence of condemnation against all such as will not receive and believe the Doctrine left by Christ and preached by his Apostles And if among those that believe not she comprehends not only Infidels and Heathens but also all Hereticks and Schismaticks 't is nothing but what she has receiv'd from the Apostles who did not only shake the dust off their Feets in witness against those who denied them entrance and refused to believe in Jesus but also denounc'd such of the Brethren to stand guilty of damnation who notwithstanding their belief in Jesus that he died for the Redâ—mption of Man and that rising again he Ascended into
Heaven did make Divisions amongst the Faithful or Preached any new Doctrine contrary to what they had deliver'd St. Paul is very express in this who foretelling Timothy 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3. of some who in latter times would come and Preach a Doctrine Forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats which God hath created to be received brands them with the infamous Title of Men that depart from the Faith giving heed to seducing Spirits and Doctrines of Devils In these words plainly letting him understand that though these Men would not deny Christ yat that their false Doctrine in those two other Points were enough to make them Seducers Deserters of Christ and Leaders to the Devil And does not he as expresly in his 2 d Epistle to Timothy c. 2. v. 16 17 18. condemn Hymeneus and Philetus for prophane and vain bablers increasers of Ungodliness and overthrowers of the Faith who concerning the Truth erred only in one Point saying that the Resurrection is past already By which ' â—is manifest to him that the Doctrine now taught him by his Church is nothing but what she has learnt from St. Paul and the rest of the Apostles it being deliver'd by them that he is a Lyar who denieth that Iesus is the Christ 1 Ioh. 2.22 And that every spirit that confesses not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God ib. c. 4. v. 3. And not only this but likewise A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Tit. 3.10 11. With this weighty advice to the Brethren in which they are commanded in the Name of our Lord Iesus Christ to speak all the same thing that there be no divisions among them but thet they be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement 1 Cor. 1.10 For that having strife and divisions among them they will shew themselves to be Carnal and to walk as Men ib. c. 3. v. 3. That therefore there being but one Body and one Spirit one Lord one Faith and one Baptism they should endeavour to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace and not be tossed to and fro like Children and carried about with every Wind of Doctrine by the slight of men and cunning Craftiness whereby they lye in wait to deceive Ephes c. 4. v 3 4 5 14. Who transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ are false Apostles deceitful Workers 2 Cor. 11.13 But certainly accursed for that troubling the Faithful they would pervert the Gospel of Christ. and preach another Gospel than that which had him preach'd by the Apostles Gal. 1.7.8 And this is the Sum of the Doctrine of his Church which believing that Faiâ—h is necessary to Salvation it being impossible without Faith to please God Heb. 11.6 teaches likewise that the Faithful ought to hold fast the profession of their Faith without wavering for that not only they lose it who deny Iesus Christ to be God as some have done but also all those who endeavor to pervert the Gospel of Christ and in any point of Faith obstinately deny or teach otherwise than was taught by Christ and his Apostles as Hymeneus and Philetus did so that that Christian makes but a very imperfect and lame profession of his Faith who can only say I believe that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh and that he is God and Man the Redeemer of the World unless he can with truth add this likewise I also believe the whole Gospel that he preach'd and every point of Faith that he has taught and deliver'd to us by his Apostles there being the same Obligation to obey his Precepts and hearken to his Words as to acknowledg the Divinity of his Person and it being a sin of the same blackness obstinately to oppose any point of his Doctrine as to deny the truth of his Persâ—n 'T is not therefore any uncharitableness in his Church to declare plainly this miserable unhappy state of all such who wilfully oppose and separate from the Doctrine of Christ deliver'd by the Apostles and continued in the Catholick Church and of such who disobey and seperate from the Government of the same Church which Christ has Commanded all to hear and obey But 't is her Zeal so to do and the same solicitude for the salvation of Souls which mov'd the Apostles heretofore to Preach the like Doctrine to their Flock as also the Primitive Christians to expel their Communion and Anathematize all such who by broaching erroneous Tenets contrary to any point of Receiv'd Doctrine or by disobedience did wilfully divide themselves from the Belief or Discipline of the Catholick Church Such as were Marcion Basilides and Bardesanes who were Condemn'd in the First Age for opposing that Article of our Faith in which we believe the Resurrection of the Dead such the Archonticks Condemn'd likewise for denying the necessity of Baptism Such Tatianus c. for Preaching Marriage to be unlawful Such the Millenarians for maintaining a thousand Years Reign of Christ upâ—n Earth with his Saints in sensual pleasures And so in all Ages others were condemn'd upon the like account It having been always a received Custom even in the purest time of the Gospel for the Elders and Prelates to whose charge Christ committed the care of his Flock to oppose all those that by new Doctrine or by making Schisms and Divisious did disturb its peace and not to permit any that by such like means dâ—d endeavour to destroy his Unity so much desired and recommended by the Apostles So that they were equally declar'd Enemies of Christianity who denyed Christ and they who confessing Christ did yet contradict and reject any part of his Doctrine And this upon the Principle that Christian Faith ought to be entire For that every Article Mystery and Point of it being deliver'd by the same hands and recommended by the same Authority whosoever did oppose any one Point of it was immediately judg'd guilty of all in discrediting the Authority on which the whole stood equally grounded And this is that great Truth proclaimed above thirteen hundred years ago and now every where read in St. Athanasius's Creed Whosoever will be saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith Which Faith except every one do keep Whole and undefiled without doubt he shall perish everlastingly By which words was made known to the Christian World the Sense and Doctrine of the then pure and unspotted Church as receiv'd from Christ and his Apostles That it is vain for any one to hope for Salvation unless he first believe the Catholick Faith and that whosoever does not believe it Whole and undefiled shall certainly perish everlastingly Which is a Doctrine like that deliver'd by the Apostle conceâ—ning the observance of the Laws of God that as whosoever fails in one is made guilty of all so also
of it should be sensible of the Alteration but also to be manag'd with such Policy and Craft that the whole business should be a Secret for many Age And if this be scarce to be thought possible of this one Kingdom what can be imagin'd when 't is affirm'd of many Nations of the whole Christian World Can any thing look more like a Fable or Romance Or can any rational man barely upon such a Report condemn the Faith and Religion of his Ancestors for Novelty and Humane Inventions and quite laying aside this take him for the Rule of his Reformation who thus without Reason Justice or Truth has thrown such an Infamy upon all the Christians preceeding him for a thousand years But not to insist upon these reasonings for the wiping off the scandal of Novelty from the Doctrine of the Church of Rome 't would not be amiss here to look beyond the Tenth Century as also beyond the time of Pope Gregory And if in those earlier Christians nothing can be found of that Faith and Profession which is charged as Novelty and Error against the Church of Rome all the Papists in the World shall join with their Adversaries and condemning Pope Gregory for a Seducer and all of the Tenth Age for so many Ignoramus's shall in one voice with them cry out against all such Doctrine Novelty Novelty Errour Errour But if on the contrary every Point thus challeng'd of Novelty shall appear to have been the Profession of the Faithful in the time of the Purity of the Gospel if before Pope Gregory we find that Invocation of Saints the real Presence Transubstantiation Purgatory Prayer for the Dead the use of Holy Images Relicks the Sign of the Cross Procession c. were a receiv'd Doctrine and common Practice of Christians in those Primitive times Then shall the Papists remain as they are as being of the same Faith and Religion with those Antient Believers without any Additions and Alterations and all their Adversaries ought in justice to return again to their Communion and making up one Qâ—ite cry out with them Blessed are they who believe as our Forefathers believ'd who receiv'd their Faith from the Apostles and their Successors and Accursed be they who separate from this Faith and upon the Noise of Novelty and Errour make Divisions in the Church and fall from her Communion believing Lies rather than Truth In order to this I intended in this place to have given the Reader a fair prospect of the Doctrine and Belief of the Fathers at the first five hundred years after Christ but finding the matter to increase so much beyond expectation upon my hands I have reserv'd them for another occasion But however upon confidence of what I am able to produce in that point I cannot omit to assure the Reader that the chief and most material Points charg'd upon the Church of Rome for Novelty the Primitive Fathers do so plainly own to have been the Faith and Profession of the Church in their days and to have been deliver'd down and taught as the Doctrine of the Apostles that an impartial Considerer need not take much time to conclude whether are the greater Innovators those that now Believe and Profess these Tenets and Practices or they that disown or rejâ—ct them 'T is evident that every Point of that Doctrine which is now decry'd for Popery and basely stigmatiz'd with the note of Errors introduc'd of late and of a modern invention is by many Ages older than those who are reputed to be the Authors that every particular Article laid to the Ignorance of the Tenth Century and to the contrivance of Pope Gregory are as expresly and clearly own'd and taught some Ages before as it is now at this day That those Great Men were as down-right Papists in these Points as we are now And that any disturber of Christianity might have as well defâ—n'd them for believers of Novelties and Errours as we are now at this present The Faith that they profess'd then we profess now and if any of our Doctrine be Novelty 't is a Novelty of above twelve hundred years standing And who can question it not to be of an older date If it was the publick belief of the Christian World in the fourth Century who can be better Witnesses of what was beliâ—v'd before them even in the third Age than They They tell us that the Doctrine they maintain and deliver is the Faith of the Catholick Church receiv'd from their Fore-fathers and as it was taught by the Apostles and we don't find that in any of these Points they were challeng'd by any Authority or opposed by the Pastors of the Church or any Writers either then living or succeeding them but received always with great veneration And upon what grounds can any challenge them now Is it possible that any living now can give a better account of what was believ'd and practis'd in the third Age than They that immediately follow'd them Which will be more credible Witnesses of what was done in Forty Eight those that shall be alive fifty years hence or they that are not yet to come these thousand years If therefore these Holy Men declare to us the Doctrine they bâ—liev'd with an assurance that it was the Faith of the Catholick Church so believ'd by their Ancestors and as they had receiv'd it from the Apostles and their Successors do not they deserve better credit than others who coming a thousand years after cry out against all these several Points that they are nothing but Novelty and Errour 'T is evident therefore to him that this noise of Novelty was nothing but a stratagem for the introducing of Novelties and that those that brought an Infamy upon these Points by this aspersion might with as great applause every and as easily have laid a scandal upon other Articles of the Christian Faith which they thought sit to retain and have had them all exploded for Novelty And this has been so far done already that even three parts of that Doctrine pick'd out by the first Reformers for Apostolical and conform to the Word of God we have seen in our days clamem'd against for Novelty and thrown by with as general Approbation and as clear Evidence of the charge as ever they laid by Transubstantiation and the Primacy The first Reformers cast off the Authority of the first Bishop as being a Novelty Others soon alter cry'd down the Authority of all Bishops for a Novelty The First disown'd a great part of the Priestly Function as being lately crept in the Others disown'd all the rest and even Ordination it self as having all crept in together The First threw out a great number of Ceremonies as being not Apostolical but of a modern Institution The Others threw out even what they had retain'd for being no more an Ordination of the Apostles than the former The First laid by five of the Sacraments the Others laid by the other two And thus Novelty was the
Word whensoever any receiv'd Doctrine of Christianity was to be outed and may to be made for a Novelty And he does not doubt but that if the noise of Novelty continue long so unhappily successful as of late and the liberty be permitted to every presuming Spirit to fix this scandal upon whatsoever Doctrine or Institution they shall think fit that all Christianity is in a faiâ— way of being thrown out of doors And the Bible Preaching Catechising Christ's Incarnation and Passion c. is as likely to bâ— cast off for a Novelty as all the rest have been Those that will but shew to the People that even these things have been all receiv'd from Rome and that the Papists by their Missionaries spread these Doctrines over the World may soon perswade them they are nothing but Popish Inventions meer Novelties that those that began the Reformation did their business by halves and that the World will never be throughly Reform'd till all these Romish Superstitions are laid by with the rest they being of the same date He takes no notice thereof of all the clamours rais'd against several points of the receiv'd Doctrine of his Church his Faith is founded on better Principles than to be shaken with such a Vulgar Engine Novelty Novelty is a cry that may fright unthinking Men from their Religion but every serious Man will require better Motives than a Noise before he forsake any point of his Faith and 't is impossible he should joyn with any in condemning such things for Novelties which he finds the Profession of all Antiquity XXXVII Of Innovation in matters of Faith THE Substance of his Discourse on this Head may be reduced to these things 1. That the Church in every Age hath Power to declare what is necessary to be believed with Anathema to those who Preach the Contrary and so the Council of Trent in declaring Transubstantiation Purgatory c. to be necessary Articles did no more than the Church had done before on like Occasions 2. That if the Doctrines then defined had been Innovations they must have met with great Opposition when they were introduced 3. That those who charged those points to be Innovations might as well have laid the scandal on any other Article of Faith which they retained These are things necessary to be examined in order to the making good the charge of Innovation in matters of Faith which we believe doth stand on very good Grounds 1. We are to consider Whether the Council of Trent had equal Reason to define the necessity of these points as the Council of Nice and Constantinople had to determin the point of the Trinity or those of Ephesus and Chalcedon the Truth of Christ's Incarnation He doth not assert it to be in the Churches Power to make new Articles of Faith as they do imply new Doctrines reveal'd but he contends earnestly That the Church hath a Power to declare the necessity of believing some points which were not so declared before And if the Necessity of believing doth depend upon the Churches Declaration then he must assert that it is in the Churches Power to make points necessary to be believed which were not so and consequently to make common Opinions to become Articles of Faith But I hope we may have leave to enquire in this Case since the Church pretends to no new Revelation of matters of Doctrine therefore it can declare no more than it receives and no otherwise than it receives And so nothing can be made necessary to Salvation but what God himself hath made so by his Revelation So that they must go in their Declaration either upon Scripture or Universal Tradition but if they define any Doctrine to be necessary without these Grounds they exceed their Commission and there is no Reason to submit to their Decrees or to believe their Declarations To make this more plain by a known Instance It is most certain that several Popes and Councils have declared the Desposing Doctrine and yet our Author saith It is no Article of Faith with him Why not since the Popes and Councils have as evidently delivered it as the Council of Trent hath done Purgatory or Transubstantiation But he may say There is no Anathema joined to it Suppose there be not But why may it not be as well as in the other Cases And if it were I wouâ—d know whether in his Conscience he would then believe it to be a necessary Article of Faith thô he believed that it wanted Scripture and Tradition If not then he seees what this matter is brought to viz. That althô the Council of Trent declare these new Doctrines to be necessary to be believed yet if their Declaration be not built on Scripture and Universal Tradition we are not bound to receive it 2. As to the impossibility of Innovations coming in without notorious opposition I see no ground at all for it where the alteration is not made at once but proceeds gradually He may as well prove it impossible for a Man to fall into a Dropsy or a Hectick-Fever unless he can tell the punctual time when it begun And he may as well argue thus Such a Man fell into a Fever upon a great Debauch and the Physicians were presently sent for to advise about him therefore the other Man hath no Chronical Distemper because he had no Physicians when he was first sick as because Councils were called against some Heresies and great Opposition made to them therefore where there is not the like there can be no Innovation But I see no Reason why we should decline giving an Account by what Dâ—grees and Steps and upon what Occasions and with what Opposition several of the Doctrines defined at Trent were brought in For the matter is not so obscure as you would make it as to most of the Points in difference between us But that is too large a Task to be here undertaken 3. There is no colour for calling in Question the Articles of Faith received by us on the same Grounds that we reject those defined by the Council of Trent for we have the Universal Consent of the Christian World for the Apostles Creed of the 4 General Councils for the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation who never pretended to determine any Point to be necessary which was not reveaâ—ed in Scripture whose sense was delivered down by the Testimony of the Christian Church from the Apostles times But the Council of Trent proceeded by a very different Rule for it first set up an Unwritten Word to be a Rule of Faith as well as the Written which althô it were necessary in order to their Decrees was one of the greatest Innovations in the World and the Foundation of all the rest as they were there established The CONCLUSION THese are the Characters of the Papist as he is Mis-represented and as Represented And as different as the One is from the Other so different is the Pâ—pist as reputed by his Maligners
of the Bible before any other and not allowing any Translations into a Mother-Tongue to be ordinarily read 14. In believing that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular Person 15. In relying upon the Authority of the present Church for the sense of Scripture 16. In receiving and believing the Churches Traditions as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assenting to them with Divine Faith just as he doth to the Bâ—ble 17. In believing that the present Guides of the Church being assembled in Councils for preserving the Unity of the Church have an Infallible Assistance in their Decrees 18. In believing the Pope to be the Supreme Head of the Church under Christ being Successor to S. Peter to whom he committed the care of his Flock 19. In believing that Communion in both Kinds is an indifferent thing and was so held for the first four hundred years after Christ and that the first Precept for Receiving under both Kinds was given to the Faithful by Pope Leo I. and confirmed by Pope Gelasius 20. In believing that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded on Scripture Authority and Reason 21. In believing that to the saying of Prayers well and devoutly it is not necessary to have attention on the Words or on the Sense of Prayers 22. In believing that none out of the Communion of the Church of Rome can be saved and that it is no Uncharitableness to think so 23. In believing that the Church of Rome in all the new Articles defined at Trent hath made no Innovation in mat ters of Faith Our Reasons against it in the several Particulars 1. THou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image or any likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth c. Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them Which being the plain clear and express Words of the Divine Law we dare not worship any Images or Representations lest we be found Transgressors of this Law Especially since God herein hath declared himself a Iealous God and annexed so severe a Sanction to it And since he that made the Law is only to interpret it all the Dictinctions in the World can never satisfy a Mans Conscience unless it appear that God himself did either make or approve them And if God allow the Worship of the thing Represented by the Representation he would never have forbidden that Worship absolutely which is unlawful only in a certain respect 2. We have an Advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous 1 John 2.1 And one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Iesus 1 Tim. 2.5 For Christ is entered into Heaven it self now to appear in the Presence of God for us Heb. 9 24. And therefore we dare not make other Intercessors in Heaven besides him and the distance between Heaven and us breaks off all Communication between the Saints there and us upon Earth so that all Addresses to them now for their Prayers are in a way very different from desiring others on Earth to pray for us and if such Addresses are made in the solemn Offices of Divine Worship they joyn the Creatures with the Creator in the Acts and Signs of Worship which are due to God alone 3. Call upon me in the day of Trouble I will deliver thee and thou shalt glorifie me Psâ—l 50.15 When we pray to Our Father in Heaven as our Saviour commanded us we do bâ—t what both Natural and Christian Religion require us to do But when men pray to the Blessed Virgin for Help and Protection now and at the hour of Death they attribute that to her which belongs only to God who is our Helper and Defender And altho Christ knew the Dignity of his Mother above all others he never gives the least Encouragement to make such Addressâ—s to her And to suppose her to have a share now in the Kingdom of Christ in Heaven as a Copartner with him is to advance a Creature to Divine Honour and to overthrow the true Ground of Christs Exaltation to his Kingdom in Heaven which was His suffering on the Cross for us 4. And no man knoweth of the Sepulchre of Moses unto this day Deut. 34.6 Why should God hide the Body of Moses from the People if hâ— allowed giving religious Honour and Respect to Relicks Why should Hezekiah break in pieces the Brazen Serpent because the Children of Israel did burn Incense to it 2 Kings 18.4 especially when it was a Type or Representation of Christ himself and God had wrought many Miracles by it 5. Whom the Heaven must receive until the times of the Restitution of all things Acts 3.21 And therefore in the Eucharist we adore him as sitting on the right hand of God but we dare not direct our Adoration to the Consecrated Host which we believe to be the Substance of Bread and Wine tho consecrated to a Divine Mystery and therefore not a fit Object for our Adoration 6. The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 This is spoken of the Bread after Consecration and yet the Apostle supposes it to be Bread still and the Communion of his Body is interpreted by the next Words For we being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all Partakers of that one Bread v. 17. Which is very different from the Bread being changed into the very Body of Christ which is an Opinion that hath no Foundation in Scripture and is repugnant to the common Principles of Reason which God hath given us and exposes Christian Religion to the Reproach and Contempt of Iews Turks and Infidels 7. When you shall have done all those things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable Servants we have done that which was our Duty to do St. Luke 17.10 And therefore in no sense can our best Works be truly meritorious of Eternal Life Which consisting in the enjoyment of God it is impossible there should be any just Proportion or due Commensuration between our best Actions and such a Reward 8. And the Son said to him Father I have sinned against Heaven and in thy sight S. Luke 15.21 Where Confession to God is required because the Offence is against him but it is impossible for any Man upon Earth to forgive those whom God doth not forgive And he alone can appoint the necessâ—ry conditions of Pardon among which true Contrition and Repentance is fully declared but Confession to a Priest thô it may be useful for the ease of the Penitent is no where in Scripture made necessary for the Forgiveness of Sin 9. I said I will confess my Transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin Psal. 32.5 If God doth fully forgive the Guilt of sin there remains no Obligation to Punishment for where-ever that is the guilt remains It is true God may not sometimes fully pardon but he may reserve some temporal Punishment here for his own
Honour or the Chastisement of a penitent Sinner But then what have any men to do to pretend that they can take off what God thinks fit to lay on Can any Indulgences prevent Pain or Sickness or sudden Death But if Indulgences be understood only with respect to Canonical Penances they are a most notorious and inexcusable corruption of the Discipline of the Ancient Church 10. For if when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Romans 5.10 And therefore no Satisfaction to the Justice of God is now required from us for the Expiation of any Remainder of Guilt For if Christ's Satisfaction were in it self sufficient for a total Remission and was so accepted by God what Account then remains for the Sinner to discharge if he perform the Conditions on his part But we do not take away hereby the Duties of Mortification Prayer Fasting and Alms c. but there is a difference to be made between the Acts of Christian Duties and Satisfaction to Divine Iustice for the Guâ—lt of Sin either in whole or in part And to think to joyn any Satisfactions of ours together with Christ's is like joyning our hand with God's in Creating or Governing the World 11. Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly in all Wisdom teaching and admonishing one anotâ—er c. Col. 3.16 How could that dwell richly in them which was not to be communicated to them but with great Caution How could they teach and admonish one another in a Language not understood by them The Scriptures of the New Testament were very early perverted and if this Reason were sufficient to keep them out of the hands of the People certainly they would never have been published for common use but as prudently dispensed then as some think it necessary they should be now But we esteem it a part of our Duty not to think our selves wiser than Christ or his Apostles nor to deprive them of that unvaluable Treasure which our Saviour hath left to their use 12. All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3.16 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2 Pet. 1.21 Therefore where there is no Evidence of Divine Inspiration those Books cannot be made Canonical But the Jewish Church To whom the Oracles of God were committed never deliver'd these Books as any part of them being written when Inspiration was ceased among them And it is impossible for any Church in the World to make that to be divinely inspired which was not so from the beginning 13. But I say Have they not heard Yes verily their sound went into all the Earth and their Words unto the ends of the World Rom. 10.18 Therefore the Intention of God was that the Gospel should be understood by all Mankind which it could never be unless it were translated into their several Languages But still the difference is to be observed between the Originals and Translations and no Church can make a Translation equal to the Original But among Translations those deserve the greatest esteem which are done with the greatest Fidelity and Exactness On which account our last Translation deserves a more particular Regard by us as being far more useful to our People than the Vulgar Latin or any Translation made only from it 14. Thy Word is a Lamp unto my Feet and a Light unto my Path Psalm 119.105 Which it could never be unless it were sufficient for necessary direction in our way to Heaven But we suppose Persons to make use of the best means for understanding it and to be duely qualified for following its Directions without which the best Rule in the World can never attain its End And if the Scripture have all the due Properties of a Rule of Faith it is unconceivable why it should be denied to be so unless men find they cannot justify their Doctrines and Practices by it and therefore are forced to make Tradition equal in Authority with it 15. Wo unto you Lawyers for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledg ye entred not in your selves them that were entring in ye hindred S. Luk. 11.52 From whence it follows that the present Guides of the Church may be so far from giving the true Sense of Scripture that they may be the chief Means to hinder Men from right understanding it Which argument is of greater force because those who plead for the Infallibility of the Guides of the present Church do urge the promises made to the Jewish Church at that time as our Author doth from those who sat in the Chair of Moses and from Calâ—phas his Prophesying 16. We have also a more sure word of Prophesie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed 2 Pet. 1.19 And yet here the Apostle speaks of something delivered by the Testimony of those who were with Christ in the Holy Mount From whence we infer that it was not the Design of Christ to lâ—ave us to any Vocal Testimony buâ— to refer us to the Written Word as the most certain Foundâ—tion of Faith And it is not any Pâ—â—sons assumâ—ng the Title of the Catholâ—ck Church to themselves can give them Authority to impose any Traditions on the Faith of Christians or require them to be believed equally with the Written Word For before any Traditions can be assented to with Divine Faith the Churches Authority must be proved to be Divine and Infallible either by a written or unwritten Word but it can be done by neither without overthrowing the necessity of such an Infallibility in order to Divine Faith because the Testimony on which the Churches Infallibility is proved must be received only in a way of Credibility 17. Also of your own selves shall Men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Acts 20.30 Which being spoken of the Guides of the Christian Church without Limitation of Number a possibility of Error is implied in any Assembly of them unless there were some other Promises which did assure us That in all great Assemblies the Spirit of God shall always go with the casting Voice or the greater Number 18. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Unity of the Faith c. Ephes. 4.13 14 15. Now here being an account given of the Officers Christ appointed in his Church in order to the Unity and Edification of it it had been unfaithfulness in the Apostle to have left out the Hâ—ad of it in case Christ had appointed any Because this were of more consequence than all the rest being declared necessary to Salvation to be in subjection to him But neither this Apostle nor St. Peter himself give the least intimation of it Which it is impossible to conceive should have been left out in the Apostolical Writings upon so many
consists of two parts I. A general Complaint of the Papists being Misrepresented among us II. An Account of the Method he hath taken to clear them from these Misrepresentions I. As to the First Whether it be just or not must be examin'd in the several particulars But here we must consider whether it serves the End it is designed for in this place which is to gain the Reader 's good Opinion of their Innocency Not meerly because they complain so much of being injured but because the best Men in all Times have been mis-represented as he proves at large in this Introduction from several Examples of the Old and New Testament but especially of Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians But it is observable that when Bp. Iewel began his excellent Apology for the Church of England with a Complaint much of the same Nature and produced the very same Examples his Adversary would by no means allow it to have any Force being as he called it Exordium Commune which might be used on both sides and therefore could be proper to neither And although it be reasonable only for those to complain of being mis-represented who having Truth on their side do notwithstanding suffer under the Imputation of Error yet it is possible for those who are very much mistaken to complain of being mis-represented and while they go about to remove the Misrepresentations of others to make new Ones of their own And as the best Men. and the best Things have been mis-represented so other Men have been as apt to complain of it and the worst Things are as much mis-represented when they are made to appear not so bad as they are For Evil is as truly mis represented under the appearance of Good as Good under the appearance of Evil and it is hard to determine whether hath done the greater Mischief So that if the Father of Lies be the Author of Mis-representing as the Introduction begins we must have a care of him both ways For when he tried this black Art in Paradise as our Author speaks it was both by mis-representing the Command and the Danger of trangressing it He did not only make the Command appear otherwise than it was but he did very much lessen the Punishment of Disobedience and by that means deluded our first Parents into that Sin and Misery under which their Posterity still suffers Which ought to be a Caution to them how dangerous it is to break the Law of God under the fairest Colour and Pretences and that they should not be easily imposed upon by false Glosses and plausible Representations though made by such as therein pretend to be Angels of Light But although the Father of Lies be the Author of Mis-representing yet we have no reason to think but that if he were to plead his own Cause to Mankind he would very much complain of being mis-represented by them and even in this respect when they make him the Father of those Lies which are their own Inventions And can that be a certain Argument of Truth which may as well be used by the Father of Lies And the great Instruments he hath made use of in deceiving and corrupting Mankind have been as forward as any to complain of being mis-represented The true Reason is Because no great Evil can prevail in the World unless it be represented otherwise than it is and all Men are not competent Judges of the Colours of Good and Evil therefore when the Designs of those who go about to deceive begin to be laid open they then betake themselves to the fairest Representations they can make of themselves and hope that many will not see through their pretences If I had a mind to follow our Author's Method I could make as long a Deduction of Instances of this kind But I shall content my self with some few Examples of those who are allowed on both sides to have been guilty of great Errors and Corruptions The Arrians pleaded they were mis-represented when they were taken for Enemies to Christ's Divinity for all that they contended for was only such a moment of time as would make good the Relation between Father and Son The Pelagians with great success for some time and even at Rome complained that they were very much mis-represented as Enemies to God's Grace whereas they owned and asserted the manifold Grace of God and were only Enemies to Mens Idleness and neglect of their Duties The Nestorians gave out that they never intended to make two Persons in Christ as their Adversaries charged them but all their design was to avoid Blasphemy in calling the Blessed Virgin the Mother of God and whatever went beyond this was their Adversaries Mis-representations and not their own Opinions The Euâ—ychians thought themselves very hardly dealt with for saying there was but one Nature in Christ they did not mean thereby as they said to destroy the Properties of the Humane Nature but only to assert that its Subsistence was swallowed up by the Divine and of all Persons those have no reason to blame them who suppose the Properties of one Substance may be united to another Even the Gentile Idolaters when they were charged by the Christians that they worshipped Stocks and Stones complained they were mis-represented for they were not such Ideots to take things for Gods which had neither Life nor Sense nor Motion in them And when they were charged with worshipping other Gods as they did the Supream they desired their Sense might not be taken from common prejudices or vulgar practices but from the Doctrine of their Philosophers and they owned a Sovereign Worship due to him that was Chief and a subordinate and relative to some Celestial Beings whom they made application to as Mediators between him and them Must all these Complaints now be taken for granted What then becomes of the Reputation of General Councils or the Primitive Christians But as if it were enough to be Accused none would be Innocent so none would be Guilty if it were enough to complain of being mis-represented Therefore in all Complaints of this Nature it is necessary to come to particulars and to examine with care and Diligence the Matters complained of and then to give Judgment in the Case I am glad to find our Author professing so much Sincerity and Truth without Passion and I do assure him I shall follow what he professes For the Cause of our Church is such as needs neither Tricks nor Passion to defend it and therefore I shall endeavour to state the Matters in Difference with all the clearness and calmness that may be and I shall keep close to his Method and Representations without Digressions or provoking Reflections II. But I must declare my self very much unsatisfied with the Method he hath taken to clear his Party from these Mis-representations For 1. He takes upon him to draw a double Character of a Papist and in the one he pretends to follow a certain Rule but not in the
other which is not fair and ingenuous As to the one he saith He follows the Council of Trent and their allowed Spiritual Books and Catechisms and we find no fault with this But why must the other Part then be drawn by Fancy or common Prejudices or ignorant Mistakes Have we no Rule whereby the Judgment of our Church is to be taken Are not our Articles as easie to be had and understood as the Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent I will not ask How the Council of Trent comes to be the Rule and Measure of Doctrine to any here where it was never received But I hope I may why our Representations are not to be taken from the Sense of our Church as theirs from the Council of Trent If he saith his Design was to remove common Prejudices and vulgar Mistakes it is easie to answer if they are contrary to the Doctrine of our Church we utterly disown them We know very well there are Persons who have so false a Notion of Popery that they charge the Rites and Customs of our Church with it but we pity their Weakness and Folly and are far from defending such Mis-representations But that which we adhere to is the Doctrine and Sense of our Church as it is by Law established and what Representations are made agreeable thereto I undertake to defend and no other But if a person take the liberty to lay on what Colours he pleases on one side it will be no hard matter to take them off in the other and then to say How much fairer is our Church than she is painted It is an easie but not so allowable a way of disputing for the same person to make the Objections and Answers too for he may so model and frame the Arguments by a little Art that the Answers may appear very full and sufficient whereas if they had been truly represented they would be found very lame and defective 2. He pretends to give an Account why he quotes no Authors for his Mis-representations which is very unsatisfactory viz. That he hath dâ—scribed the Papist therein exactly accoâ—ding to the Apprehension he had of him when he was a Protestant But how can we tell what sort of Protestant he was nor how well he was instructed in his Religion And must the Character now supposed to be common to Protestants be taken from his ignorant or childish or wilful Mistakes Did ever any Protestant that understands himself say That Papists are never permitted to hear Sermons which they are able to understand or that they held it lawful to commit Idolatry Or that a Papist believes the Pope to be his great God and to be far above all Angels c Yet these are some of his Misrepresentations Did he in earnest think so himself If he did he gives no good account of himself if he did not he gives a worse for then how shall we believe him in other things when he saith He hath drawn his Mis-representations exactly according to his own Apprehensions It is true he saith he added some few points which were violently charged on him by his Friends but we dare be bold to say these were none of them But let us suppose it true that he had such Apprehensions himself Are these fit to be printed as the Character of a Party What would they say to us if a Spanish Convert should give a Character of Protestants according to the common Opinion the people there have of them and set down in one Column their monstrous Mis-representations and in another what he found them to be since his coming hither and that in good Truth he saw they were just like other Men But suppose he had false Apprehensions before he went among them why did he not take care to inform himself better before he changed Had he no Friends no Books no Means to rectifie his Mistakes Must he needs leave one Church and go to another before he understood either If this be a true Account of himself it is but a bad Account of the Reasons of his Change III. The Account he gives of the other part of his Character affords as little Satisfaction For although in the general it be well that he pretends to keep to a Rule 1. He shews no Authority he hath to interpret that Rule in his own sense Now several of his Representations depend upon his own private Sense and Opinions against the Doctrine of many others as zealous for the Church as himself and what reason have we to adhere to his Representations rather than to theirs As for instance he saith The Pope's personal Infallibility is no Matter of Faith But there are others say it is and is grounded on the same Promises which makes him Head of the Church Why now must we take his Representation rather than theirs And so as to the Deposing Power he grants it hath been the Opinion of several Popes and Councils too but that it is no matter of Faith But whose Judgment are we to take in this Matter according to the Principles of their Church A private Man's of no Name no Authority or of those Popes and Councils who have declared it and acted by it And can any man of their Church justifie our relying upon his Word against the Declaration of Popes and Councils But suppose the Question be about the Sense of his own Rule the Council of Trent what Authority hath he to declare it when the Pope hath expresly forbidden all Prelates to do it and reserved it to the Apostolical See 2. He leaves out in the several Particulars an essential part of the Character of a Papist since the Council of Trent which is that he doth not only believe the Doctrines there defined to be true but to be necessary to Salvation And there is not a word of this in his Representation of the Points of Doctrine but the whole is managed as though there were nothing but a difference about some particular Opinions whereas in truth the Necessity of holding those Doctrines in order to Salvation is the main Point in difference If Men have no mind to believe their own Senses we know not how to help it but we think it is very hard to be told we cannot be saved unless we renounce them too And this now appears to be the true State of the Case since Pius the 4 th drew up and published a Confession of Faith according to the Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent wherein Men are not only required to believe their Traditions as firmly as the Bible the Seven Sacraments Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass Purgatory Invocation of Saints worshipping of Images Indulgences Supremacy c. but they must believe that without believing these things there is no Salvation to be had in the ordinary way for after the enumeration of those Points it follows Hanc veram Catholicam sidem extra quam nemo salvus esse potest c. This is the
Session took care about reforming the Missal and Breviary why was no care taken to reform these Prayers and Hymns which they say are not to be construed by the Sense of the Words but by the Sense of the Church There was time enough taken for doing it for the Reformed Missal was not published till six Years after the Council nor the Breviary till four In all that time the Prayers and Hymns might easily have been altered to the Sense of the Church if that were truly so But instead of that a very late French Writer cries out of the necessity of Reforming the Breviaries as to these things wherein he confesses Many Hymns are still remaining wherein those things are asked of Saints which ought to be asked of God alone as being delivered from the Chains of our Sins being preserved from Spiritual Maladies and Hell-Fire being inflamed with Charity and made fit for Heaven In good Conscience saith he is not this joyning the Saints with God himself to ask those things of them which God alone can give And whatever Men talk of the Sense of the Church he confesses the very Forms and natural Sense of the Words do raise another Idea in Mens minds which ought to be prevented But doth not the Roman Catechism explain this to be the Sense of the Church I have examined that too with all the care I could about this matter And I cannot find any necessity from thence of putting this Sense upon them I grant in one place where it explains the difference of the Invocation of God and Saints it saith We are to pray to God as the Giver and to Saints that they would obtain things of God for us and then it adds the Forms differ that to God is Miserere Nobis and Audi Nos that to Saints is Ora pro Nobis Very well And is there then no other Form owned or allowed in the Church of Rome to Saints besides this Hold a little saith the Catechism for it is lawful to make use of another Form and that is we may pray to Saints too Vt nostri misereantur And how doth this now differ from that to God but only in Number But it adds that the Saints are very pitiful then surely we are encouraged to pray to them for Help and Pity Yes saith the Catechism we may pray to them that being moved with pity toward us they would help us with their Favour and Intercession with God But yet this doth not clear the Matter for elsewhere the Roman Catechism attributes more to Saints than meer Intercession and we may pray to them for what is in their Power For where it undertakes to give an exact Account of the Reason of Invocation of Saints and Angels it there parallels them with Magistrates under a King and saith they are Gods Ministers in governing the Church Invocandi itaque sunt quod perpetuo Deum intuentur Patrocinium Salutis nostrae libentissimè suscipiunt What is this Patrocinium salutis nostrae Is it only Praying and Intercession with God That cannot be for it instances presently in Deliverances by Angels and Jacob 's praying to the Angel to bless him and not meerly to intercede for him But though this is spoken of Angels yet from hence it infers the Invocation of Saints too But what need we insist more on this since they do own the Ministry of Saints as well as Angels with respect to the Church and do Canonize Saints for particular Countries as lately S. Rosa for Peru. And where there is such a particular Protection supposed what incongruity is it to interpret the Form of their Prayers according to a Doctrine so received and allowed But of this more under the next Head 2. He confesses that we are all redeemed by the Blood of Christ alone and that he is our only Mediator of Redemption but as for Mediators of Intercession he doth not doubt but it is acceptable with God we should have many I would ask concerning this Distinction the Question which Christ asked concerning Iohn's Baptism Is it from Heaven or of Man No doubt there may be such a Distinction of Mediators if God please to make them But who hath Authority to appoint Mediators with him besides himself Is it not usurping his Prerogative to appoint the great Officers of his Kingdom for him Would any Prince upon Earth allow this viz. when he hath absolutely declared his Pleasure that his own Son should present Petitions to him that others shall take upon them to set up Masters of Requests themselves Can any thing be plainer in the New Testament than that God hath appointed the Mediator of Redemption to be our Mediator of Intercession And that his Intercession is founded upon his Redemption As the High Priest's going into the Holy of Holies to intercede for the People was upon the Blood of the Sacrifice of Expiation which he carried in with him If there were no Revelation in this Matter there might be some reason for it But since the Revelation is so clear in it this Distinction looks just like the Socinians Distinction of a God by Nature and a God by Office which was framed on purpose to avoid the plain Texts of Scripture which called Christ God So doth this look as if it were intended to avoid that clear Text which saith There is one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Iesus Which is presently answered with this Distinction although there be not the least ground in that or any other Text for it Yes saith our Author Moses was such a Mediator for the Israelites Job for his three Friends Stephen for his Persecutors The Romans were desired by S. Paul to be his Mediator and the Corinthians and Ephesians so almost every sick Person desires the Congregation to be his Mediator that is to be remembred in their Prayers But is there no difference between Men praying for one another and desiring others to pray for them here on Earth and an humble Invocation of the Saints in Heaven to be our Mediators of Intercession with God there There is a threefold disparity in the Case 1. Here upon Earth we converse with one another as Fellow Creatures and there is no danger of our having an Opinion thereby that were able to assist one another any other way than by our Prayers But the case is very different as to the Saints in Heaven who by being addressed to there by such solemn Invocation may too easily be conceived to have the Power of bestowing such Blessings upon those who call upon them 2. Heaven is looked upon by all Mankind who direct their Devotions thither as the particular Throne of God where he dwells and discovers himself after another manner than he doth upon the Earth And we are directed to pray to our Father in Heaven where he is represented as infinitely above all his Creatures and the great Concernment of Religion is to keep up the apprehension
to the blasphemous saying of St. Bernardin by Mendoza who endeavours to prove the blessed Virgin 's Kingdom not to be a Metaphorical but a true and real Kingdom And by Salazar another noted Jesuit who saith Her Kingdom is as large as her Son 's And we have lately seen how far this Divinity is spread for not many years since this Proposition was sent from Mexico Filius non tantum tenetur audire Matrem sed obedire The Son is bound not only to hear but to obey his Mother And is it still damnable for to say she commands him But our Author saith Whatever esteem they have for her They own her still as a Creature Is he sure of that What thinks he of another saying which Mendoza approves of viz. of Christ's saying to his Mother As thou hast communicated Humanity to me I will communicate my Deity to thee But it may be said We are by no means to judge the sense of a Church by some mens extravagant sayings I grant it But I have something considerable to reply viz. That we may easily judge which way the Guides of that Church incline by this following passage About ten years since a Gentleman of that Communion published a Book called Wholsome Advice to the Worshippers of the Blessed Virgin and the whole design of it being Printed in Latin and French was to bring the people of that Church to a bare Ora pro nobis to the Blessed Virgin But this was so far from being approved that the Book was condemned at Rome and vehemently opposed by the Jesuits in France and a whole Volume published against it Here I have reason to enquire Whether the Virgin Mary then according to the sense of the Church of Rome be only a Mediatrix of Intercession or not since so large Power and Dominion is attributed to her And why should not her Suppliants go beyond an Ora pro nobis if this Doctrine be received as it must be if the contrary cannot be endured For that Author allowed her Intercession and Prayer to her on that account but he found fault with those who said she had a Kingdom divided with her Son that she was the Mother of Mercy or was a Co-Saviour or Co-Redemptrix or that she was to be worshipped with Latria or that men were to be slaves to her Now if these things must not be touched without Censure and no Censure pass on the other Books it is not easy to judge which is more agreeable to the Spirit of the Guides of that Church But we have a fresh Instance of this kind at home in a Book very lately published Permissu Superiorum There we are told in the Epistle That not only the Blessed Virgin is the Empress of Seraphims the most exact Original of Practical Perfection which the Omnipotency of God ever drew but that by innumerable Titles she claims the utmost Duty of every Christian as a proper Homage to her Greatness What can be said more of the Son of God in our Nature In the Book it self she is said to be Queen of Angels Patroness of the Church Advocate of Sinners that the Power of Mary in the Kingdom of Iesus is suitable to her Maternity and other Priviledges of Grace and therefore by it she justly claims à servitude from all pure Creatures But wherein doth this special Devotion to her consist He names several Particulars 1. In having an inward cordial and passionate value of the Maternity of Mary and all other Excellencies proper to and inseparable from the Mother of God 2. In External Acts of Worship of eminent Servitude towards her by reason of the Amplitude of her Power in the Empire of Iesus And can we imagine these should go no farther than a poor Ora pro nobis He instances in these External Acts of her Worship 1. Frequent visiting holy Places dedicated to her Honour And are not those her Temples then which Bellarmine confesses to be a peculiar part of the worship due to God And the distinction of Basilicae cannot hold here because he believes the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin and he will not pretend to her Honour is only for Discrimination 2. A special Reverence towards Images representing her Person 3. Performing some daily Devotions containing her Praises congratulating her Excellency or imploring her Mediation and by oft calling upon the Sacred Name of Holy Mary c. 3. In having a firm and unshaken Confidence in her Patronage amidst the greatest of our outward Conflicts and outward Tribulations through a strong Iudgement of her eminent Power within the Empire of Iesus grounded upon the singular Prerogative of her Divine Maternity I have not Patience to transcribe more but refer the Reader to the Book it self only the eighth Particular of special Devotion is so remarkable that it ought not to be passed over viz. Entring a solemn Covenant with Holy Mary to be for ever her Servant Client and Devote under some special Rule Society or Form of Life and thereby dedicating our Persons Concerns Actions and all the Moments and Events of our Life to Iesus under the Protection of his Divine Mother choosing her to be our Adoptive Mother Patroness and Advocate and intrusting her with what we are have or do hope in Life Death and through all Eternity And is all this no more than an Ora pro nobis And it follows Put your self wholly under her Protection What a pitiful thing was the old Collyridian Cake in comparison of these special Acts of Devotion to her But there are some extraordinary strains of Devotion afterwards which it is pity to pass over As I will ever observe thee as my Sovereign Lady Adoptive Mother and most Powerful Patroness relying on thy Bowels of Mercy in all my Wants Petitions and Tribulations of Body and Mind Could any thing greater be said to the Eternal Son of God And in the Praise Vers. Open my Lips O Mother of Jesus Resp. And my Soul shall speak forth thy Praise Vers. Divine Lady be intent to my Aid Resp. Graciously make haste to help me Vers. Glory be to Jesus and Mary Resp. As it was is and ever shall be Then follows the Eighth Psalm applied thus to her Mary Mother of Iesus how wonderful is thy Name even unto the Ends of the Earth All Magnificence be given to Mary and let her be exalted above the Stars and Angels Reign on high as Queen of Seraphims and Saints and be thou crowned with Honour and Glory c. Glory be to Iesus and Mary c. In the next Page follows a Cantique in imitation of the Te Deum Let us praise thee O Mother of Iesus Let us acknowledge thee our Sovereign Lady Let Men and Angels give Honour to thee the first conceived of all pure Creatures c. I think I need mention no more only three things I shall observe 1. That this is now printed
Christ at York but the Priest there doth it therefore the Body of Christ at London is different from that at York or else the Conversion at London would be into the Body as at York But if not what is the substantial Term of this substantial Change where nothing but an accidental Mode doth follow If there be any such Term whether that must not be a production of something which was not before and if it be so Christ must have as many new Bodies as there are Consecrations 8. This makes that which hath no particular Subsistence of its own to be the Subject of a substantial Change for this is the condition of Christ's Body whatever its manner of Existence be after the Hypostatical Union to the Divine Nature For when Bellarmin Petavius and others of their greatest Divines undertake against Nestorius to explain the Hypostatical Union they tell us it consists in this that the human Nature loseth its proper Subsistence and is assumed into the Subsistence of the Divine Nature From whence I infer That the Body of Christ having no proper Subsistence of its own there can be no substantial Change into that which hath no proper subsistence but into that which hath and consequently the Change must be into the Divine Nature principally from whence it will follow the Elements losing their Subsistence upon Consecration the Divinity must be united hypostatically to them as to the human Nature and so there will be as many Hypostatical Unions as there are Consecrations And so this Doctrine not only confounds Sense and Reason but the Mysteries of Christ's Incarnation too Which I think is sufficient for this Head VI. Of Merits and Good Works HE believes Christ's Death and Passion to be ineffectual and insignificant and that he has no dependance upon the merits of his Sufferings or the Mercy of God for the obtaining Salvation but that he is to be sav'd by his own Merits And for this reason he is very zealously busie in fasting in whipping himself in watching in going in Procession in wearing Hair-shirts and using a thousand such like Mortifications And having done this he thinks himself not at all beholding to God for his Salvation and that to give him Heaven will be no favour It being now his due upon the account of his own meritorious Atchievements without any God-a-mercy to Christ's Passion or his Makers Goodness HE believes it damnable to say that Christ's Death and Passion is ineffectual and insignificant And that 't is the Doctrine of Devils to belive That he has no dependance for his Salvation upon the Merits of Christ's Sufferings or the Mercy of God but only upon his own Merits and good Works 'T is his Faith to believe That of our selves we are not sufficient so much as to think a good thought that the Grace by which we are justified is given us purely gratis upon the account of Christs Merits moreover that no Man how just soever can merit any thing either in this life or in that to come independant on the Merits Passion of Jesus Christ. Nevertheless that through the Merits of Christ the good Works of a just Man proceeding from Grace are so acceptable to God that through his Goodness and Promise they are truly meritorious of eternal Life And this he has learn'd from the Apostle 2 Tim. 4.8 where he is taught that there is a Crown of Justice which our Lord a just Judge will render at the last day not only to Saint Paul but also to all those that shall have fought a good sight and consummated their course kept the Faith and lov'd his coming Knowing therefore that at the day of Judgment he is to receive according to his Works He endeavours by good Works to make his Vocation and Election sure And in following this Counsel he thinks he no more offends against the fulness of the Merits of Christ's or God's Mercy than the Apostle does in giving it VI. Of Merits and good Works FOr the true stating this Controversie we are to observe 1. That we do not charge those of the Church of Rome That they belive Christ's Death and Passion to be ineffectual and insignificant and that they have no dependence on the Merits of his Sufferings or the Mercy of God for attaining Salvation but that they are to be saved only by their own Merits and Good Works as the Misrepresenter saith 2. We do not charge them with denying the Necessity of Divine Grace in order to merit or with asserting that they can merit independently thereupon 3. We do by no means dispute about the Necessity of Good Works in order to the Reward of another Life or assert that Christ's Merits will save Men without working out their own Salvation but do firmly believe that God will judg Men according to their Works The Question then is Whether the Good Works of a just Man as our Author expresses it are truly meritorious of eternal Life Which he affirms but qualifies with saying That they proceed from Grace and that through Gods Goodness and Promise they are truly meritorious But the Council of Trent denounces an Anathema against those who deny the Good Works of justified Persons to be truly meritorious of the increase of Grace and of eternal Life Here then lie the Points in difference 1. Whether such Good Works can be said to be truly meritorious 2. Whether those who deny it deserve an Anathema for so doing As to what relates to Gods Acceptance and Allowance and his Goodness and Promise we freely own all that he saith about it and if no more be meant what need an Anathema about this matter There must therefore be something beyond this when Good Works are not only said to be truly meritorious but we are cursed if we do not say the same To make any thing truly meritorious we must suppose these Conditions requisite 1. That what we pretend to merit by be our own free act 2. That it be not defective 3. That there be an Equality between it and the Reward due to it 4. That there be an Obligation in point of Justice to give that Reward to him that doth it And from these Considerations we deny that good Works even of justified Persons can be truly meritorious 1. It is granted by themselves That what is truly meritorious must be a free Act of the Person who doth it Now the good Works of justified persons cannot be said to be their own free Acts if the Power of doing them depend upon Divine Assistance and there was an antecedent Obligation upon them to perform them So that they can do nothing but what they are bound to as God's Creatures and their very Power of doing it is from the Grace of God If Men pretended to merit at anothers hands by what God gives there were some colour for it but to merit from God himself by what he gives us seems very incongruous If I ow a Man an 100 l.
firm purpose of amendment and an hearty resolution of turning from his evil ways may from them receive Absolution by the Authority given them from Heaven and not doubt but God ratifies above the sentence pronounced in that Tribunal Loosing in Heaven whatsoever is thus loosed by them on Earth And that whosoever comes without the due preparation without a Repentance from the bottom of his heart and real intension of forsaking his sins receives no benefit by the Absolution but adds sin to sin by an high contempt of God's Mercy and abuse of his Sacraments VII Of Confession WE do not charge the Church of Rome that in the power of Absolving they make Gods of Men as our Misrepresenter pretends 2. We do not deny That Christ gave to the Bishops and Priests of the Catholick Church Authority to absolve any truly penitent Sinner from his Sins which he therefore needlesly proves out of Scripture and that such Absolution is ratified in Heaven 3. We are glad to find that our Author declares That no Man receives benefit by Absolution without Repentance from the bottom of his Heart and real intention of forsaking his Sins by which we hope he means more than Attrition But yet there are some things which stick with us as to the Doctrine and Practicee of the Church of Rome in this matter which he takes no notice of 1. That Secret Confession of Sins to a Priest is made so necessary to Salvation that an Anathema is denounced against all that deny it when they cannot deny that God doth forgive Sins upon true Contrition For the Council of Trent doth say That Contrition with Charity doth reconcile a Man to God before the Sacrament of Penance be actually received But then it adds That the desire of Confession is included in Contrition Which is impossible to be proved by Scripture Reason or Antiquity For so lately as in the time of the Master of the Sentences and Gratian in the 12 th Century it was a very disputable Point whether Confession to a Priest were necessary And it is very hard for us to understand how that should become necessary to Salvation since which was not then Some of their own Writers confess that some good Catholicks did not believe the necessity of it I suppose the old Canonists may pass for good Catholicks and yet Maldonat saith That all the Interpreters of the Decrees held that there was no Divine Precept for Confession to a Priest and of the same Opinion he grants Scotus to have been But he thinks it is now declared to be Heresie or he wishes it were And we think it is too much already unless there were better ground for it 2. That an Anathema is denounced against those who do not understand the words of Christ Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. of the Sacrament of Penance so as to imply the necessity of Confession Whereas there is no appearance in the words of any such Sense and themselves grant that in order to the Remission of Sins by Baptism of which St. Matthew and St. Mark speak in the Apostles Commission there is no necessity of Sacramental Confession but a general Confession is sufficient And from hence the Elder Iansenius concludes That the Power of Remission of Sins here granted doth not imply Sacramental Confession Cajetant yields There is no Command for Confession here And Catharinus adds That Cajetan would not allow any one Place of Scripture to prove Auricular Confession And as to this particular he denies that there is any Command for it and he goes not about to prove it but that Cajetan contradicts himself elsewhere viz. when he wrote School-Divinity before he set himself to the study of the Scriptures Vasques saith That if these words may be understood of Baptism none can infer from them the Necessity of Auricular Confession But Gregory de Valentia evidently proves that this place doth relate to Remission of Sins in Baptism not only from the Comparison of places but from the Testimonies of Saint Cyprian Saint Ambrose and others 3. That it is expressed in the same Anathema's that this hath been always the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholick Church from the beginning We do not deny the ancient practice either of Canonical Confession as part of the Discipline of the Church for publick Offenses nor of Voluntary Confession for ease and satisfaction of the perplexed Minds of doubting or dejected Penitents but that which we say was not owned nor practised by the Church from the beginning was this Sacramental Confession as necessary to the Remission of sins before God It is therefore to no purpose to produce out of Bellarmine and others a great number of Citations to prove that which we never deny but if they hold to the Council of Trent they must prove from the Fathers that Sins after Baptism cannot be forgiven without Confession to men which those who consider what they do will never undertake there being so many Testimonies of undoubted Antiquity against it And it is observable that Bonaventuâ—e grants that before the Lateran Decree of Innocentius 3. it was no Heresie to deny the necessity of Confession and so he excuses those who in the time of Lombard and Gratian held that Opinion And all other Christians in the World besides those of the Church of Rome do to this day reject the necessity of particular Confession to a Priest in order to Remission as the Writers of the Church of Rome themselves confess So Godignus doth of the Abyssins Philippus à SS Trinitate of the Iacobites Clemens Galanus of the Nestorians who saith They made a Decree against the use of Confession to any but to God alone And Alexius Meneses of the Christians of St. Thomas in the Indies The Greeks believe Confession only to be of Positive and Ecclesiastical Institution as the late Author of the Critical History of the Faith and Customs of the Eastern Nations proves And the very Form of their Absolution declares that they do not think particular Confession of all known Sins necessary to pardon for therein the Priest absolves the Penitent from the sins he hath not confessed through forgetfulness or shame And now let any one prove this to have been a Catholick Tradition by Vincentius his Rules viz. That it hath been always received every where and by All. VIII Of Indulgences HE believes that his Holy Father the Pope can give him leave to commit what sins he pleaseth especially if he can make him a present of a round Sum of Mony he never need doubt of an Indulgence or Pardon for himself and his Heirs for ever for all sorts of Crimes or Wickedness he or any of his Posterity may have convenience of falling into And having this Commission in his Pocket under the Popes Broad Seal he may be confident that Christ will confirm and stand to all that his Vicar upon Earth has granted and not
to be the Foundation of Indulgences 2. They would be rather hurâ—ful than profitable and the Church would deceive her Children by them 3. They could not be granted for the Dead 4. They who receive Indulgences do undergo Canonical Penances 5. The Form of them doth express that they do relate to God not only to the Church And this I think is sufficient to shew how far he is from true Representing the Nature of Indulgences for we do not dispute the Church's Power in relaxing Canonical Penances to penitent sinners upon just Causes IX Of Satisfaction HE believes very injuriously of Christs Passion being perswaded that his Sufferings Death were not sufficiently satisfactory for our sins but that it is necessary for every one to make satisfaction for themselves And for this end after he has been at Confession the Priest injoyns him a Penance by the performance of which he is to satisfie for his offences And thus confidently relying upon his own penitential Works he utterly evacuates Christ's Passion and though he professes himself a Christian and that Christ is his Saviour yet by his little trusting to him he seems to think him to be no better than what his Crucifix informs him that is a meer Woodden one HE believes it damnable to think injuriously of Christs Passion Nevertheless he believes that though condign Satisfaction for the Guilt of Sin and the Pain eternal due to it be proper only to Christ our Saviour yet that penitent Sinners being redeem'd by Christ and made his Members may in some measure satisfie by Prayer Fasting Alms c. for the temporal pain which by order of God's Justice sometimes remains due after the Guilt and the eternal pains are remitted So that trusting in Christ as his Redeemer he yet does not think that by Christ's Sufferings every Christian is discharg'd of his particular Sufferings but that every one is to suffer something for himself as S. Paul did who by tribulations and in suffering in his own flesh did accomplish those things that wanted of the Passions of Christ and this not only for himself but for the whole Church Col. 1.24 and this he finds every where in Scripture viz. People admonish'd of the greatness of their sins doing Penance in Fasting Sack-cloth and Ashes and by voluntary austerities endeavouring to satisfie the Divine Justice And these personal Satisfactions God has sufficiently also minded him of in the punishments of Moses Aaron David and infinite others and even in the Afflictions sent by God upon our own Age in Flagues Wars Fires Persecutions Rebellions and such like Which few are so Atheistical but they confess to be sent from Heaven for the just Chastisement of our sins and which we are to undergo notwithstanding the infinite Satisfaction made by Christ and without any undervaluing it Now being thus convinc'd of some temporal punishments being due to his sins he accepts of all Tribulations whether in Body Name or Estate from whence-soever they come and with others of his own chusing offers them up to God for the discharging this debt still confessing that his Offences deserve yet more But these penitential Works he is taught to be no otherwise satisfactory than as joyn'd and apply'd to that satisfaction which Jesus made upon the Cross in virtue of which alone all our good Works find a grateful acceptance in God's sight IX Of Satisfaction 1. HE believes it damnable to think any thing injuriously of Christ's Passion But then he distinguishes the Eternal and Temporal Pain due to Sin As to the Guilt and Eterternal Pain the satisfaction he saith is proper to Christ but as to the Temporal Pain which may remain due by God's Iustice after the other are remitted he saith that Penitent Sinners may in some measure satisfy for that by â—rayer Fasting Alms c. 2. These Penitential Works he saith are no otherwise satisfactory than as joâ—ned and applyed to Christ's Satisfaction in virtue of which alone our good Works find a grateful acceptance in God's sight But for right apprehending the State of the Controversy we must consider 1. That they grant both Eternal and Temporal Pain due to Sin to be remitted in Baptism so that all the satisfaction to be made is for Sins committed after Baptism 2. We distinguish between Satisfaction to the Church before Absolution and Satisfaction to the Justice of God for some part of the punishment to sin which is unremitted 3. We do not deny that truly Penitential Works are pleasing to God so as to avert his displeasure but we deny that there can be any Compensation in way of Equivalency between what we suffer and what we deserve The Matter in Controversy therefore on this Head consists in these things 1. That after the total Remission of Sins in Baptism they suppose a Temporal Punishment to remain when the Eternal is forgiven which the Penitent is to satisfy God's Justice for and without this being done in this Life he must go into Purgatory for that End Of which more under that Head 2. That this Satisfaction may be made to the Justice of God after Absolution is given by the Priest So that although the Penitent be admitted into God's Favour by the Power of the Keys according to their own Doctrine yet the Application of the Merits of Christ together with the Saints in the Sentence of Absolution according to their Form do not set him so free but he either wants a new Supply from the Treasure of the Church i. e. from the same Merits of Christ and the Saints or else he is to satisfy for the Temporal Punishment by his own Penances 3. That these Penitential Works are to be joyned with the Merits of Christ in the way of proper Satisfaction to Divine Justice And however softly this may be expressed the meaning is that Christ hath merited that we may merit and by his Satisfaction we are enabled to satisfy for our selves And if the Satisfaction by way of Justice be taken away the other will be a Controversy about Words 4. That these Penitential Works may not only be sufficient for themselves but they may be so over-done that a great share may be taken from them to make up the Treasure of the Church for the benefit of others who fall short when they are duly applied to them in the way of Indulgences And about these Points we must desire greater Proof than we have ever yet seen X. Of Reading the Holy Scripture HE believes it part of his Duty to think meanly of the Word of God to speak irreverently of the Scripture to do what he is able to lessen the repute of it and bring it into disgrace And for this end he says it is obscure full of ambiguous expressions plain contradictions not fit to be read by the Vulgar nor fit to be translated into Vulgar Languages And without respect to Christ or his Apostles profanely Preaches that no Ten Books in the World have done so much
doubt a mighty Advantage to have such infallible Interpreters as the Apostles and Prophets and all Christians are bound to follow their Sense where they have delivered it But suppose the Question be about the Sense of these Interpreters must their Books not be looked into because of the danger of Error This Reason will still hold against those who go about to deliver their Sense and so on till by this Method of Reasoning all sort of Books and Interpretations be rejected unless any such can be found out which is not liable to be abused or misunderstood And if there be any such to be had they are much to blame who do not discover it But as yet we see no Remedy for two things in Mankind a proneness to Sin and to Mistake But of all things we ought not to take away from them one of the best Means to prevent both viz. a diligent and careful and humble reading the Holy Scriptures But 3. He denies that all persons are forbid to read the Scriptures but only such as have License and good Testimony from their Curats and therefore their design is not to preserve Ignorance in the people but to prevent a blind ignorant presumption These are plausible pretences to such as search no farther but the Mystery of this matter lies much deeper It was no doubt the Design of the Church of Rome to keep the Bible wholly out of the hands of the people But upon the Reformation they found it impossible so many Translations being made into vulgar Languages and therefore care was taken to have Translations made by some of their own Body and since the people of better inclinations to Piety were not to be satisfied without the Bible therefore they thought it the better way to permit certain persons whom they could trust to have a License to read it And this was the true Reason of the fourth Rule of the Index Liber prohibit made in pursuance of the Order of the Council of Trent and published by Pius IV. by which any one may see it was not an Original Permission out of any good Will to the Thing but an Aftergame to get the Bible out of the hands of the People again And therefore Absolution was to be denied to those who would not deliver them to their Ordinaries when they were called for And the Regulars themselves were not to be permitted to have Bibles without a License And as far as I can understand the Addition of Clement VIII to that fourth Rule he withdraws any new Power of granting such Licenses and saith they are contrary to the Command and Vsage of that Church which he saith is to be inviolably observed Wherein I think he declares himself fully against such Licenses And that inferior Guides should grant them against the Command of the Head of the Church is a thing not very agreeable to the Unity and Subordination they boast of XI Of Apocryphal Books HE believes it lawful to make what Additions to Scripture his Party thinks good and therefore takes no notice of the ancient Canon approved by the Apostles and primitive Christians but allows equal Authority to the Books of Toby Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and the Macchabees as to the other part of the Scripture altho' these were always rejected by the Jews never exant in the Hebrew Copy and expresly condemn'd by St. Jerome as not Canonical and never admitted by the Church but only of late years in some of their Synods which made these Innovations contrary to the Sense of their Ancestors HE believes it damnable to add any thing to the Scripture And yet allows the Books of Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Macchabees to be Canonical because the Church of Christ has declar'd them such not only in these later ages but even in the primitive times S. Gregory Nazianzen Orat. de S S. Macc. who lived in the year 354. Also S. Ambrose lib. de Iacob vit beat An. 370. Innocent I. Ep. ad Exup They were also received by the third Council of Carthage An. 419. which approv'd all these Books as Canonical Can. 47. and was subscrib'd by S. Augustine and confirm'd in the 6 th General Synod August lib. 2. Doct. Christ. cap. 8. So that to him 't is of little concern whether they were ever in the Hebrew Copy the Canon of the Church of Christ being of much more Authority with him than the Canon of the Iews He having no other assurance that the Books of Moses and the four Gospels are the true Word of God but by the Authority and Canon of the Church And this he has learn'd from that great Doctor S. Augustine who declares his mind plainly in this case saying That he would not believe the Gospel except the Authority of the Catholick Church mov'd him threunto Contra Ep. Fundam c. 4. Now he is well satisfied that many doubted whether these Books were Canonical or no and amongst others S. Ierom because the Church had not declar'd them so But since the Church's Declaration no Catholick ever doubted no more than of other Books viz. of the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of St. James the second of St. Peter the second and third of St. John St. Jude 's Epistle and the Apocalyps All which were for many years after the Apostles time doubted of but afterwards declar'd and receiv'd as Canonical This he finds S. Ierome expresly confessing of himself viz. That for some time the Book of Judith seemed to him Apocryphal to wit till the Council of Nice declar'd it otherwise Praef. in Iudith The like he affirms of S. Iames's Epistle that it was doubted of by many for several years Paulatim tempore procedente meruit authoritatem By little and little in process of time it gain'd Authority De viris illus verb. Iacob For this reason he matters not what Books have been reputed Apocryphal by some and for some years But only what Books are receiv'd and declar'd by the Church Canonical in what year and at what time soever For believing the same spirit of Truth assists her in all Ages he looks upon himself equally oblig'd to receive her Definitions of the Year 419. as of any of the precedent years It not being possible for Christ to fail of his Promise or the Holy Ghost to err or misguide the Church in that year more than in any other XI Of Apocryphal Books 1. WE do not charge the Church of Rome with making what Additions to Scripture they think good as the Misrepresenter saith but we charge them with taking into the Canon of Scripture such Books as were not received for Canonical by the Christian Church as those Books himself mentions viz. Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and Maccabees 2. We do not only charge them with this but with Anathematizing all those who do not upon this Declaration believe them to be Canonical since they cannot but know that these Books never were in the Iewish Canon and were left
other Latin one whatsoever Beza in his Preface to the New-Testament Anno 1559. blames Erasmus for rejecting it Paulus Fagius cries out against all that disallow it Cap. 4. Vers. Lat. Paraph Chald. Ludovicus de Dieu with admiration confesses it to be most Faithful in Not. ad Evang. Praef. Causabon prefers it before the Greeks Text now in use and acknowledges that it agrees with the Ancient Manuscripts in Not. ad Evang. Act. Grotius professes to the World that he highly esteems it for that it contains no erroneous Opinions and is very Learned nulla dogmata insalubria continet multum habet in se eruditionis Prâ—f Annot. in vet Test. And for this reason he refers his Annotations generally to this Translation as he declares himself So that seeing this Version is deliver'd to him with the approbation of his whole Church and is commended by most Learned Adversaries he thinks he has great reason to receive it and that he may peruse it without any danger that can come to him from any Corruptions or Falsifications And because he has not the like assurance of the English Translation allowed by Protestants or any other made since the Reformation by any of that Perswasion but sees that there has been almost as many different Translations made and published by these as there had been men of different Humours different Spirits and different Interests whereof none have ever approv'd the Versions of any of the rest but cry'd out against and Condemn'd them of many Alterations Additions Detractions and Forgeries Bucer and the Osiandrians exclaiming against Luther Luther against Munster Beza against Castaleo Castaleo against Beza Calvin against Servetus Illyricus against Calvin and Beza Our English Ministers against Tindal and his Fellows And this not upon the account of some oversights or like mistakes or the following of different Copies but accusing one another of being Absurd and senseless in their Translations of obscuring and perveâ—ing the meaning of the Holy Ghost of Omissions and Additions of perverting the Text in eight hundred forty and eight pieces of corrupt and false Translations all which in express Terms has been charg'd by great Abbetters of the Reformation against a Bible yet us'd in England and ordered to be read in all Churches by Queen Elizabeth and to be seen in the Abridgement of a Book deliver'd by certain Ministers to King Iames pag. 11.12 in Mr. Burges's Apology Sect. 6. Mr. Broughton's Advertisement to the Bishops And in Doctor Reynold's refusing before the King at Hampton-Court to subscribe to the Communion-Book because it warranted a corrupt and false Translation of the Bible For these and such other reasons he is commanded not to read any of these Translations but only that which is recommended to him by the Church XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible 1. WE do not dispute about the Vulgar Edition whether it may not be preferr'd before modern Latin Editions because of its great Antiquity in some parts of it and its general Reception since the time of Gregory I. But our dispute is whether it be made so Authentick since the Council of Trent that no Appeals are to be made to the Originals i. e. whether that Council by its Authority could make a Version equal to the Originals out of which it was made Especially since at the time of that Decree the Vulgar Edition was confessed to be full of Errors and Corruptions by Sixtus V. who saith he took infinite pains to correct them and yet left very many behind as appeared by Clement VIII who corrected his Bibles in very many places and grants some faults were left uncorrected still Now how was it possible for the Council of Trent to declare that Edition Authentick which was afterwards so much corrected And whether was the correct Edition of Sixtus V. Authentick or not being made in pursuance of the Decree of the Council If not how comes Clement his Edition to be made Authentick when the other was not since there may be Corruptions found in that as well as the other and no one can tell but it may be reviewed and corrected still as some of their own Writers confess it stands in need of it 2. Our Controversy is not so much about the Authority of the Vulgar Latin above other Latin Versions to those who understand them but whether none else but the Latin Version must be used by those who understand it not And here our Representer saith That he is commanded not to read any of these Translations speaking of Tindal's and that in Queen Elizabeths time but only that which is recommended to him by the Church If this relate to the Vulgar Latin then we are to seek why the common people should have none to read but what they cannot understand if to Translations of their own then we doubt not to make it appear that our Translations allowed among us is more exact and agreeable than any they can put into their hands XIII Of the Scripture as a Rule of Faith HE believes it lawful nay that it is his obligation to undervalue the Scripture and take from it that Authority which Christ gave it For whereas Christ left this to the World as the Rule of Faith and as a Sacred Oracle from whence all his Followers might be instructed in the Precepts of a good Life learn all the Mysteries of their Faith and be resolv'd in all difficult and doubtful Points of Religion He is taught flatly to deny all this and to believe that the Scripture is not capable of deciding any one point of Controversy or reconciling the different Sentiments of Men in Religion And thus demeans himself towards the word of God in a manner most unbecoming a Christian. HE believes it damnable to undervalue the Scripture or take from it the Authority given it by Christ. He gives it all respect due to the Word of God he owns it to be of greatest Authority upon Earth and that it is capable of leading a Man to all Truth whensoever it is rightly understood But to any one that misunderstands it and takes it in any other sense than what was intended by the Holy Ghost he believes it to such a one to be no Scripture no word of God that to such a one it is no Rule of Faith nor Iudge of Controversies And that what he thinks to be the Doctrine of Christ and Command of Heaven is nothing but his own Imagination and the suggestion of the Devil And since by the experience of so many thousand Heresies since our Saviour's time all pretending to be grounded on Scripture he finds that almost every Text of the Bible and even those that concern the most Essential and Fundamental Points of the Christian Religion may be interpreted several ways and made to signifie things contrary to one another and that while thus contrary meanings are by several Persons drawn from the same Words the Scripture is altogether silent without discovering
and commanded to be believe even by Ten Thousand Councils he believes it damnable in any one to receive it and by such Decrees to make Additions to his Creed This seems to be a very good saying and it is pity any thing else should overthrow it But here lies the Misrepresenting he will believe what Christ and his Apostles taught from the Definitions of Councils and so all this goodly Fabrick falls to nothing for it is but as if one should say If Aristotle should falsly deliver Plato's sense I will never believe him but I am resolved to take Plato's sense only from Aristotle's Words So here he first declares he will take the Faith of Christ from the Church and then he saith if the Church Representative should contradict the Faith of Christ he would never believe it 2. We dispute not with them the Right and Necessity of General Councils upon great occasions if they be truly so rightfully called lawfully assembled and fairly managed which have been and may be of great use to the Christian world for setling the Faith healing the Breaches of Christendom and reforming Abuses And we farther say that the Decrees of such Councils ought to be submitted to where they proceed upon certain Grounds of Faith and not upon unwritten Traditions which was the fatal stumbling at the threshold in the Council of Trent and was not to be recovered afterwards for their setting up Traditions equally with the written Word made it it easie for them to define and as easie for all others to reject their Definitions in case there had not been so many other Objections against the Proceedings of that Council And so all our Dispute concerning this matter is taken off from the general Notion and runs into the particular Debate concerning the Qualifications and Proceedings of some which were called Free General Councils but were neither General nor Free and therefore could not deliver the Sense of the Catholick Church which our Author requires them to do XVIII Of Infallibility in the Church HE believes that the Pastors and Prelates of his Church are Infallible and that like so many Divine Oracles or petty Familiar Deities they are exempt from Errour and cannot deceive But this especially when they are met together in a General Council It being a main part of his Faith That then they are secure from all mistakes and that it is as impossible for them to decline either to the right hand or the left in any of their Definitions and Decrees as it is for God to leave Heaven and become the Author of Lies Thus fondly believing these to be assisted with a necessary Infallibility like Gods whom their Ignorance ill Example and debauch'd Lives to a true Considerer scarce speak to be Men. As if God Almighty did so blindly throw his Benefits and Graces amongst his Creatures that none should have a more powerful assistance of Gods Truth and infallible Spirit than those in whom there was least of God to be found HE believes that the Pastors and Prelates of his Church are Fallible that there is none of them but may fall into Errours Heresie and Schism and consequently are subject to mistakes But that the whole Church can fail or be deceiv'd in any one Point of Faith this he believes impossible knowing it to be built on better Promises such as secure her from all Errour and danger of Prevarication Her Foundation being laid by Christ against which the Gates of Hell shall not prevail Matthew 16.18 The Power that protects her being Christ himself Behold I am with you all days Matthew 28.20 The Spirit that Guides and Teaches her being the Comforter of the Holy Ghost who shall teach her all things and suggest to her all things that Christ has said to her Ioh. 14.16 The time that she is to be thus protected taught and assisted being not only while the Apostles liv'd or for the first three for or five hundred years next after but for ever to the end of the World Behold I am with you all days Matthew 28.20 He will give you another Paraclete that he may abide with you for ever Ioh. 14.16 And the thing that she is to be thus taught to the end of the World being all Truth He shall teach you all Truth Ioh. 16.13 Now being assured by these Promises that the Church of Christ shall be taught all Truth by the special assistance of the Holy Ghost to the end of the World he has Faith to believe that Christ will make his Words good and that his Church shall never fail nor be currupted with Antichristian Doctrine nor be the Mistress of Errours but shall be taught all Truth and shall teach all Truth to the Consummation of things and that whosoever hears her hears Christ And whosoever despiseth her despises Christ and ought to be esteemed as an Heathen or a Publican Matthew 18.17 The like assistance of the Holy Ghost he believes to be in all General Councils which is the Church Representative as the Parliament is the Representative of the Nation by which they are especially protected from all Errour in all Definitions and Declarations in matters of Faith So that what the Apostles pronounc'd concerning the Result of their Council Acts 15.28 It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs He does not doubt may be prefix'd to all the Determinations in Point of Faith resolv'd on by any General Council lawfully assembled since that time or to be held to the Worlds end The Assistance being to extend as far as the Promise And though 't is possible that several of the Prelates and Pastors in such an Assembly as also many others in Communion with the Church of Christ should at other times either through Pride or Ignorance prevaricate make Innovations in Faith teach Erroneous Doctrines and endeavour to draw Numbers after them yet he is taught that this does not at all argue a Fallibility in the Church nor prejudice her Faith but only the Persons that thus unhappily fall into these Errours and cut themselves off from being Members of the Mystical Body of Christ upon Earth Whilst the Belief of the Church remains pure and untainted and experiences the Truth of what Saint Paul foretold That Grievous Wolves shall enter in among you not sparing the Flock Also of your own selves shall Men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Act. 20. v. 29 30. which as it prov'd true even in the Apostles time by the Fall of Nicholas and his Followers as also several others So it has been verified in all Ages since by turbulent and presuming Spirits broaching new Doctrines and making Separations and Schisms But this without casting any more Aspersion on the Church or Congregation of the Faithful than the Fall of Iudas did on the Aâ—ostles or the Rebellion of Lucifer on the Hierarchy of Angels which was no more than that such wicked and presuming Spirits went out from amongst them and were expell'd their
Communion as unworthy Neither does it reflect at all on the Churches Authority or make the Truth of her Doctrine questionable to him that many of her eminent Members Doctors Prelates and leading Men have been or are great enormous Sinners infamous for their Pride Covetousness or other Vices whatsoever The Promises of God's continual and un-interrupted Assistance to his Church being not to be frustrated by the Wickedness of such particular Men though in great Dignities These Promises being made surer to her than ever the Iewish Church Which nevertheless stood firm in her Authority and the Delivery of Truth notwithstanding the frequent Idolatry of the People Nadab and Abihu's consecrated Priests offering strange Fire Corah Dathan and Abiram's making a great Schism and the Sins of Moses and Aaron and other High-Priests in all her succeeding Ages Nay though all things touching Religion and Virtue were in a manner run to decay in our Saviour's time both in Priests and People yet did he maintain the Authority of the Iewish Church and commanded all to be Obedient and submit to those who had the Superiority without calling in question their Authority or doubting of the Reasonableness of their Commands The Scribes and Pharisees says he Matth. 23.2 sit in Moses 's Chair All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do But do ye not after their Works If therefore God's special Assistance was never wanting to the Church of the Iews so as to let it fail in the Truth of its Doctrine or its Authority notwithstanding the Pride Covetousness Cruelty Impiety Idolatry of many of her Levites Elders Priests and High-Priests Why should not he believe the same of the Church of Christ which as Saint Paul says is built on better Promises and that it remains entire in the Truth of her Doctrine and her Authority notwithstanding the Viciousness of many of her Governours Especially since he 's in a manner confident that there has been nothing so infamous acted by any Priests Prelates Popes or others since Christ's time but what may be follow'd Nay was out-done by the Priests of the Iews XVII Of Infallibility in the Church 1. HE doth not pretend this belongs to the Pastors and Prelates of his Church who may fall he saith into Heresie and Schism but that the whole Church is secured by Divine Promises from all Error and danger of Prevarication which he proves from the Promises of the New Testament Mat. 16.18 28.20 Iohn 14.16 26. But however the former seems to take away Infallibility from the Guides of the Church yet that this is to be understood of them seperately appears by what follows 2. The like Assistance of the Holy Ghost he believes to be in all General Councils which is the Church Representative by which they are specially protected from all error in all definitions and declarations in matters of Faith Now here are two sorts of Infallibility tacked to one another by vertue of these general Promises which ought more distinctly to be considered 1. To preserve Christs Church so as it shall never cease to be a Church is one thing to preserve it from all Errors is another The former answers the End of Christs Promises as to the Duration of the Church and the latter is not implied in them 2. The promise of teaching them all Truth Joh. 16.13 is not made to the whole Church but to the Apostles And their case was so peculiar and extraordinary that there can be no just inference from the assistance promised to them of what the Church should enjoy in all Ages 3. If the diffusive Church have no infallible Assistance promised then no infallible Assistance can from thence be proved for the Church Representative so that some particular Promises to the Guides of the Church as assembled together are necessary to prove the Infallibility of Councils 4. It by no means proves following Councils to be Infallible because the Apostle said Acts 15.28 It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Our Author doth not doubt but the same may be prefixed to all determinations in point of Faith resolved on by any General Council lawfully assembled since that time or to be held to the Worlds end But what Reason he had for not doubting in this matter I cannot see the Assistance he said being to extend as far as the Promise But shall Assistance imply Infallibility Then there must be good store as long as the Promises of Divine Grace hold good But this Assistance of Councils is very different from the Assistance of Grace for the Church may subsist without Councils but cannot without Grace What General Council was there from the meeting Acts 15. to the Council of Nice Were not Christ's Promises fulfilled to his Church all that time when it encreased in all parts against the most violent Opposition 5. No parity of Reason from the Iewish Church can be sufficient proof for Infallibility in the Christian. But our Author argues thus If Gods special Assistance was never wanting to the Church of the Iews so as to let it fail in the truth of its Doctrine or its Authority Why should not he believe the same of the Church of Christ which is built on better Promises What special Assistance was it which Israel had when it is said that for a long time Israel had been without the true God and without a teaching Priest and without Law And as to Iudah was there no failing in point of Doctrine in our Saviours time It is true they had the Law intire and that was all that was good among them for their Teachers had corrupted themselves and the people and made the Law of no effect among them If there were Infallibility any where it must be in the High Priest and Sanhedrim but is it possible for any Christian to think them Infallible when they were so grosly mistaken about the main Article of their Faith as to the Messias and pronounced him worthy of Death Is not this a fine Argument for the Infallibility of the Guides of the Christian Church But the Church of Christ hath better Promises No doubt of it greater Promises of Grace and Mercy in this World and in that to come but what is all this to Infallibility in Councils 6. Christ's Command of Obedience to those who sat in Moses Chair Matth. 23.2 doth not prove the Infallibility of those who sat there Yet this is alledged to that purpose and that men ought not to doubt of the Reasonableness of the Commands of their Superiors But St. Chrysostom saith our Saviour speaks of the things commanded by the Law of Moses â—er Cathedram Doctrinam Legis ostendit saith St. Ierome Not their own Doctrine but that of Moses saith Isidore and so Hilary and Theophylact. Maldonate confesseth our Saviours Words are to be understood not of their own Doctrine but of that of the Law and therefore he yields the Obedience here required is to be restrained to
that All things saith Cajetan which they teach out of Moses 's Chair Not all their Doctrines but as far as they were conformable to the Law saith Ferus Now can any one hence infer that no men ought to dispute any Commands of Superiors when it is supposed that there is a Rule and Standard for them to speak according to and our Saviour elsewhere doth suppose these very men to teach things contrary to the Law as in the Case of Corban Would our Saviour contradict himself or require a blind Obedience in things repugnant to the Law We do not deny a due submission to our Superiors in the Church yea we allow them a Power to determine things not forbidden and think Obedience due in such things by vertue of their Authority but yet this is far enough from Infallibility or an unlimited implicit Obedience which would overthrow the force of all our Saviour's Reasonings against the Scribes and Pharisees as to their misinterpreting the Law and the Superstitious Practises they imposed upon the people XVIII Of the POPE HE believes the Pope to be his great God and to be far above all the Angels That Christ is no longer Head of the Church but that this Holy Father hath taken his place and that whatsoever he Orders Decrees or Commands is to be received by his Flock with the same respect submission and awe as if Christ had spoken it by his own mouth For that his Holiness having once receiv'd the Triple-Crown on his Head is now no more to be look'd upon as Man but as Christ's Vicar whose Office it is to Constitute and Ordain such things as Christ forgot when he was upon Earth not throughly considering what would be the Exigencies of his Flock in future Ages And for this intent he is assisted with a certain Mysterious Infallibility such as hides it self when he is upon his own Private Concerns exposes him to all the Designs Cheats Malice and Machinations of his Enemies and lets him be as easily over-seen as imprudent as silly as his Neighbours But when he comes into his Chair to hear any Publick Business then it begins to appear and protects him from all Mistakes and Errors and he becomes immediately full of the Holy Ghost though he had the Devil and all of Wickedness in him just before HE believes the Pope to be none of his God neither Great nor Little That he is not above the Angels but only a Man He believes that Christ as he is supreme Master Governour and Lord of all created things so also of his Church of which he acknowledges him to be the Founder and Head But as notwithstanding this Lordship and Headship of Christ over all things every Father of a Family owns himself to be Master of it under Christ every petty Commander of a Ship stiles himself Master of it under God and every Prince King and Emperour is confess'd supreme Lord and Governour of his Dominions under God So also he believes that there is a Pastor Governour and Head of Christ's Church under Christ to wit the Pope or Bishop of Rome who is the Sucessor of St. Peter to whom Christ committed the care of his Flock and who hath been follow'd now by a visible Succession of above 250 Bishops acknowledg'd as such in all Ages by the Christian World And now believing the Pope to enjoy this Dignity he looks upon himself oblig'd to shew him that Respect Submission and Obedience which is due to his place a thing which no body can in reason or conscience deny to any one in Rule or that has any Superiority Neither does he doubt but God assists those who have this charge with a particular helping Grace such as has a special respect to the Office and Function more than to the Person Such was given to all the Prophets when they were sent to preach Such to Moses when he was made God to Pharaoh Exod. 7.1 Such to the seventy Elders when God taking of the Spirit of Moses gave it unto them constituted them Iudges Such to Caiphas who to council prophesied of the death of Christ which St. Iohn ascrib'd not to his Person but to his Office of High-Priest Job 11.51 And this spake he not of himself but being High-Priest that year he Prophesied that Jesus should die for that Nation By priviledge of his Office uttering a Truth which he himself never meant With such like helping Grace he doubts not but God generally assists the Pastors of the New-Law and more especially the High-Priest for the Good of the whole Flock And therefore tho' he were as wicked as Caiphas yet he is ready to tender him all respect due to his Function and obey him in every thing concerning the Exercise of his charge not for any consideration of his Person but meerly for the Office he bears It being the Duty of a good Son to Obey his Father and of a Loyal Subject his King and never to question their Authority or dis-respect them in their Office tho' for some particular Vices they may have little respect for their persons In this manner is he ready to behave himself towards his chief Pastor with all Reverence and Submission never scrupling to receive his Decrees and Definitions such as are issued forth by his Authority with all their due circumstances and according to the Law in the concern of the whole Flock And this whether he has the Assistance of a Divine Infallibility or no Which though some allow him without being in a General Council yet he is satisfied 't is only their Opinion and not their Faith there being no Obligation from the Church of assenting to any such Doctrine And therefore as in any Civil Governments the Sentence of the supreme Iudge or Highest Tribunal is to be obey'd though there be no assurance of Infallibility or Divine Protection from Error or Mistake So is he taught should be done to the Orders of the Supreme Pastors whether he be Infallible or no. XVIII Of the POPE 1. WE do not charge them with Believing the Pope to be God which it seems himself did if we believe the Misrepresenter in his Preface but there is some Reason to doubt whether they do not at some times give him greater Honour than becomes a Man I instance in the Adoration after his Election when the new Pope is placed upon the Altar to receive the Submissions of the Cardinals but the Altar themselves do confess to be sacred to God alone And there they profess to Worship Jesus Christ as present in the Host. This therefore looks too much like assuming the Place of Christ and not becoming the Distance between God and Man 2. The Question is Whether Christ hath appointed the Pope or Bishop of Rome to be Pastor Governour and Head of his Church under him This he saith he believes and this he knows we deny and therefore had reason to expect some proof of it But instead thereof he tells us how they
look on themselves as obliged to shew him the Respect due to his place which he knows is not the matter in question Two things however he saith which seem to justifie his Title 1. He is the Successor of St. Peter to whom Christ committed the Care of his Flock But how far is this from proving the Pope to be Head of the Church under Christ For how doth it appear that Christ ever made St. Peter Head of the Church or committed his Flock to him in contradistinction to the rest of the Apostles This is so far from being evident from Scripture that the Learned Men of their Church are ashamed of the Places commonly produced for it it being impossible ever to justify the sense of them according to their own Rules of interpreting Scripture viz. by the unanimous consent of the Fathers For 1. Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church is interpreted by many of the Fathers both Greek and Latin of S Peters Confession and not of his Person so by S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Basil of Selucia S. Hilary S. Gregory Nyssen and Theodoret all great and considerable Persons in the Christian Church whose words are plain and full to that purpose and so they can never produce the unanimous Consent of the Fathers for S. Peter's Supremacy out of these words 2. And unto thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are interpreted by the Fathers of S. Peter in common with the other Apostles so Origen S. Cyprian S. Hilary S Hierom and S. Augustine as they are all owned by some Members of the Roman Communion And 3. For these words Feed my Sheep a late learned Doctor of the Sorbon shews that if they prove any thing peculiar to Saint Peter they must prove him sole Pastor of the Church which was the thing Saint Gregory disputed against so warmly But that there was nothing peculiar to Saint Peter above or beyond the rest of the Apostles he shews at large from S. Chrysostom S. Cyril S. Augustine and others to whom I refer the Reader and to the former Authors But suppose it were made to appear that Saint Peter was Head of the Church How doth the Bishop of Rome's Succession in that Headship shew it self To that he saith 2. That there hath been a visible Succession of above Two hundred and fifty Bishops acknowled as such in all past Ages by the Christian World As such What is that As Bishops of Rome That is not of weight enough to put it upon Tryal as Heads of the Catholick-Church That he knows is not only denied by us but by all the Greek Armenian Nestorian Abyssin Churches so that we dare say it was never allowed in any one Age of the Christian Church But we need not insist on the proof of this since the late mentioned Authors of the Roman Communion have taken so great pains not only to prove the Popes Supremacy to be an Incroachment Usurpation in the Church but that the laying it aside is necessary to the Peace and Unity of it And until the Divine Institution of the Papal Supremacy be proved it is to no purpose to debate what manner of Assistance is promised to the Pope in his Decrees Our Author is willing to decline the Debate about his personal Infallibility as a matter of Opinion and not of Faith and yet he saith he doubts not but God doth grant a special Assistance to the High Priest for the good of the whole Flock under the New Law as he did under the Old and produces the Instance of Caiaphas Joh. 11.51 This is a very surprizing way of Reasoning for if his Arguments be good from Scripture he must hold the Popes personal Infallibility as a matter of Faith and yet one would hardly think he should build an Article of Faith on the instance of Caiaphas For what consequence can be drawn from Gods over-ruling the Mind of a very bad man when he was carrying on a most wicked design to utter such words which in the event proved true in another sense than he meant them that therefore God will give a special Assistance to the Pope in determining matters of Faith Was not Caiaphas himself the man who proposed the taking away the Life of Christ at that time Was he assisted in that Council Did not he determine afterwards Christ to be guilty of Blasphemy and therefore worthy of Death And is not this a rare Infallibility which is supposed to be consistent with a Decree to crucifie Christ And doth he in earnest think such Orders are to be obeyed whether the Supreme Pastor be Infallible or not For so he concludes That his Sentence is to be obeyed whether he be Infallible or no XIX Of Dispensations HE believes that the Pope has Authority to pispense with the Laws of God and absolve any one from the obligation of keeping the Commandments So that if he has but his Holy Fathers leave he may confidently Dissemble Lie and Forswear himself in all whatsoever he pleases and never be in danger of being call'd to an account at the last day especially if his Lying and Forswearing was for the common good of the Church there being then a sure Reward prepar'd for him in Heaven as a recompence of his good Intentions and Heroick Atchievements And if at any time he should chance to be catch'd in the management of any of these publick and Church-concerns and being obnoxious to Penal Laws should have Sentence of Death pass'd on him he has liberty at his last hour on the Scaffold or Ladder to make a publick Detestation of all such Crimes to make protestations of his Innocence to call God to witness that he denies unjustly and that as he is immediately to appear before the Supreme Judge he knows no more of any such designs and is as clear from the Guilt of them as the Child unborn And this though the Evidence against him be as clear as noon-day though the Jury be never so Impartial and the Judge never so Conscientious For that he having taken the Sacrament and Oath of Secresie and receiv'd Absolution or a Dispensation from the Pope may then Lye Swear Forswear and Protest all that he pleases without scruple with a good Conscience Christian-like Holily and Canonically HE believes that the Pope has no Authority to dispense with the Law of God and that there 's no Power upon Earth can absolve any one frome the Obligation of keeping the Commandments or give leave to Lie or Forswear or make that the breaking of any the least Divine Precept shall not be accountable for at the day of Judgment He is taught by his Church in all Books of Direction in all Catechisms in all Sermons that every Lie is a Sin that to call God to witness to an Vntruth damnable that it ought not to be done to save the whole World that whosoever does it either for his own personal account
or for the Interest of Church or Pope or whatsoever else must of necessity answer for it at the last day and expect his portion with the Devil and his Angels if unrepented And that no one can give leave for Lying Perjury or committing any Sin or even pretend to it unless it be the Devil himself or some devilish Ministers of his such as he detests in his heart and utterly abominates And in consequence to this believes that whosoever at the hour of his death denies any Crime of which he is guilty and protests himself to be innocent when he is not so can have no hope of Mercy but departing out of this World an enemy to God and the Truth shall infallibly be receiv'd as such in the next and dying with a Lye in his mouth can expect no reward but from the Father of Lies And this whatsoever his Crime was whether incurr'd by an undertaking for Mother-Church or no and whatsoever his pretences for the denial of the Truth were whether Absolutions Dispensations the Sacrament or Oath of Secresie or whatsoever else nothing of these being capable of excusing him in Lies or Perjury or making them to be Innocent and not displeasing to God Nor indeed did he ever hear of these so much talk'd on Dispensations and Absolutions from any Priests of his Church either in Sermons or Confessions he never read of them in his Books and Catechisms he never saw the Practice of them in any of his Communion it having been their Custom ever since Oaths were first devis'd against them rather to suffer the loss of their goods banishments imprisonments torments and death it self than Forsâ—ear themselves or protest the least Untruth And 't is not out of the memory of man that several might have saved their Estates and Lives too would they have subscrib'd to and own'd but one Lye and yet refus'd it chusing rather to die infamously than prejudice their Conscience with an Vntruth So that it seems a great Mystery to him that those of his Profession should have Leave and Dispensations to Lye and forswear themselves at pleasure and yet that they should need nothing else but Lying and Perjury for the quiet enjoyment of their Estates for the saving their Lives for the obtaining Places of highest Command and greatest Dignity such as would be extraordinarily advantagious for their Cause and the interest of their Church And yet that they should generally chuse rather to forego all these so considerable Conveniences that once Lie or Forswear themselves And is it not another great Mystery that these Dispensations for Lying and Swearing should be according to the Receiv'd Doctrine of his Church and yet that he or any of his Communion were never instructed nor inform'd of any such Diabolical Point nay had never come to the knowledge of it had it not been for the information receiv'd from some Zealous Adversaries such as relate either meerly upon Trust or else such as have receiv'd a Dispensation of Lying from the Devil that they might charge the like Doctrine on the Church of Rome and the Pope XIX Of Dispensations HEre the Misrepresenter saith That a Papist believes that the Pope hath Authority to dispence with the Laws of God and absolve any one from the Obligation of keeping the Commandments On the other side the Representer affirms That the Pope has no Authority to dispence with the Law of God and that there 's no Power upon Earth can absolve any one from the Obligation of keeping the Commandments This matter is not to be determined by the one's affirming and the others denying but by finding out if possible the true sense of the Church of Rome about this matter And there are three Opinions about it 1. Of those who assert That the Pope hath a Power of Dispensing in any Divine Law except the Articles of Faith The Gloss upon the Canon Law saith that where the Text seems to imply that the Pope cannot dispence against the Apostle it is to be understood of Articles of Faith And Panormitan saith This Exposition pleases him well for the Pope may dispense in all other things Contra Apostolum dispensat saith the Gloss on the Decree And the Roman Editors in the Margin refer to 34 Dist. c. Lector to prove it And there indeed the Gloss is very plain in the Case sic Ergo Papa dispensat contra Apostolum And the Roman Correcters there justifie it and say it is no absurd Doctrine as to positive Institutions But the former notable Gloss as Panormitan calls it sets down the particulars wherein the Pope may dispense As 1. Against the Apostles and their Canons 2. Against the Old Testament 3. In Vows 4. In Oaths The Summa Angelica saith the Pope may dispense as to all the Precepts of the Old Testament And Clavasius founds this Power upon the Plenitude of the Popes Power according to that Expression in the Decretal mentioned that he can ex plenitudine potestatis de Iure supra Ius dispensare and without such a Power he saith God would not have taken that care of his Church which was to be expected from his Wisdom Iacobatius brings several Instances of this Power in the Pope and refers to the Speculator for more Iac. Almain saith That all the Canonists are of Opinion that the Pope may dispense against the Apostle and many of their Divines but not all For 2. Some of their Divines held that the Pope could not dispence with the Law of God as that implies a proper relaxation of the Law but could only Authoritatively declare that the Law did not oblige in such a particular Case because an Inferiour could not take away the force of a Superiors Law and otherwise there would be no fixed and immutable Rule in the Church and if the Pope might dispense in one Law of God he might dispense in the rest And of this Opinion were some of the most eminent School-Divines as Thomas Aquinas Bonaventure Major Soto and Catharinus who at large debates this Question and denies that the Pope hath any Power to dispense with Gods Law But then he adds that the Pope hath a kind of prophetical Power to declare in what Cases the Law doth oblige and in what not which he parallels with the Power of declaring the Canon of Scripture and this he doth not by his own Authority but by Gods He confesseth the Pope cannot dispense with those Precepts which are of themselves indispensable nor alter the Sacraments but then saith he there are some Divine Laws which have a general force but in particular Cases may be dispensed with and in these cases the Law is to be relaxed so that the Relaxation seems to come from God himself But he confesses this Power is not to be often made use of so that he makes this Power to be no Act of Jurisdiction but of prophetical Interpretation as he calls it and he brings the Instance of Caiaphas to this
in the Canon Nos Sanctorum c. Urban II. Gregory IX the Councils of Lateran under Alex. III. and Innocent III the Councils of Lyons of Vienna of Constance of Lateran under Leo X. and of Trent have all grievously and enormously erred about this matter for that it was the Doctrine of them all he shews at large and so Seven General Councâ—ls lose their Infallibility at one blow 6. That the Gates of Hâ—ll have prevailed against the Church For the true Church could never teach such pernicious Doctrine as this must be if it be not true And if it erred in this it might as well err in any other Doctrine and so Men are not bound to believe or obey it 7. That Princes and all Laymen have just Cause to withdraw from their Church because it shewed it self to be governed by a spirit of Ambition and not by the Spirit of God and not only so but they may justly prosecute all that maintain a Doctrine so pernicious to Government if it be not true Let us now see what our Author saith to clear this from being a Doctrine of the Church of Rome 1. That for the few Authors that are abettors of this Doctrine there are of his Communion three times the number that publickly disown all such Authority If this bâ— true it is not much for the Reputation of their Church That there should be such a number of those who are liable to all these dreadful Consequences which Lessius urges upon the deniers of it But is it possible to believe there should be so few followers of so many Popes and Seven General Councils owned for such by the disowners of this Doctrine except the Lateran under Leo 10 The poor Eastern Christians are condemned for Hereticks by the Church of Rome for refusing to submit to the Decrees of one General Council either that of Ephesus or of Chalcedon And they plead for themselves That there was a misinterpretation of their meaning or not right understanding one another about the diffâ—rence of Nature and Person which occasioned those Decrees I would fain know whether those Churches which do not embrace the Decrees of those Councils are in a state of Heresie or not If they be then what must we think of such who reject the Decrees of Seven General Councils one after another and give far less probable accounts of the Proceedings of those Councils in their Definitions than the other do 2. He saith Those who have condemned it have not been in the least suspected of their Religion or of denying any Article of Faith Let any one judg of this by Lessius his Consequences And the Author of the first Treatise against the Oath of Allegiance saith in plain Terms That the Opinion that the Pope hath no such Power is erroneous in Faith as well as temerarious and impious And he proves it by this substantial Argument Because they who hold it must suppose that the Church hath been for some time in a damnable Error of Belief and Sin of Practice And he not only proves that it was defined by Popes and Councils but for a long time universally received and that no one Author can be produced before Calvins time that denied this Power absolutely or in any case whatsoever But a few Authors that are Abettors of it saith our Representer Not one total Dissenter for a long time saith the other And which of these is the true Representer The deniers of it not in the least suspected of their Religion saith one Their Opinion is erroneous in Faith temerarious and impious saith the other And a Professor of Lovain now living hath undertaken to shew that the nuâ—ber is far greater of those who assert this Doctrine than of those who deny it 3. If we charge their Church with this Opinion may not they as well charge ours with the like since Propositions as dangerous were condemned at Oxford July 26 1683. as held not by Jesuits but by some among our selves This is the force of his Reasoning But we must desire the Reader to consider the great disparity of the Case We cannot deny that there have been men of ill Minds and dâ—sloyal Principles Factious and Disobedient Enemies to the Government both in Church and State but have these Men ever had that Countenance from the Doctrines of the Guides of our Church which the Deposing Doctrine hath had in the Church of Rome To make the Case parallel he must suppose our Houses of Convocation to have several times declared these Damnable Doctrines and given Encouragement to Rebels to proceed against their Kings and the University of Oxford to have condemned them for this is truly the Case in the Church of Rome the Popes and Councils have owned and approved and acted by the Deposing Principle but the Universities of France of late years have condemned it How come the Principles of the Regicides among us to be parallel'd with this Doctrine when the Principles of our Church are so directly contrary to them and our Houses of Convocation would as readily condemn any such damnable Doctrines as the University of Oxford And all the World knows how repugnant such Principles are to those of the Church of England and none can be Rebels to their Prince but they must be false to our Church As to the Personal Loyalty of many Persons in that Church as I have no Reason to question it so it is not proper for me to debate it if I did since our business is not concerning Persons but Doctrines and it was of old observed concerning the Epicureans That thô their Principles did overthrow any true Friendship yet many of them made excellent Friends XXI Of Communion in one kind HE believes that he is no longer oblig'd to obey Christ's Commands than his Church will give him leave And that therefore tho' Christ instituted the Sacrament under both kinds and commanded it to be receiv'd so by all yet he thinks it is not necessary for any to do so now but Priests because his Church forsooth hath forbidden the Cup to the Laity And put a stop to the Precept of Christ who said Drink ye all of this Mat. 26. In submission to which Church-Prohibition all the poor people of his Communion contentedly rest while they see themselves defrauded of great part of that benefit which Christ left them as his Last Will and Testament for the comfort of their poor Souls and the Remedy of their Infirmities HE believes that he is oblig'd to obey all the commands of Christ and that neither his Church nor any other Power upon Earth can limit alter or annul any precept of Divine Institution contrary to the intention of the Law giver Nâ—ither is the Denial of the Cup to the Laity a practise any ways opposite to this his Belief He being taught that thô Christ instituted the blessed Sacrament under both kinds and so deliver'd it to his Apostles who only were then present and
whom he had made Priests just before yet he gave no command that it should be so receiv'd by all the faithful But left this indifferent as is evident from his own words where he attributes the obtaining life everlasting the end of the Institution sometimes to the receiving under both kinds sometimes under one as when he says If any Man eat of this Bread he shall live for ever He that eats Me even he shall live by me He that eats of this bread shall live for ever John 6. v. 51 57 58. And a curious Reader may find as many Texts for thus Receiving under one kind as for the other And St. Augustine was so fâ—r of this Opinion that he says that Christ himself administred the Sacrament to some of his Disciples under one kind only viz. to those two going to Emaus Luk. c. last 30. And that the Apostles afterwards did often practise the like when they assembled to break bread Acts 2. c. Which places Ile and other Fathers explicate of the Sacrament Aug. l. 49. de Cons. Evang And that this was the Custom of the Primitive Christians to give it under one kind to Children to the Sick and that Men on a Iourney used so to carry it with them is attested by all antient Writers and modern Historians Nay he finds that this was the practice of the Church to Communicate under one kind only or else under both as every one thought good especially in all Private Communions for the first four hundred years after Christ and that the first Precept of Receiving under both kinds was given to the Faitâ—ful by Pope Leo I. in the year 443. and Confirm'd by Pope Gelasius in 490. not for the correcting any Abuse that had crept into the Church but for the discovering the Manichees who being of opinion that Christ had no true Blood and that Wine was the Gall of the Devil us'd to lurk among the Christians and receiving under the form of Bread only as the rest did remain'd undâ—stinguish'd till by this Obligation of all Receiving the Cup which they judg'd unlawful and abominabâ—e they were all detected And now if a thing till that time Indifferent was for these Motives determin'd by an Ecclesiastical Precept and so observ'd for many hundred years without scruple or questioning the Authority why should he doubt to submit to the same Authority when upon different Motives and Circumstances they issue forth another Precept Few doubt of this in the matter of Eating of strangled Meats and Blood which thô forbid by the Apostles Acts 15. and so unlawful is now by another Order and upon other circumstances become a thing Indifferent and like other things And why then should he scruple in this especially since there 's no Injury done nor he defrauded of any thing For believing the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament he consâ—quently believes whole and living Iesus to be entirely contain'd under either Species And that receiving under one kind he is truly partaker of the whole Sacrament and not depriv'd of other the Body or Blood of Christ. XXI Of Communion in one kind FOR our better proceeding in this Controversie I shall set down the State of it as clearly as I can 1. The Question is not Whether the first Institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist by Jesus Christ were in one kind or two for all confess it was under both kinds 2. It is not Whether both kinds are not still necessary for the due Celebration of it for it is granted that both kinds are necessary to be upon the Altar or else there could be no compleat Sacrifice 3. It is not Whether the People may be wholly excluded from both kinds and so the Sacrifice only remain for they grant that the People are bound to communicate in one kind 4. It is not concerning any peculiar and extraordinary Cases where no Wine is to be had or there be a particular Aversion to it or any such thing where positive Institutions may be reasonably presumed to have no force But concerning the publick and solemn Celebration and participation of it in the Christian Church 5. It is not concerning the meer disuse or neglect of it But concerning the lawfulness of Excluding the People from both Kinds by the Churches Prohibition notwithstanding the Institution of it by Christ in both kinds with a Command to keep up the Celebration of it to his Second Coming Here now consists the point in Controversie Whether the Church being obliged to keep up the Institution in both kinds be not equally obliged to distribute both as our Saviour did to as many as partake of it Our Author not denying the Institution or the continuance of it saith Our Saviour left it indifferent to receive it in one kind or both And that is the point to be examined 1. He saith Christ delivered it to his Apostles who only were then present and whom he made Priests just before yet he gave no command that it should be so received by all the Faithful But were not the Apostles all the Faithful then present I pray in what capacity did they then receive it As Priests How did they receive the Bread before the hoc facite As Priests or as faithful It is ridiculous to suppose the hoc facite changed their capacity and if â—t did it only relates to consecrating and not to receiving but if Christ gave it only to the Apostles as Priests then for all that I can see the People are not at all concerned in one kind or other but it was intended only for Priests If the people be concerned how came they to be so Where is there any command but what refers to the first Institution And it had been more plausible according to this Answer to exclude the People wholly than to admit them to one kind and to debar them the other 2. Christ attributes the obtaining Life Everlasting the end of the Institution sometimes to receiving under both kinds sometimes under one John 6.51 57 58. He could not easily have thought of any thing more against himself for our Saviour there makes it as necessary to drink his Blood as to eat his Flesh Verily 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 If this be understood of the Sacrament as he saith How is it possible for him to make the Cup indifferent Unless it be indifferent whether the People be saved or not 3. Christ himself administred the Sacrament to some of his Disciples under one kind only Luke 24.30 But is he sure Christ did then administer the Sacrament to them Or that if he did the Cup was not implied since breaking of Bread when taken for an ordinary Meal in Scripture doth not exclude drinking at it But S. Augustin he saith l. 49. de Consensu Evangel understands that place of the Sacrament If he doth it cannot be where he saith for
S. Augustin wrote but Four Books of that Subject but l. 3.25 he doth say something towards it yet S. Augustin in another place supposes that these Disciples did both eat and drink The Disciples did not know him but in the breaking of Bread and truly he that doth not eat and drink Iudgment to himself doth in the breaking of Bread own Christ. Wheâ—e it is plain that he applies both to the breaking of Bread here spoken of 4. He saith it was the Custom of the Primitive Christians to give it under one kind to Children the Sick and to Men in a Iourney I would he had produced his Authorities to prove these things for I can bring several to prove the direct contrary as to Children and sick Pâ—rsons and Travellers and not only ancient Writers but the most Learned of their own Church And therefore I cannot but wonder to find him saying This was attested by all ancient Writers and modern Historians But I have ever found those have been most mistaken who produce all Writers and Historians when it may be there is not one that speaks home to the business At least we have here none mentioned and therefore none to examine and it would be too hard a task to search All. 5. He adds to this extravagancy in saying That Receiving in one or both kinds was indifferent for the â—irst four hundred years when the contrary is so manifest that the most ingenious of their own Writers confess it If any Persons did carry home one kind which is very questionable for Baronius and Albaspinaeus say they carried both kinds to receive it in times of Persecution at what season they thought fit afterwards This ought not to be set up against the general and constant Rule of the Church which is attested not only by Cassander and such like but even by Salmero Ruardus Tapperus and Lindanus who make no scruple of saying the publick Celebration in the Primitive Church was in both kinds But then how is it possible for us to judge better what they thought themselves bound to do than what they constantly observed in all their publick Celebrations The Church is not accountable for the particular Fancies or Sâ—perstitions of Men but what was observed in all publâ—ck Offices we have reason to think the Church thought it self obliged so to do out of regard to the Institution of Christ. And to shew how Unâ—versal this Observation was in the Church those who give account of the Eastern Church say That the Greeks Nestorians Armenians Maronites Cophtites and Abyssins do all observe it still viz. That the publâ—ck Communicants do partake of both kinds And not one of all these Churches but think themselves bound to observe it out of regard to the Institution of Christ and why then should any think the Prâ—mâ—tive Church thought it indifferent 6. The first Precept of receiving under both kinds was given to the Faithful by Pope Leo A. D. 443. and confirmed by Gâ—lâ—sius A. D. 490. This is a great mistake for Leo gave no Precept abâ—ut it but only told the People how they might certainly discover the Manichees for they would conform in other things but they would not taste of the Wine which argued that all other Communicants did then partake in both kinds Gelasius not only confirms the Custom then used but he saith That it is Sacriledge to divide that Holy Mystery And surâ—ly he did not account Sacriledge an indifferent thing 7. Lastly he saith That those who receive in one kind are truly Partakers of the whole Sacrament This is a new way of Concomitancy we used to hear of Whole Christ under either Species and that Whole Christ was therefore received but how comes it to be the whole Sacrament which consists of two distinct Parts And if it be a Sacrifice the Blood must be separated from the Body else the Blood of Christ is not considered as shâ—d and so the Notion of the Sacrifice will be lost Which is our next Head XXII Of the MASS HE believes an insufficiency in the Sacrifice made by Christ upon the Cross and that his Death will little avail us in order to our Redemption unless we by daily Sacrificing him to his Father perfect what he began and therefore little taking notice of St. Paul 's Words to the Hebrews Chap. 10.14 where he says that Christ our High-Priest by one Oblatâ—on hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified He thinks he shall never be sanctified but by the Offering made by his Mass Priest upon their Altars when they say Mass and thus wholly relying upon this Superstition an Invention of some crafty Pâ—pe for the deceiving Wâ—dows and Credulâ—us Women he is taught to neglect the Passiâ—n of Christ and to put no hopes in his Merits and the work of our Redemption HE believes that the Sacrifice made by Christ upon the Cross was altogether sufficient That by it he Sav'd and Redeem'd us paying the Debt of Sin and satisfying the Infinite Iustice of his Father That by it he procur'd means for our Salvation which means are Faith and Good Works and most honourable to God is the Offering a Sacrifice And as Christ's Worshipping of God Christ's Fasting Christ's Praying and suffering for us does not hinder or evacuate our Worshipping of God our Fasting our Suffering our Praying for our selves So neither did his Sacrifice hinder or evacuate all Sacrifices for ever But as he instituted â—asting Praying and suffering for his Followers thâ—t by so doing they might apply what he did to themselves so aâ—so he instituted a Sacrifice that by it they might apply the merits of his Sacrifice and make it beneficial to their Souls So that though he firmly believes that Christ offered Sacrifice for our Redemption and by one only Offering spoken of by St. Paul perfected by way of Redemption the Sanctification of all those that are sanctified yet he also believes that to receive the benâ—fit of this Offering we must also do our parts by our Good Works concurring with Christ so becoming Labourers together with God 1 Cor. 3.9 and in some manner purifying our own selves 1 John 3.3 and therefore not omit the best of all Works which is Sacrifice proper to none but God Which our Saviour Iesus Christ instituted at â—is last Supper when leaving unto us his Body and Blood under two distinct Species of Bread and Wine he bequeath'd as a Legacy to his Apostles not only a Sacrament but also a Sacrifice A Commemorative Sacrifice lively Representing in an unbloody manner the bloody Sacrifice which was offered for us upon the Cross and by a distinction of the Symbols distinctly shewing his Death Christ's until he come This he gave in charge to his Apostles as to the first and chief Priests of the New Testament and to their Successors to Offer commanding them to do the same thing he had there done at his last Supper in commemoration of him And this is the Oblation or
Sacrifice of the Mass which has been observ'd perform'd frequented by the Faithful in all Agâ—s attested by the General Consent of ancient Canons universal Tradition Councils and the practâ—ce of the whole Church mention'd and allow'd of by all the Fathers Greek and Latin and never call'd into question but of lâ—te Years being that pure Offering which Malachy Prophecying of Christ foretold should be offer'd among the Gentiles in every place Mal. 1.11 as it is understood by several Fathers and particularly S. Cypr. l. 1. c. 18. advers Iud. S. Ierom S. Theodoret S. Cyril in their Commentaries upon this Text S. Augustine l. 18. c. 15. de Civit. S. Chrysost. in Psal. 95. and others Of the MASS UNder this Head which is thought of so great consâ—quence in the Roman Church I expected a fuller Representation than I here find as about the Opus Operatum i. e. how far the meer Act is effectual About their Solitary Masses when no Person receives but the Priest about the People having so little to do or understand in all the other parts of the Mass About the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mass how useful and important they are About reconciling the present Canon of the Mass with the present Practises About offering up Masses for the honour of Saints All which we find in the Council of Trent but are omitted by our Representer Who speaks of the Mass as tho there were no Controversie about it but only concerning the Sacrifice there supposed to be offered up and which he is far from true Representing For the Council of Trent not only affirms a true proper propitiatory Sacrifice to be there offered up for the quick and dead but denounces Anathema's against those that deny it So that the Question is not Whether the Eucharist may not in the sense of Antiquity be allowed to be a Commemorative Sacrifice as it takes in the whole Action but whether in the Mass there be such a Representation made to God of Christ's Sacrifice as to be it self a true and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the Qâ—ick and the Dead Now all that our Representer saith to the purpose is 1. That Christ bequeathed his Body and Blood at his last Supper under the species of Bread and Wine not only a Sacrament but also a Sacrifice I had thought it had been more proper to have offered a Sacrifice than to have bequeathed it And this ought to have been proved as the Foundation of this Sacrifice viz. That Christ did at his last Supper offer up his Body and Blood as a Propitiatory Sacrifice to God And then what need his suffering on the Cross 2. He gave this in charge to his Apostles as the first and chief Priests of the New-Testament and to their Successors to offer But Where When and How For we read nothing at all of it in Scripture Christ indeed did bid them do the same thing he had there done in his last Supper But did he the offer up himself or not If not How can the Sacrifice be drawn from his Action If he did it is impossible to prove the necessiâ—y of his dying afterwards 3. This Sacrifice was never questioned till of late years We say it was never determined to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice till of late We do not deny the Fathers interpreting Mal. 1.11 of an Offering under the Gospel but they generally understand it of Spiritual and Eucharistical Sacrâ—fices and although some of them by way of Accommodation do apply it to the Eucharist yet not one of them doth make it a Propitiatory Sacrifice which was the thing to be proved For we have no mind to dispute about Metaphorical Sacrifices when the Council of Trent so positively decrees it to be a True Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice XXIII Of Purgatory HE believes contrary to all Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity that besides Heaven and Hell there is a third place which his Church is pleas'd to call Purgatory a place intended purely for those of his Communion whâ—re they may easily have admittance after this Life without danger of falling into Hell for that though Hell was designed first for the punishment of Sinners yet that now since the blessed discovery of Purgatory Hell may easily be skip'd over and an eternal Damnation avoided for an exchange of some short Penalty undergone in this Pope's Prison where he never need fear to be detained long for that if he has but a friend left behind him that will but say a few Hail-Maries for his Soul or in his Testament did but remember to order a small sum to be presented to some Mâ—ss Priest he never need doubt of being soon releas'd for that a Golden Kâ—y will as infallibly open the Gates of Purgatory as of any other Prison whaâ—soever HE believes it damnable to admit of any thing for Faith that is contrary to Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity and that the Being of a Third Place call'd Purgatory is so far from being contrary to all or any of these that it is attested confirm'd and establish'd by them all 'T is expresly in the 2 d. of the Maccabees c 12. where Money was sent to Hierusalem that Sacrifices might be offered for the slain And ' â—is recommended as a Holy Cogitation to Pray for the Dead Now though these Books are not thought Canonical by some yet St. Augustine held them as such and says they are so received by the Church l. 18. de Civit. But whether so or no one thing is allow'd by all viz. That they contain nothing contrary to Faith and that they were cited by the Antient Fathers for the Confutation of Errors forming of good Manners and the explication of the Christian Doctrine Thus were they us'd by Origen for Condemnation of the Valentinian Hereticks Orig. in cap 5. Ep. ad Rom. thus by St. Cyprian Lib. de Exhor Mart. c. 11. thus by Euseb. Caesariensis Lib. Praepar Evang. 11. c. 15. thus by St. Greg. Naz. Ambros. c. And he is in a manner certain that the Books would never have been put to this Use by these Holy and Learned Fâ—thers they would never with such confidence have produc'd their Authority nor would they have been read by the Church in those Golden times had this Doctrine of a Third Place and of Prayers for the Dead which they maintain been any idle Superstition a meer Dream contrary to Reason the Word of God and Antiquity or had it been any Error at all The being also of a Third Place is plainly intimated by our Saviour Matth. 12.32 where he says Whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this World neither in the World to come By which words Christ evidently supposes that though these shall not yet some sins are forgiven in the World to come which since it cannot be in Heaven where no sin enters nor in Hell whence there is no Redemption it must necessâ—rily be
understood a word that he spoke Does any one think that those Holy Women who follow'd their Lord in these sad Passages and were Witnesses of his Sufferings wanted Holy Affections in their Souls because he spoke not or were they scandaliz'd at his silence Was not their Faith in him that suffer'd by which they believ'd him to be Christ Iesus true God and Man laying down his life for the Redemption of Man sufficient to excite in their Souls all the Passions due from a sinful Creature to his bleeding Redeemer to his Crucified Iesus The like Faith also is sufficient to fill him with Devotion when he is present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass For believing that Christ is there really present before him under the Species of Bread and Wine and that He that lies upon the Altar is the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the World What need of more to quicken in his Soul all the Affections of a Devout Lover Can he behold his Redeemer before him and not break forth into Love and Thanksgiving Can he see him that gives sight to the Blind health to the Sick and life to the Dead and yet stand still senseless and un-mov'd without putting any Petition to him without asking any thing for his blind sick and sinful Soul Can he believe that he that gives his life for the World and died for our sins is there before him and not be touch'd with sorrow and contrition for his Offence Can he see commemorated every doleful passage of his Saviour's sufferings in the several Mysteries of the Mass and yet not be fill'd with grief and compassion Is not Iesus welcome to a devout Soul although he come in silence Is not the Presence of Christ a more forcing motive to a Christian than any Humane Words could be And if he must needs have Words let him behold with the eye of Faith the gaping Wounds of his Redeemer and see if those speak nothing to his Soul If they do not 't is because he wants Faith It nothing therefore concerns his Devotion that the Mass is said in Latin If the Church has order'd it thus so to preserve Unity as in Faith so in the External Worship of God and to prevent alterations and changes which it would be expos'd to if in Vulgar Languages and other good Reasons What 's that to him He should receive but little advantage if it were in his Mother Tongue For besides that the greatest part is said in so low a Voice that it is not possible he should hear it the Words do not belong to him That 's only the Priest's Office and the Obligation is to accompany the Priest in Prayer and Spirit to be a joint-Offerer with him to contemplate the Mysteries there represented and to excite in his Soul Devotions according to the exigency of every Passage according to the Directions he finds in his English Prayer-Books of which there are extant great variety set forth for the help of the Ignorant by which they are taught the meaning of every Part and Ceremony of the Mass and how to apply their Devotions accordingly And if at any time he be present at other publick Devotions as the Church Offices the Litanies solemn Thanksgivings Exequies c. which are all perform'd in Latin or should say any private Prayers or sing an Hymn in the same Language which he understands not yet is he taught that this may be done with great benefit to his Soul and the acceptance of God if at these occasions he does but endeavour to raise his thoughts to Heaven and fix his Heart upon his Maker For that God does not respect the Language of the Lips but of the Heart does not attend the motion of the Tongue but of the Mind and if these be but directed to him in Thanksgiving in Praeising in Petitioning in Humiliation in Contrition and such like Acts as Circumstances require he need not doubt but that God accepts his Prayers and Devotions It being an undeniable thâ—ng that to say Prayers well and devoutly 't is not necessary to have attention on the Words or on the Sense of the Prayers but rather purely on God Of these three Attentions this last being approv'd by all as of greatest Perfection and most pleasing to God And this he can have whether he understands the Words or no it being very usual and easie for a Petitioner to accompany his Petition with an earnest desire of obtaining his suit tho the Language in which it is worded be unknown to him XXIV Of Praying in an unknown Tongue THE Qâ—estion in short is Whether the Church Service at which Persons are bound to assist ought not to be in a Language understood by those who are bound to assist For our Author grants That a Papist is bound to assist at the Church Service and to hear Mass but he is not bound to understand the Words there spoken This is a plain state of the case and one would have thought St. Paul's Discourse about Edification in the Church-Service and a known Tongue and the Primitive Practice had desâ—rved a little consideration but not a Word is said to either of them and the whole is so managed as tho there had been no Rule or any appearance of Practice to the contrary But I must consider what he doth say 1. The Mass is a Sacrifice And what then Have they no other Church-Service but the Mass What then becomes of their Breviaries Litanies and all other Offices But suppose the Priests Office in the Mass be to offer the Sacrifice are there no Prayers in the Canon of the Mass wherein the People are concerned Why must not they understand what they are required to assist in Prayer for If they have English Books as he saith to teach them every part and Ceremony of the Mass why not as well the Prayers in the Mass wherein they are to joyn They tell us It is unseasonable then for the People to say their Beads and other Devotions And I suppose as unseasonable to talk or think of other matters Why then should not they know what it is they are to do and what Petitions they are then to make to God Are there no Responses to be made No Lessons to be read No Creed to be professed Doth not the Priest speak to the People to pray and they answer him Is there no Thanksgiving after the Communion which the People is concerned in We are as much for their Devout Affections as they can be but we think they are not hindred by understanding what they are about We cannot but wonder that any man should say That it nothing concerns his Devotion that the Mass is in Latin if he understand it not Is it no part of Devotion to joyn in the publick Prayers not merely by rote but from a due apprehension of the matter contained in them He requires That they accompany the Priest in Prayer and Spirit And why not in understanding also But
being no direction in Scripture concerning the Number of the Commandments to be assign'd to each Table nor to let us know which is the first which the second which the third Commâ—ndment or which the last He is taught that 't is but an unnecessary trouble to concern himself about the Number of them or Division when-as his whole Business ought to be the Observance of them in his Life and Conversation XXV Of the Second Commandment THE Dispute about this is not Whether the Second Commandment may be found in any of their Books but by what Authority it comes to be lâ—ft out in any as he confesses it is in their short Catechisms and Manuals But not only in these for I have now before me the Reformed Office of the Blessed Virgin Printed at Salamanca A. D. 1588. published by Order of Pius V. where it is so left out And so in the English Office at Antwerp A. D. 1658. I wish he had told us in what publick Office of their Church it is to be found But himself pleads for the leaving it out when he saith The People are in no danger of Superstition or Idolatry by it since the First Commandment secures them from it and there is nothing in this but what is vertually contained in the First and is rather an Explanation than a new and distinct Precept But is this so plain and clear that a Mans Conscience can never make any just and reasonable Doubt concerning it There is a terrible sanction after it and men had need go upon very good Grounds in a matter of such moment Hath God himself any where declared this to be only an Explication of the First Commandment Have the Prophets or Christ and his Apostles ever done it How then can any mans Conscience be safe in this matter For it is not a trifling Controversie whether it be a distinct Commandment or an Explication of the First but the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of the Worship of Images depends very much upon it For if it be only an Explication of the First then unless one takes Images to be Gods their Worship is lawful and so the Heathens were excused in it who were not such Ideots But if it be a new and distinct Precept then the Worshipping any Image or Similitude becomes a grievous sin and exposes men to the Wrath of God in that severe manner mentioned in the end of it And it is a great confirmation that this is the true meaning of it because all the Primitive Writers of the Christian Church not only thought it a sin against this Commandment but insisted upon the force of it against those Heathens who denied that they took their Images for Gods And therefore this is a very insufficient Account of leaving out the Second Commandment XXVI Of Mental Reservations HE is taught to keep no Faith with any that are reputed Hereticks by his Church and that whatsoever Promises he has made thô never so positive and firm with this sort of People he may lawfully break and cheat and cozen them without any scruple And tho he must not do this by down-right Lying and telling Untruths for that would be a sin yet he may make use of any indirect ways such are Dissimulation Equivocations and Mental Reservations and by these means draw them into his snares And this without fear of offending God who is well pleas'd with these kind of pious Crafts allows of these Holy Cheats HE is taught to keep Faith with all sorts of People of whatsoever Iudgment or Perswasion they be whether in Communion with his Church or no he is taught to stand to his Word and observe his Promise given or made to any whatsoever and that he cannot cheat or cozen whether by dissembling equivocations or mental reservations without defiâ—nce of his own Conscience and the violation of God's Law This is the Instruction he receives from the pulpit the Confessionary and his Books of Direction The holy Francis Sales in his Introduction to a Devout Life p. 3. c. 30. tells him plainly Let your Talk be courteous frank sincere plain and faithful without double-dealing subtilty or dissembling This he is taught to observe and practise and that without this 't is not possible to please God In the Catechism ad Parochos compil'd by order of the Council of Trent and recommended to all Parish Priests for the Instruction of the Faithful he is taught that by the Eighth Commandment he is forbidden all Dissimulation whether in Word or Deed that cum scelere conjuncta sunt to speak or do otherwise than for the intimation of what is in the mind is abominable and wicked That no man shall bear false witness against his Neighbour whether he be Friend or Enemy And Pope Innocent XI in a Decree issued forth the Second of March Anno 1679. has strictly commanded all the Faithful in virtue of his holy Obedience and under pain of incurring the Divine Vengeance that they never swear equivocally or with any mental reservation upon no account or pretended convenience whatsoever And that if any presume either publickly or privately to teach or maintain the Doctrine of Swearing with equivocations or mental reservation that they de facto incur Excommunication latae Sententiae and cannot be absolv'd by any but the Pope himself excepting at the hour of death He is taught therefore to speak plainly and sincerely without Dissimulations Equivocations mental Reservations or any such like Artifices which cannot be but very injurious to all Society and displeasing to the First Truth And now if any Authors in Communion with his Church be prâ—duced as Patrons of inward Reserves and grand Abettors of thâ—se mental Iuggles let them hold up their hands and answer for themselves Their Church has declar'd for no such Doctrine and is no more to be charg'd with their extravagant Opinions than with the unexemplar lives of other her Members whose Irregularities are not at all deriv'd from their Religion but from the neglect of their own corrupt Inclinations and giving way to the temptations of their Enemy XXVI Of Mental Reservations UNder this Head he denies Two Things 1. That they are ever taught to break Faith with Hereticks 2. That their Church doth allow any Equivocations or Mental Reservations As to the former I am sincerely glad to find a Principle so destructive to all humane Society so utterly disowned when he saith He is taught to keep Faith with all sorts of People of whatsoever Iudgment or Perswasion they be and to stand to his Word and observe his Promise given or made to any whatsoever And whatever Opinions and Practices there may have been of that kind formerly we hope there will never be occasion given to revive that dispute 2. As to the Second We embrace his Declaration against it and hope there is no Equivocation or Mental Reservation in it But there are some things which must here be taken notice of 1. He cannot deny that there are Authors
in Communion with his Church which may be charged with teaching another Doctrine and those not a few nor inconsiderable who not only allow the Practice of Mental Reservations and Equivocations but say with great confidence it hath been received in the Roman Church for no less than Four hundred Years and that in some Cases they are all still agreed in it See Parsons Treatise of Mitigation c. 7. Sect. 2.3 c. 10 Sect. 1. 2. We do not deny that Innocent XI hath condemned Equivocations and Mental Reservations in Swearing as at least scandalous and pernicious in Practise and therefore we cannot charge the Pope with abetting this Doctrine But we cannot but reflect on what our Author said about the Deposing Doctrine That altho Popes had believed it and acted by it yet the greater number opposed it And what shall we say in this Case if the Generality of their Casuists in some Cases approve it and think it no Lye or Perjury as in that of Confession but if it be really so in any one Case then it may be some other fault but it is not a Lye or Perjury in any other when a Man doth not think himself bound to speak all he knows 3. That as we highly commend the Pope's condemning such Doctrines and Practâ—ses now so we have Reason to think the contrary did not once want the encouragement and approbation of the Roman See as may be found in the resolution of some Cases by Pius V. relating to some Missionaries who were to be sent hither and then it was declared That if they were summon'd before our Judges they might Sophistice Iurare Sophistice Respondere and that they were not bound to answer according to the Intention of the Judges but according to some true sense of their own i. e. which was made true by the help of a Mental Reservation But it is very well that now the very same things are condemned at Rome as Scandalous and Pernicious in Practise XXVII Of a Death-Bed Repentance HE is bred up in a total neglect of the service of God of all Virtue and Devotion while he is well and in good health upon presumption of a Death-bed Repentance and a confidence that all his sins will be certainly forgiven if he can but once say Lord have mercy upon me at the last hour And 't is a sufficient Encouragement to him to rely wholly upon this to see that there is no such profligate Villain none that has liv'd tho to the heighth of Wickedness and debauchery of his Communion but at his Death he shall be assisted by a Priest and shall receive an Absolution from all his Sins with an absolute Promise of being soon admitted to Bass and reigning with Christ if he can but once say he is sorry or if his Voice fail him signifie as much by a Nod of his Head or the Motion of a Finger HE is bred up in the Service and Love of God taught to work his Salvation in fear and trembling to provide in health time against the last hour and by no means to rely upon a Death-bed Repentance for that Men generally speaking as they live so they dye and 't is to be fear'd greatly that those who neglect God Almâ—ghty and forsake him aâ—l their life-time wâ—ll never find him at their death So that with St. Augustine he doubts the Salvation of as many as deâ—er theâ—r Conversion till that Hour and has no encouragement at all to do it However if any are found tâ—at have been so neglectful of their Duty as to put â—ff this great business of Eternity to the last moment he is taught that in Charity they ought to have all assistance possible to put them in mind of their condition to excite them to a heâ—â—y detestation of all their Offâ—nces To let them know that tho they deserve Hell-fire in Punishment of their Wickâ—dness yet that they ouâ—ht by no means despair for that God is merciful and who knows but if they heartily call upon him and endeavour for a sincere Repentance with an humble confidence on the Merits and Passion of Iesus Christ he may hear their Prayers shew them mercy and give them time to repent These are all the Promises can be given in this point and this is what he sees daily practis'd and if some by these means are preserv'd from falling into despair 't is well but as for any receiving from hence encouragement of coming into the like circumstances he thinks there 's but little danger especially since there 's nothing so often repeated in Books no more common Subjects for Sermons than the dispâ—aying the manifold perils of delaying ones Conversion and putting off Repentance till the last hour XXVII Of a Death-bed-Repentance WE have no difference with them about this matter as far as they hold to these points 1. That men are strictly obliged to work out their Salvation with fear and trembling in time of health 2. That it is very dangerous to defer their Repentance to the last 3. That if any are surprised they ought in Charity to have all possible assistance to put them into the best way for their Salvation But yet there may be some particular Doctrines owned in the Church of Rome which may give men too much encouragement to put off true Repentance as 1. The easiness of being put into a state of Grace by the Sacrament of Penance for which no more is required than removing the Impediment as appears by the Council of Trent Sess. 7. Can. 6. and afterwards it defines That bare Attrition doth sufficiently dispose a Man to receive Grace in that Sacrament Sess. 14. c. 4. So that altho a man hath led a very bad Life if he hath but this Attrition for his Sins when he doth confess them he is put into a state of Grace by this Sacrament And what can any Man expect more and what can he do less I do not mean a bare natural Attrition the sufficiency whereof is condemned by Innocent XI in the same Propositions Fifty seventh but that which the Council of Trent calls Imperfect Contrition i. e. a good Motion in a man's Mind to forsake his Sins for fear of Punishment If really no mâ—re be required for a state of Grace but this it is no wonder iâ— Men put off the doing of that which may be done at any time so easily by the help of a Priest 2. The Treasure of the Church is another thing which is very apt to hinder mens speedy Repentance for by that they believe there is a stock ready of so many Merits and Satisfactions of others if duely applied to them by Indulgences that they need not be at such pains to work out their own Salvation with fear and trembling When a Man by the Sacrament of Penance is put into a state of Grace the Eternal Punishment is discharged and nothing remains but some Temporal Pains and to ease him of these he hath many helps but especially
the Treasure of the Church which the Pope hath the dispensing of as he is bound to believe and by Indulgences he may easily get off some Thousands of years of Purgatory-Pains and if these should fail him there is another help yet left which is leaving a stock of Prayers for his Soul when he dies which even our Author assures him are very available towards his speedier release out of Purgatory XXVIII Of Fasting HE is contented with the appearance of Devotion and looking not beyond the name of Mortification he sits down well satisfied with the shadow without ever taking care for the substance And this being a great Pretender to Fasting and the Denial of himself he thinks he has sufficiently complied with his Duty in this point and made good his claim if he has but abstain'd from Flesh and tho at the same time he regales himself at Noon with all variety of the choicest Fish and stuffs himself at Night with the best Conserves and delicatest Junkets and drinks all day the pleasantest Wines and other Liquors yet he perswades himself that he is a truly Mortified Man that he has most Christian-like commemorated the bitter Death and Passion of his Redeemer and done a work of great force in order to the suppressing his corrupt Inclinations and satisfying for the Offences of his Life past Nay he has such a preposterous conceit of things that he believes it a greater sin to eat the least bit of Flesh on a Fasting-dâ—y than to be down-right Drunk or commit any other Excess as having less scruple of breaking the Commandments of God than of violating any Ordinance of the Pope or any Law of his Church HIS Church teâ—ches him that the Appearance of Devotion the Name of Mortification and pretence to it are only vain and fruitless things if they are not accompanied with the substance and that 't is but a very lame compliance with the Ecclesiastical Precept of Fasting to abstain from Flesh unless all other Excesses are at the same time carefully avoided 'T is true his Church has not forbidden on these days the drinking of Wine but permits a moderate use of it as at other times but is so far from giving liberty to any of her Flock of committing Excesses that she declares Drunkenness and all Gluttony whatsoever to be more hainous and scandalous sins on such days than on any other they being expresly contrary not only to the Law of God but also to the intention of the Church which appoints these times for the retrenching Debaucheries and conquering our vicious Appetites And now if any of his Profession make less scruple of being Drunk on a Fasting-day than of eating the least bit of Flesh he knows nothing more can be said of them than of many others who will not break the Sabbath-day by doing any servile Labour on it for all the World looking on this as a most damning sin and yet at the same time have little scruple of Swearing Cursing Lying or Revelling the greatest part of the day Which is not because they have more liberty for these than the former they being all most wicked Offences but because they that do thus are but Christians by halves who with a kind of Pharisaical and Partial Obedience seem to bear some of the Commandments most zealously in their Hearts while others they trample under their feet scrupling many times at a Moat and on other occasions passing by a Beam undiscern'd for which their Church is not to be accountable but They themselves as being guilty of a wilful blindness and a most unchristian Negligence This is the real case of such of his Communion who on days of Humiliation while they abstain from Flesh yet give scandal by their Intemperateness They have a Command of God by which they are oblig'd on all days to live soberly and to avoid all Gluttony and Drunkenness and on Fasting-days besides this Command of God they have a Church-precept by which they are bound if able to eat but one Meal in a day and that not of Flesh. And now if some are so inconsiderate and careless as to be scrupulously observant of one of these Commands and wholly negligent of the other 't is not because their Religion teaches them to do so which detests and condemns all such scandalous Partiality and complying with their Duty by halves but because they shut their ears to all good Instruction and chuse rather to follow their own corrupt Appetites than the wholsome Doctrine of their Church XXVIII Of Fasting THE Question here is Whether a Man doth not observe their Churches Command about Fasting who forbears all forbidden things but takes liberty in those which are not forbidden It is not Whether they may not break the Commands of God against Gluttony and Drunkenness but whether they break the Law of the Church about Fasting And notwithstanding what our Author hath said I see no Reason for the Affirmative I do not deny 1. That it is a very indifferent sort of Fasting to abstain from Flesh unless all other sorts of Excesses at the same time be carefully avoided 2. That Excesses on such days are more scandalous because there is a pretence of Fasting 3. That God's Command doth at all times forbid Intemperance Which are the chief things he insists upon But yet this doth not reach the point which is about their Churches Command For their Casuists distinguish Fasting into 1. Natural which is total Abstinence and this is required only in order to receiving the Eucharist 2. Moral which is the same with Temperance or Fasting for Health 3. Ecclesiastical which is defined by them to be An Abstinence from Food forbidden by the Church And if this Definition be true it cannot be broken but by eating what the Church hath prohibited And therefore their Casuists as far as I can find are agreed in these things 1. That a Man may eat a full Meal of what is not forbidden and not break the Churches Precept of Fasting provided Vespers be first said And the later Casuists blame Covarruvias for making any scruple about it If a Mans Excess comes to be a mortal Sin yet for all that saith Reginaldus He shall not be judged as a breaker of his Fast. Nay Lessius goes further and saith He doth not lose the Merit of Fasting Quamvis aliquis multum excedat non solvit Iejunium saith Card. Tolet. And Paulus Zacchias saith This is the common Opinion and he thinks the Intention of the Church is sufficiently answered And so doth Pasqualigus in his Praxis of Fasting 2. A Man may drink Wine or other drink as often as he pleaseth without breaking his Fast. He may toties quoties bibere saith Diana Zach. Pasqualigus who hath written most fully on this Subject shews That it is the general Opinion that no quantity of Wine or other drink tho taken without any necessity is a violation of the Precept of Fasting no not although the Wine be taken for nourishment
be so much rather questioned because those who assert the Pope may dispense go upon this ground Because Circumstances may alter the Obligation of a Vow and when a greater good is to be attained it ceaseth to oblige which to my Apprehension doth not prove the Pope's Power to dispense but the dispensable Nature of the Vows themselves 3. Whether all things of this nature being liable in continuance of time to great Degeneracy and Corruptions and the numbers of such Places being unserviceable either to Church or State it be not in the Power of the King and States of the Kingdom to dissolve and reduce them to ways more suitable to the Conveniences of both As to what he discourses about Councils of Perfection the Distractions of the World the Corruptions of the best Things c. they reach not the main Points but are only general Topicks which we are not concerned to debate XXXI Of Wicked Principles and Practices HE is Member of a Church which is called Holy but in her Doctrine and Practices so Foul and Abominable that whosoever admires her for Sanctity may upon the same grounds do homage to Vice it self Has ever any Society since Christ's time appear'd in the World so black and deform'd with hellish Crimes as she Has not she out-done even the most Barbarous Nations and Infidels with her Impieties and drawn a scandal upon the name of Christian by her unparallel'd Vices Take but a view of the horrid Practices she has been engag'd in of late years consider the French and Irish Massacres the Murders of Henry III. and IV. Kings of France the Hoâ—y League the Gun-powder Treason the Cruelty of Queen Mary the Firing of London the late Plot in the Year 1678. to subvert the Government and destroy His Majesty the Death of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey and an infinite number of other such-like Devilish Contrivances And then tell me whether that Church which has been the Author and Promoter of such barbarous designs ought to be esteem'd Holy and respected for Piety and Religion or rather be condemn'd for the Mysteries of Iniquity the Whore of Babylon which hath polluted the Earth with her Wickedness and taught nothing but the Doctrine of Devils And let never so many Pretences be made yet 't is evident that all these Execrable Practices have been done according to the known Principles of this Holy Church and that her greatest Patrons the most Learned of her Divines her most Eminent Bâ—shops her Prelates Cardinals and even the Popes themselves have been the chief Managers of these Hellish Contrivances And what more convincing Argument that they are all well approved conform to the Religion taught by their Church HE is Member of a Church which according to the ninth Article of the Apostles Creed he believes to be Holy and this not only in Name but also in Doctrine and for witness of her Sanctity he appeals to her Councils Catechisms Pulpits and Spiritual Books of Direction in whâ—ch the main design is to imprint in the Hearts of the Faithful this comprehensive Maxim of Christianity That they ought to love God above all things with their whole Heart and Soul and their Neighbour as themselves And that none flatter themselves with a confidence to be sav'd by Faith alone without living Soberly Iustly and Piously as 't is in the Council of Trent Sess. 6. c. 11. So that he doubts not at all but that as many as live according to the Direction of his Church and in observance of her Doctrine live Holily in the Service of and Fear of God and with an humble confidence in the Merits and Passion of their Redeemer may hope to be receiv'd after this Life into Eternal Bliss But that all in Communion with his Church do not live thus Holily and in the fear of God he knows 't is too too evident there being many in all places wholly forgetful of their Duty giving tâ—emselves up to all sorts of Vice and guilty of most horrid Crimes And though he is not bound to believe all to be Truth that is charg'd upon them by Adversaries there being no Narrative of any such Devilish Contrivances and Practices laid to them wherein Passion and Fury have not made great Additions wherein things Dubious are not improv'd into Certainties Suspicions into Realities Fears and Iealousies into Substantial Plots and downright Lies and Recorded Perjuries into Pulpit nay Gospel-Truths Yet really thinks that there has been Men of his Profession of every rank and degree Learned and Unlearned High and Low Secular and Ecclesiastick that have been scandalous in their Lives wicked in their Designs without the fear of God in their Hearts or care of their own Salvation But what then Is the whole Church to be condemn'd for the vicious Lives of some of her Professors and her Doctrine to stand guilty of as many Villanies as those commit who neglect to follow it If so let the Men of that Society Iudgment or Perswasion who are not in the like circumstance fling the first stone Certainly if this way of passing Sentence be once allow'd as just and reasonable there never was nor ever will be any Religion or Church of God upon the Earth 'T is but reck'ning up the Idolatries Superstitions Cruelties Rebellions Murders of Princes Impieties and other such like Enormities committed by the Iews as they stand recorded in Scripture and 't is immediately prov'd that the Iews were never the chosen People of God nor their Law the Dictates of Heaven 'T is but making a Lift of the Misdemeanours Irregularities Abuses Excesses Treacheries Simony Separation Discords Erroneous Doctrines to be found even in the time of the Apostâ—es and their Followers and they are all effectually prov'd to be the Disciples of Antichrist and that the World's Redeemer had no sooner ascended into Heaven but his Apostles left him and began to set up for Schism and Vice By this way Constantine may be evidently condemn'd for an Heathen because he murdered his Wife and his Son And the Religion of Theodosius be mark'd out for Atheism because by his Order seven Thousand Thessalonians were treacherously Massacred in three hours space without distinction of Sex or Age or the Innocent from the Guilty A confident Undertaker would find no difficulty in proving all this especially if he had but the Gift of exaggerating some things misrepresenting others of finding Authorities and Texts for every idle Story oâ— charging the exâ—ravagant Opinions of every single Author upon the Religion they profess of raking together all the Wickedness Cruelties Treacheries Plots Conspiracies at any time committed by any ambitious Desperado's or wicked Villains And then positively asserting that what these did was according to the Doctrine of that Church of which they were Members and that the true measures of the Sanctity and Goodness of the Church in whose Communion these Men were may be justly taken from the Behaviour of such Offenders But certainly no Man of Reason and Conscience can
allow of such Proceedings No sober Man would ever go to Tyburn and Whetstones-Park to know what is the Religion professed in England according to Law Nor would look into all the Sinks Jakes Dung-hills Common-shores about Town from such a Prospâ—ct to give a true Description of the City Why therefore should the Character of the Church of Rome and her Doctrine be taken only from the loose Behaviour and wicked Crimes of such who thô in Communion with her yet live nâ—t according to her Direction She teaches Holiness of Life Mercy to the Poor Loyalty and Obedience to Princes and the necessity of keeping the Commandments witness the many Books of Devotion and Direction made English for Publick benefit written originally by Papists and great numbers there are God be prais'd who practice this in their Lives And now if there be many also who stop their Ears to good Instruction and following the Suggestion of their own ungovern'd appetites of Pride Ambition Covetousness Luxury c. so lay aside all concern of Salvation and become unchristian both to God and their Neighbour that they are a shame to their Profession Why should the Church be repâ—esented according to the Wickedness of those that neglect her Doctrine and not ratâ—er by the Piety and Exemplar Lives of such as follow it Is not this to deal by her if we may use such a Comparison as 't is generally done by the Sign of St. Dunstan near Temple-Bar on which thô the Saint be drawn almost in the full proportion and there 's no more of the Devil on it besides the reaching towards him with a pair of Tongs yet 't is describ'd only by the name of the Devil-Tavern without the least mention of the Saint And is not this partiallity unjust and these piece-meal Descriptions unreasonable Lâ—t the Character of the Church be given according to what she teaches and not according to the Writings of every positive Opiniator and the Practices of every wicked Liver and then there 's no fear of its coming out so ugly and deform'd Neither leâ— any one pretend to demonstrate the Faith and Principles of the Papists by the Works of every Divine in that Communion or by the Actions of every Bishop Cardinal or Pope For they extend not their Faith beyond the Declarations of General-Councils And standing fast to these they yet own that many of their Writers are too loose in their Opinions that all Bishops and Cardinals are not so edifying as becomes their State and that Popes may have their 〈◊〉 too A Pope is a Temporal Prince keeps a Court has variety of Officers â—bouâ— him And it he has Flatterers and Mis informers too 't is nothing but what all Princes are sensible of but cannot remedy And hence he doubts not but 't is possible he may be engag'd in unlawful undertakings and invite others to the like And are not all other Princes subject to this too But what then These Actions of Popes concern not the Faith of those who are in Communion with them they may throw a scandal indeed upon the Religion but they can never alter its Creed But what need any other return to the numerous Clamours made daily against the wickedness of the Papists 'T is a sufficient vindication of their Chief Pastors and Popes to use the words of a Person of Quality that among two hundred and fifty that have now Successively bore that Charge there are not above ten or twelve against whom their most malicious Adversaries can find occasion of spitting their Venom and that a Challenge may be made to the whole World to shew but the fifth part of so many Successive Governors since the Creation of which there have not been far more that have abus'd their Power And as for their Flock and People owning this Authority 't is true many wicked things have been done by some of them and too many like Libertines neglect the care of their Souls But however the Generallity of them live like Christans few come to them but with their Religion they change also their Manners for the better Few desert them but such who seem to be fall'n out with all Christianity And whosoever will look into any of our Neighbouring Popish Towns as Paris Antwerp Gaunt c. will find in any one of them more Praying more Fasting more receiving the Sacraments more visiting of Prisoners and the Sick more Alms-giving than in any ten Towns of the Reformation XXXI Of Wicked Principles and Practices THE Misrepresenter charges the Church of Rome with many horrid Practices as the French and Irish Massacres the Murders of Two Kings of France the Holy League the Gun-powder-Treason c. And charges these as being done according to the Principles of that Church But in Answer to this he saith 1. In General That the Doctrine of it is holy teaching the Love of God and our Neighbour and that none can be saved by Faith alone In which Doctrine we heartily concur with them 2. That altho many uncertain things pass for certain and false for true yet he cannot deny that all ranks and degrees of men have been corrupted among them being scandalous in their Lives wicked in their Designs without the Fear of God in their Hearts or care of their own Salvation This is a general Acknowledgment but no particular Answer to the things objected 3. That the whole Church is not to be charged for the sake of such villanies Very true unless some Doctrine owned in that Church gave encouragement to them As suppose any should ever have fallen into Rebellion upon the belief of the Deposing Power is not that Doctrine chargeable with the Consequences of it They are extremely to blame who charge a Church with what her Members do in direct Opposition to her Doctrine but it is quite another Case when the main Ground they alledge for their Actions is some allowed Principle in it 4. They are not accountable for the Actions of every Bishop Cardinal or Pope for they extend not their Faith beyond the Declaration of General Councils But suppose General Councils have declared such Doctrines and Popes act but according to them is not their Church then accountable for their Actions 5. There is more Praying and Fasting and receiving the Sacraments more visiting the Prisoners and the Sick more Alms-giving in any of our neighbouring Popish Towns as Paris Antwerp Gant c. than in any Ten Towns of the Reformation And is there more Charity too It doth not appear if they be as ready to censure others and admire themselves as our Author who so freely gives his Judgment about a matter it is impossible for him to know We see no reason to admire or imitate the manner of their Praying and Fasting and receiving the Sacraments for to pray without understanding to fast without Abstinence to receive a maimed Sacrament are things we do not envy them for but althô our Devotion be not so pompous and full of shew yet We
And what then Must therefore S. Francis or S. Dominic or S. Rosa do as great as the Apostles had done What Consequence can be drawn from the Apostles times to latter Ages We do not dispute God's Omnipotency or say his hand is shortned but we must not from thence infer that every thing which is called a Miracle is truly so or make use of God's Power to justify the most incredible stories Which is a way will serve as well for a false as a true Religion and Mahomet might run to Gods Omnipotency for cleaving the Moon in two pieces as well as others for removing a House over the Seas or any thing of a like nature But he saith their Miracles are not more ridiculous and absurd than some in the Old Testament Which I utterly deny but I shall not run out into the examination of this Parallel by shewing how very different the Nature Design and Authority of the Miracles he mentions is from those which are believed in the Roman Church And it had been but fitting as he set down the Miracles of the Old Testament so to have mentioned those of the Roman Church which were to vye with them but this he was willing to forbear for certain good Reasons If most of poor Man's impossibles be none to God as he concludes yet every thing is not presently true which is not impossible and by this way of Arguing there can be nothing objected against the most absurd and idle Fictions of the Golden Legend which all Men of Understanding among themselves not only reject for want of Authority but of Credibility XXXIII Of Holy Water HE highly approves the Superstitius use of many inanimate things and attributes wonderful effects to such Creatures which are but in a very inferiour rank and able to do no such things Holy Water is in great esteem with him so are Blessed Candles Holy Oyl and Holy Bread in which he puts so much conâ—idence that by the Power of these he thinks himself secure from all Witchcraft Inchantment and all the power of the Devil nay that by the help of these seâ—seless Medators he may obtain remission of his Venial or lighter sins And in the use of these things he is taught by his Church to so obstinatley positive as if he had the Authority of Fathers and Scripture to back it when-as there is not the least grain of Reason no hint of Antiquity no Text throughout the Word of God for the defence command or even permission of it HE utterly disapproves all sorts of Superstition And yet is taught to have an esteem for Holy-Water Blessed Candles Holy Oyl and Holy Bread not doubting but that as such Men who have Consecrated themselves to the Service of God in the Preaching the Gospel and Admâ—nistration of the Sacraments have a particular respect due to them above the Laity As Churches Dedâ—cated to God are otherwise to be look'd on than other dwelling Houses So likewise these other Creatures which are particularly deputed by the Prayers and Blessing of the Priest to certain uses for God's own Glory and the Spiritual and Corporeal good of Christians ought to be respected in a degree above other things And what superstitions in the use of them Has not God himself prescrib'd such inanimate things and Holy Men made use of them for an intent above their natural Power and this without any Superstition Was there Superstition in the Waters of Iealousy Numb 5.17 In the Shew-Bread in the Tables of Stone in the Salt us'd by Elijah for sweet'ning the infected Waters in the Liver of the Fish taken by the Angel Raphael for expelling the Devil Was it Superstition in Christ to use Clay for the opening the eyes of the Blind or in the Apostles to impose hands for the bringing down the Holy Ghost upon Christians or to make use of Oyl for the curing of the Sick Mark 6.13 And thô there be no express Command in Scripture for Blessing Water Bread c. yet there is this assurance that every Creature is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer 1 Tim. 4.5 and frequent Promises That God would hear the Prayers of the Faithful Why therefore should he doubt but that these Creatures on which the Blessing of God is solemnly implor'd by the Word of God and the Prayers of the Priest and People for their sanctification are really sanctified according to the assurance of the Apostle and the Promises of God St. Cyril of Ierusalem who liv'd in the Third Century made no question but that as these things whâ—ch are offer'd to Idols tho pure in their own nature are made impure by the Invocation of Devils so on the contrary simple Water is made holy and gets a Sanctity by virtue receiv'd from the Invocation of the Holy Ghost Christ our Lord and his eternal Father Cyr. Catech. 3. St. Augustine was of the same Judgment toucâ—ing the Benediction of Bread affirming that the Bread which the Catechumens did take tho it was not Christ's Body yet it was holy yes and more holy than the Meat wherewith we are nourish'd Aug. Tom. 7. l. 2. de Pecc Mer. Remisâ—c 26. The like is to be seen in the Epistle of St. Alexander who govern'd the Church but fifty years after St. Peter where he declares the Custom even at that time of blessing Water and confirms the Practice of it by his Command And that Water thus bless'd was capable by virtue receiv'd from Heaven of working effâ—cts above its own nature was the Sentiment of Christians in the Primitive times Epiphanius makes early mention Tom. 2. l. 1. cont haer 30. where he relates a passage at length how that Water being blessed in the Name of Iesus and sprinkled upon Fire which by Witchcraft was made unactive and hindred from burning immediately the Enchantment ceas'd and the Fire burn'd as also that a possess'd Person being besprinkled with bless'd Water the Party was immediately cured Theodoret has the like Narration of the Devil hindring fire from burning and how that he was chased away and the Charm dissolv'd by blessed Water being thrown on it lib. 5. Eccles. hist. c. 21. And does not St. Hierom in vit Hilarion p. 323. Paris print make this relation how that Italicus took Water from blessed Hilarion and cast it on his bewitched Horses on his Chariot and the Barriers from whence he us'd to run and that the Charm or Witchery did cease upon the sprinkling this Water so that all cryed out Marnas victis est à Christo Christ hath conquered Marnas the Idol And now there 's no jeering and ridiculing these things will ever make them look like idle Superstitions to one that considers seriously how much they are grounded upon Reason the Word of God Antiquity and the Authority and Practice of the Catholick Church which tho it approves the use of them yet it teaches plainly that there is no Confidence to be put in any thing but only in Iesus Christ and
what power these things have they not of themselves but only from Heaven and by the Invocation of the Name of Iesus who as by his heavenly Blessing he enables us to do things above the power of Nature so also by the Prayers of his Church he blesses these things in order to the working effects above their own natural qualities that by them his Fatherly Benefits may be applâ—ed to us and that so the Faithful may more particularly honour and bless him in all his Creatures XXXIII Of Holy Water THE Misrepresenter charges him with approving superstitious uses of inanimate things and attributing wonderful effects to them as Holy-Water Candles Oyl Bread c. In Answer our Author 1. declares That the Papist truly represented utterly disapproves all sorts of Superstition But it he had designed to have represented truly he ought to have told us what he meant by Superstition and whether any Man who observes the Commands of the Church can be guilty of it 2. He saith That these things are particularly deputed by the Prayers and Blessing of the Priest to certain uses for God's Glory and the Spiritual and Corporal Good of Christians This is somewhat too general but Marsilius Columna Archbishop of Salerno who hath taken most pains in this matter sums them up 1. As to Spiritual they are Seven 1. To fright Devils 2. To remit Venial sins 3. To cure Distractions 4. To elevate the Mind 5. To dispose it for Devotion 6. To obtain Grace 7. To prepare for the Sacrament 2. As to Corporal 1. To cure Barreness 2. To multiply Goods 3. To procure Health 4. To purge the Air from pestilential Vapours And now as our Author saith What Superstition in the use of it He names several things of Gods own appointing to Parallel it as the Waters of Iealousy the Shew-bread the Tables of Stone but the first was miraculous the other had no such effects that we ever heard of Elisha's Salt for sweetning the Water was undoubtedly a Miracle Is the Holy-Water so As to the Liver of the Fish for expelling the Devil in the Book of Tobit he knows the Book is not owned for Canonical by us and this very place is produced as an Argument against it there being no Ground from Scripture to attribute the Power of expelling Devils to the Liver of a Fish either naturally or symbolically Vallesius offers at the only probable account of it that it must be a Divine Power given to it which the Angel Raphael did not discover and yet it is somewhat hard to conceive how this Liver should have such a power to drive away any kind of Devil as it is there expressed unless by a Devil there no more be meant than some violent Disease which the Iews generally believed to arise from the possession of evil Spirits But however here is an Angel supposed who made this known to Tobit but we find not Raphael to discover the virtue of Holy Water against Devils As to Christ using Clay to open the Eyes of the Blind it is very improperly applied unless the same miraculous Power be supposed in it which was in Christ himself And so is the Apostles laying on of Hands and using Oyl for miraculous Cures unless the same Gift of Miracles be in every Priest which consecrates Hâ—ly Water which was in the Apostles And Bellarmine himself confesses That no infallible effect doth follow the use of Holy Water because there is no Promise of God in the case but only the Prayers of the Church But these are sufficient to sanctifie the Water saith our Author And to what end For all the spiritual and corporeal benefits before mentioned Is no promise of God necessary for such purposes as those How can any Church in the World dispose of God's Power without his Will It may appoint significant and decent Ceremonies but it can never appropriate divine Effects to them and to suppose any divine Power in things which God never gave them is in my Opinion Superstition and to use them for such ends is a superstitious use St. Cyril whom he quotes speaks of the Consecration of the Water of Baptism CÃ tech 3. St. Augustine only of a consecrated Bread which the Catechumens had De Peccat Merit Remiss l. 2. c. 26. but he attributes no divine Effects to it Pope Alexanders Epistle is a notorious Counterfeit Those Passages of Epiphanius Theodoret and S. Ierom all speak of miraculous effects and those who had the power of Miracles might sometimes do them with an external sign and sometimes without as the Apostles cured with anointing and without But this is no ground for consecrating Oyl by the Church or Holy Water for miraculous Effects If these Effects which they attribute to Holy Water be miraculous then every Priest must have not only a power of Miracles himself but of annexing it to the Water he consecrates if they be super-natural but not miraculous then Holy Water must be made a Sacrament to produce these Effects ex opere operato if neither one nor the other I know not how to excuse the use of it from Superstition XXXIV Of Breeding up People in Ignorance HE is train'd up in Ignorance and 't is the chief means made use of by his Church for preserving Men in that Communion to hide from them her manifold Mysteries of Iniquity her sottish Supâ—rstitions her un-christian Doctrines by performing all in unknown Tongues and not permitting the poor misled People to look into or understand any thing that they Believe or Profess And by this blindness they are perswaded to embrace such infinite numbers of gross Errors that were but the Vail taken from their eyes but for one half hour and they but permitted to have one fair prospect of their Religion thousands and thousands would daily desert her and come over to the Truth HE has all the liberty encouragement and convenience of becoming learned of any People or Perswasion whatsoever And none that has ever look'd over any Library and found that the greatest numbers and choicest Books of all Sciences have men of his Communion for their Authors None that in his Travels has taken a thorough view of the Universities in Popish Countries of the Sorbon Louvain Salamanca Boloign c. and consider'd their laborious Studies in Philosophy Divinity History the Fathers Councils Scripture c. and besides the Students here has seen how many thousands there are in Religious Houses who free from the disturbances of the World make Virtue and Learning the business of their whole Life will ever lay Ignorance to the charge of the Papists but must in Justice confess that amongst them are to be found as many and as great Scholars as amongst any People or Societies in the World And tho the vulgar and common sort of that Profession understand not Latin yet are not they train'd up in ignorance of their Religion nor led along in blindness but are so provided of Books in their own
whosoever disbelieves one Article of the Catholick Faith does in a manner disbelieve all There being no more hopes of Salvation for one that denies obstinately any one Point of the Catholick Faith thô he believes all the rest then there is for one who keeps Nine of the Commandments with the Breach of the Tenth An obstinate opposition against one Point of Faith and a sin against one Commandment being as certainly damnable as if 't were against all There being the same reason and an equal necessity that the Observance of God'â— Law and the Assent to the Catholick Faith be alike entire and Whole And now being convinc'd that none can believe to Salvation but he that embraces the Catholick Faith thus wholly and entirely by an equal submission to all the Mysteries contain'd in it without opposition to any And being likewise convinc'd that no one can arrive to the true knowledg of this Faith with an assurance of its Integrity but by receiving it as propos'd and believ'd by the Church of Christ Which Church was founded by the Son of God watered with his Blood and by an infallible assistance of the Holy Ghost by which it was to be taught all Truth to the end of the World was secur'd from the danger of being deceiv'd or deceiving others to the consummation of things He does not doubt but as in the Apostles time so also ever since and at present God addeth to his Church daily such as shall be saved Acts 2.47 there being no entire faith necessary to Salvation to be found out of this Church and no possibility as St. Cyprian says that God shall be a Father to any who own not this Church for his Mother But now where and which this Church is and what Society of Men are Members of it among such variety of Pretenders though it may seem a great difficulty to some to distinguish yet to him it is none at all for since there is no other Church besides the Roman Catholick which has had a continued and visible Succession of Bâ—shops and Pastors in all Ages since the Apostles no other that has converted Infidel Nations to Christianity no other that has always preserv'd Peace and Unity amongst its Members all of them speaking the same thing and being perfectly joyn'd together in the same mind and the same judgment no other that by assembling the Elders and Prelates has oppos'd in all Ages Heresies and Schisms and condemn'd all those who not sparing the Flock have spoken perverse things endeavouring to draw away Disciples after them no other that has in obedience to the command of Christ send Apostles amongst Infidels and Unbelievers for the preaching to them the Gospel and instructing them in Christianity and by this way without Arms or Blood have spread their Faith throughout the World no other that by evident and undeniable Miracles have prov'd the truth of her Doctrine no other but what has begun by Separation whose first Preachers have gone out from this the time of their first Preaching and shewing themselves to the World being upon Record and their new Doctrine censur'd and condemn'd by that Church from whence they separated Since I say there 's no other Society or Christian Congregation in the World to which these certain Marks of the Church of Christ does agree 't is evident to him that this is the only true Church that whosoever denies any Article of her Faith denies so much of Christ's Doctrine that whosoever hears her hears Christ and whosoever obstinately and wilfully is separated from her is in the same distance separated from Christ himself and finally that God addeth to this Church daily such as shall be saved Acts 2.47 XXXV Of the Vncharitableness of the Papists THE Missrepresenter as he is called charges this Point home Because they deny Salvation to those who believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith in the Apostles Creed and lead vertuous and good Lives if they be not of their Communion To this the Representer answers in plain terms That this is nothing but what they have learn'd from the Mouth of Christ and his Apostles And to this end he musters up all their Sayings against Iâ—fidels false Prophets Gnosticks Corinthians as thô they were point-blank levelled against all that live out of Communion of the Church of Rome But this is no Uncharitableness but pure zeal and the same the Primitive Church shewed against Hereticks such as Marcion Basilides and Bardesanes who were condemned in the first Age for denying the Resurrection of the dead c. What in the first Age Methinks the Second had been early enough for them But this is to let us see what Learning there is among you But do we deny the Resurrection of the Dead or hold any one of the Heresies condemned by the Primitive Church What then is our Fault which can merit so severe a Sentence We oppose the Church What Church The Primitive Apostolical Church The Church in the time of the four General Councils I do not think that will be said but I am sure it can never be proved What Church then The present Church Is it then damnable to oppose the present Church But I pray let us know what ye mean by it The Universal Body of Christians in the World No No abundance of them are Hereticks and Schismaticks as well as we i. e. All the Christians in the Eastern and Southern parts who are not in Communion with the Church of Rome So that two parts in three of Christians are sent to Hell by this Principle and yet it is no Uncharitableness But suppose the Church of Rome be the only true Church must men be damned presently for opposing its Doctrines I pray think a little better on it and you will change your Minds Suppose a man do not submit to the Guides of this Church in a matter of Doctrine declared by them Must he be Damned What if it be the Deposing Power Yet his Principle is If a Man do not hold the Faith entire he is gone But Popes and Councils have declared this to be a point of Faith therefore if he doth not hold it he must be damned There is no way of answering this but he must abate the severity of his Sentence against us For upon the same Reason he questions that we may question many more And all his Arguments against us will hold against himself For saith he he that disbelieves one Article of Catholick Faith does in a manner disbelieve all Let him therefore look to it as well as we But he endeavours to prove the Roman Catholick Church to be the true Church by the ordinary Notes and Marks of the Church Altho he is far enough from doing it yet this will not do his business For he must prove that we are convinced that it is the true Church and then indeed he may charge us with Obstinate Opposition but not before And it is a very strange thing to me that when their Divines
say that Infidels shall not be damned for their Infidelity where the Gospel hath not been sufficiently proposed to them and no Christian for not believing any Article of Faith till it be so proposed that we must be damned for not believing the Articles of the Roman Faith which never have been and never can be sufficiently proposed to us Methinks such men should study a little better their own Doctrine about the sufficient Proposal of matters of Faith before they pass such uncharitable and unlearned Censures XXXVI Of Ceremonies and Ordinances HIS Church upon the presumption of being Apostolical and Commissioned by Christ has brought in such an infinite number of unnecessary superstitious Ceremonies that the whole exercise of her Religion consists in nothing but a vain Pomp and empty Shew And whereas Christians are commanded by the Apostle to serve the Lord in Spirit and Truth She has made void this Precept and neglecting both Spirit and Truth has restor'd the heavy Yoke of Jewish Rites without the least Authority of the Word of God but rather in express opposition to it has made these her humane Inventions take place of the Divine Law And then besides her Ceremonies what an endless account is there of other Ordinances Institutions Precepts to which she obliges all in her Communion How many are her Fast-days Rogation and Ember-days How many her Festival and Holy-days How many her Injunctions on several degrees of People That Priests shall not Marry that whosoever is in Orders shall be oblig'd to the reciting or singing such and such Offices That Marriage shall not be permitted but at some set times and a multitude of other such respective Commands which have no grounds in Scripture and no other Authority for them besides the decrees of some Popes who for some private Ends and the making themselves great thought fit to lay these burdens upon the People Some being first instituted by Pope Telesporus as the Fast of Lent Some by Calâ—xtus as the Ember-days Some by Pope Nicholas as the Prohibition of Marriage And so all the rest And yet forsooth all these must be observed under pain of eternal Damnation as if God and the Pope commanding were but all one and had Heaven and Hell equally at their disposure HIS Church has appointed a great number and variety of Ceremonies to be used in the Celebrating Divine Service in the Offices and the Administration of the Sacraments She has likewise many Observances Ordinances Constitutions appertaining to Discipline and the Government of the Flock And all these are receiv'd approv'd or instituted by her every one in her Communion does embrace admit and willingly submit to without opposition exception or calling any into question because altho the Particulars thus appointed or commanded be not to be found in Scripture yet there being in the Scripture an express and absolute Command given to the whole Flock of Christ of following and being obedient to those that have thus order'd these things in virtue of that Command they voluntarily and without constraint accept all that is of their Appointment without excepting against any thing unless it be manifestly sinful And this they look on as a Christian Duty belonging to all such that are by God's Pleasure in subjection to the Hâ—gher Powers or under charge And therefore as a Servant having receiv'd a Command from his Master is oblig'd to comply with it in case it be not sinful altho he cannot find the thing then particularly commanded in Scripture the general Precept of Servants being obedient to Masters being sufficient to let him know his Obligation and to remove all scruple And as Châ—ldren are in Duty oblig'd to perform the Will of their Parents upon the Command Obey thy Father and thy Mother whether the thing particularly willed be in Scripture or no so they judge it the Duty of all Christian People to submit without contention to the Ordinances and Constitutions of their Pastors and Prelates altho the things particularly order'd by them be not express'd in Scripture it being a sufficient ground for this their Submission and Obedience that God has given them a General Command Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your Souls as they that must give account Hebrews 13.17 Remember them which have the Rule over you who have spoken to you the Word of God whose Faith follow Hebrews 13 7. So that to them it seems a very fallacious rule leading to all Confusion and unchristian Comentions viz. That the Higher Powers our Superiours Pastors and Prelates are not to be obeyed but only in such things as are express'd in Scripture and as for any other Particulars whosoever upon Examination cannot find what is commanded by them in Holy Writ may lawfully refuse Submission nay he is oblig'd to resist For however this seems to bear much of the Word of God in the face of it yet certainly 't is wholly destructive to it and under pretence of adhering close to the Scripture undermines the very Author of it This the Primitive Christians understood so well that they detested all such Maxims and following the Advice of the Apostle chose rather to trust their Souls in the hands of those whom God had plac'd over them by an humble Submission to the Government and a peaceable Obedience to their Decrees than by a presumptuous questioning of every thing and raising vain disputes to take the Rule of the Flock out of the hands of those to whom God had providentially deliver'd it and place themselves Judges over the Church their Elders Prelates and Pastors whom God had commanded them to hear and be in Subjection to So that we never read that they ever pretended to weigh the Ordinances of their Superiors by their own reasoning or to bring them to the Test of the Word of God before the acceptance but alway judg'd it conform to the Word of God that their Governours should Rule and they Obey Thus when the Apostles observ'd the Sunday instead of the Sabbath and met together at Pentecost we don't read that the Faithful then began to turn over their Bibles to find a Command for these particulars but with a prompt Obedience readily followed them in the Observance So when Abstinence from Blood and strangled Meats was order'd by the Elders assembled at Ierusalem Acts 15. the multitude of Believers having heard the Decree never murmur'd at it or call'd it into question however seemingly contrary to the intention of Christ who in abrogating the Law of Moses was thought to have cut off all these Obligations but they all rejoyced for the Consolation ib. v. 31. So when St. Paul gave orders to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 11. in what manner and posture they were to behave themselves at Prayers in their Assemblies both Men and Women we don't hear that he was challeng'd by any to shew by what authority of Scripture he thus reprov'd and prescrib'd in these Particulars or by what they
were obâ—ig'd to receive his Prescriptions but with a prompt submission accepted his Orders not doubting but since it was God's Will to place Rulers and Governours over them it must be God's Will that they should be obedient to them in following their Decrees and observing their Constitutions And with this Doctrine of Obedience Humility and Submission all the Primitive Christians were train'd up by the Apostles who zealously laboured by this means to preserve them in Peace and Unity that so they might think all the same thing and be of one mind and one judgment and without Divisions insomuch that there is not any one thing so often repeated in their Writings as Exhortations to this Obedience and Submission See how going through the Cities they deliver'd to them the Faithful the decrees for to keep that were ordain'd by the Apostles and Elders which were at Ierusalem Acts â—6 4. See how St. Paul commands the Thessalonians to hold fast the Traditions they had been taught by word or by Epistle 2 Thess. 2.15 See how he commands the Hebrews Obey them that have the rule over you Remember them which have the Rule over you Heb. 13.7.17 See with what earnestness St. Iohn urges this He that knoweth God heareth us he that is not of God heareth us not 1 Joh. 4.6 hereby know we the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Error And then again does not St. Paul commend the Corinthians for their Obedience Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Ordinances as I deliver'd them to you 1 Cor. 11.2 And then having given them directions as to their Behaviour in their Assemblies he adds But if any man seem to be contentious We have no such custom neither the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11.16 And now it being thus evident that the Church of Christ in the Apostles time was founded and preserv'd by a Submission and Obedience of the Flock to their Pastors the Papists teach and believe that what was taught and commanded by the Apostles to the Faithful then living ought to be receiv'd as a Doctrine necessary for all succeeding Ages and that Submission and Obedience ought to have been as much the Duty of Believers ever since as it was then the Commands and Practice of that time being undoubtedly the best and only Pattern for the Faithful for all times even to the end of the World And they do not only teach this Doctrine of Submission in their Books and Sermons but also observe it in their Lives having in all Ages depended on their Elders and Prelates in all matters touching the Discipline and Government of the Church leaving Rule to those whose Charge and Office it is to Rule and never believing that they who are under Charge and Command expresly by St. Paul to Remember and Obey those who have the Rule over them can upon any pretence whatsoever nay thô an Angel from Heaven should come and Preach otherwise be discharg'd from this Christian Obligation and be exempted from Remembring and Obeying whom thus by God speaking by his Apostle they are Commanded to Remember and Obey And upon this ground it is that in things concerning the Order to be observ'd in the Divine Service in all Ceremonies Holy Rites Ecclesiastical Constitutions and Ordinances they have neither Nill nor Will of their own but always receive and think that the best which is Order'd and Appointed by those to whom by Divine Law they owe this Submission and Obedience and to whom the Ordering and Appointing these things appertains And therefore if these appoint a Day of Humiliation for imploring God's Mercy or averting his Judgments they never scruple to observe it if a day of Thanksgiving in memory of some signal Benefit they likewise Obey If these judge it fit that on every Friday should be commemorated the Death and Passion of our Redeemer in Fasting and command Lent to be observ'd in remembrance and imitation of our Lord 's 40 days Fast in the Desart they think it their obligation to do so If these order such and such days to be set apart and kept holy in Remembrance and Thanksgiving for the Incarnation Nativity Circumcision Resurrection and Ascension of Christ and for other such like Intentions they esteem it sinful to oppose it If these judge it decent that the Faithful shou'd bow at the Name of Iesus stand at the reading of the Gospel prostrate or incline themselves at the Confession If they appoint Tapers and Lamps to be used in Churches to represent our Saviour who came to enlighten the World and Incense to be used to mind the People that their Hearts and Prayers should lâ—ke the Smoak ascend dâ—rectly toward Heaven If in the Administration of the Sacraments in Exorcisms in the Offices and the Celebration of the Mass these determine several Rites and Ceremonies to be observ'd for more Decency greater Solemnity and that by such exteriour helps the minds of the Faithful may be moved to the contemplation of the Sacred Mysteries and rais'd more sensibly to the Apprehension of the Majesty of God in whose Honour all is peâ—form'd they look upon themselves bound to allow and embrace all these things without Reluctance or Opposition always thinking that to be most proper which is instituted by such who have the Rule over them And if any endeavour to raise Disputes and be contentious concerning the Necessity of these Institutions they have no such Custom neither the Churches of God One thing they know to be necessary that is that they should be Obedient and that in the Service of God they must not honour him as the Iews did Isa. 58.13 by doing their own ways finding their own Pleasure and speaking their own words but as Christians are commanded in a true Self-denial a sincere Humility and Obedience submitting to those whom God has left to rule and govern the Flock Neither is there any danger of falling back into the Iewish Law by approving the allow'd Ceremonies of the Church it being certain that in the Abrogation of the Old Law all Ceremonies were not at the same time extinct but only such as were mere Types and Figures of things to come in the New Law which are now fulfill'd Whilst others fit for the raising Devotion and expressing the affections of the Soul and other such ends are still commendably retain'd as lawful and equally necessary now as heretofore such are Kneeling Fasting lifting Hands and Eyes to Heaven Sighing knocking the Breast days of Humiliation Thanksgiving Watching Hair-cloth Singing Impositions of Hands Benedictions using Oyl Spittle Breathing c. all which â—re as lawful convenient and necessâ—ry for Christians as they were for Iews and no more to be neglected because they were us'd in the Old Law than praying meeting Reading the Law Singing Psalms Humility and Obedience c. are to be laid by and disown'd by Christians because they were observed by the Iews especially since these with many others have been
recommended to us by the practice of Christ and his Apostles and of all Primitive Christianity Neither has the use of Holy Ceremonies been wholly disapproved by those of the Reformation The English Profession of Faith publish'd in the year 1562. allows them in the 34 th Article The Bohemick Confession in the 15 th Article Anno 1537. The Augustine Tit. de Miss Anno 1530. as it was penn'd by Melancthon So that since Ceremonies are generally look'd on as commendable and lawful amongst Christians the Papists judge it proper to those who have the Rule to Order and Dispose of them and declare to the Flock how when and where they are to be observed And if they who govern judge fit to oblige the Faithful to the observance of any in particular they teach that it is the Duty of the Flock to Obey Things indifferent after such Commands being no longer of choice but necessary and no less obliging than the Commands of a Father to his Child where in case the thing be not apparently sinful 't is no Perswâ—sion of the thing being superfluous can excuse an obstinate denial from Disobedience It being more safe and Christian like for all that are under any Government whether Natural Ecclesiastical or Civil to perform and comply with such things as they judge in their own private Sentiments Unnecessary mâ—rely upon the account of being Commanded than upon such considerations to disturb the Order of Government and fly in the Face of Lawful Authority than which nothing is more opposite to the Principles of Christianity and destructive of all Humane Society And upon these grounds it is that the Papists founding themselves upon the sure Foundation of Huminity and Obedience have in all Ages acknowledged Overseers and Rulers over them to watch and feed the Flock to whom God hath given Power there being no Power but of God and that whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation Romans 13.1 2. XXXVI Of Ceremonies and Ordinances HIS Discourse on this Head is against those who refuse to obey their Superiours in things not expressed in Scripture which is no part of our Controversie with them But yet there are several things about their Ceremonies we are not satisfied in As 1. The mighty number of them which have so much muffled up the Sacraments that their true face cannot be discerned 2. The Efficacy attributed to them without any promise from God whereas we own no more but decency and significancy 3. The Doctrine that goes along with them not only of Obedience but of Merit and some have asserted the Opus Operatum of Ceremonies as well as Sacraments when the Power of the Keys goes along with them i. e. when there hath been some Act of the Church exercised about the matter of them as in the Consecration of Oyl Salt Bread Ashes Water c. XXXVII Of Innovations in Matters of Faith HIS Church has made several Innovations in matters of Faith and howsoever she lays claim to Antiquity with a pretence of having preserv'd the Doctrine of the Apostles inviolable and entire yet 't is evident to any serious Observer that the greatest part of her Belief is mere Novelties that bearing date from Christ or his Apostles but only from some of her own more modern Synods There scarce having pass'd any Age yet wherein there has not in these Ecclesiastical Mints been coyn'd New Articles which with the counterfeit stamp of Christ and his Apostles are made to pass for Good and Currant amongst his credulous and undiscerning Retainers And besides these what a great number of Errors have been introduc'd at other times how many did Pope Gregory bring in and how many the Ignorance of the Tenth Age So that if we compare the Church of Rome now with the Primitive times of the first three or four hundred years there are no two things so unlike she is a Garden now but quite overgrown with Weeds she is a Field but where the Tares have perfectly choaked up the Wheat and has little in her of Apostolical besides the Name HIS Church has never made any Innovation in Matters of Faith what she believes and teaches now being the same that the Catholick Church believ'd and taught in the first three or four Centuries after the Apostles And though in most of her General Councils there has been several Decisions touching Points of Faith yet can no one without an injury to truth say that in any of these has been coin'd new Articles or Christians forced to the acceptance of Novelties contrary to the Scripture or ancient Tradition These have only trodden in the Apostles steps as often as they have been in the like circumstances with them doing exactly according to the Form and Example left to the Church by those perfect Masters of Christianity And therefore as the Apostles in their Assembly Acts 15. determin'd the Controversie concerning the Circumcision and proposed to the Faithful what was the Doctrine of Christ in that point of necessity to be believ'd of which till that Decision there had been rais'd several Questions and Doubts but now no longer to be questioned without the Shipwrack of Faith So in all succeeding Ages the Elders of the Church to whom the Apostles left their Commission of watching over the Flock in their Councils have never scrupled to determine all such Points which had been controverted amongst the Brethren and to propose to them what of necessity they were to believe for the future with Anathema pronounced against all such as should presume to preach the contrary Thus in the year 325. the first Nicene Council declar'd the Son of God to be Consubstantial to his Father against the Arians with an Obligation on all to assent to this Doctrine though never till then propos'd or declar'd in that Form Thus in the year 381. the Holy Ghost was declar'd to be God against Macedonius and his Followers in the first Constantinopolitan Council And in the first Ephesin Anno 431. Nestorius was condemned who maintain'd two Persons in Christ and that the blessed Virgin was the Mother of God with a Declaration That both these Tenets were contrary to the Catholick Faith In the second Nicene Council Anno 787. Image-breakers were Anathematiz'd And so others at other times and at last in the Council of Trent was declar'd the Real Presence Transubstantiation Purgatory the lawfulness of the Invocation of Saints of keeping Holy Images c. against Luther Calvin Beza c. And now tho in all these and the other General Councils the Persons condemned took occasion from these New Declarations to cry out Novelties Novelties to fright the People with the noise of new coin'd Articles and that the inventions of Men were impos'd on them for Faith Yet 't is evident that these New Declarations contain'd nothing but the Antient Faith and that there had never been any such Declarations made had not the Doctrine propos'd in them
being oppos'd and contradicted by some seducing Spirits who going out from the Flock endeavour'd by making Divisions to draw numbers after them So that the new Proposal of a Tenet is but a fallacious proof of the Doctrine being lately invented but a good Argument of its being lately oppos'd 'T is certain from Scripture Acts 15. that the Apostles had never declar'd the non-necessity of Circumcision had not certain men come down from Iudea and taught the Brethren the contrary And that the Consubstantiality of the Son had never been defin'd by the Nicene Fathers had not Arius with his Followers oppos'd this Catholick Doctrine And as certain it is that the Council of Trent had been altogether silent as to Transubstantiation Praying to Saints Purgatory c. had not Luther Calvin and their Disciples once professors of this Doctrine gone out from the Flock and upon the presumption of a New Light eâ—deavour'd to perswade the Faithful that these Tenets then believ'd by the whole Christian World were no longer to be own'd but to be quite thrown by as Antichristian and Diabolical 'T was this oblig'd the Pastors to watch and take care of their Flock and therefore not flying away as the Hireling does when the Wolf catcheth and scattereth the Sheep they assembled together in a Body and declar'd to all under their charge that they ought not to follow strangers that howsoever they came pretending to the Shepherd's voice yet since they came not by the door into the Sheepfold but climbing up some other way they were no Shepherds but Thieves and Robbers such whose business was not to feed but to steal kill and destroy 'T was this made them encourage all under their care not to waver but to stand fast and hold the profession of their Faith and notwithstanding all pretences by no means to suffer themselves to be deluded and led away with strange Doctrine and that they might the better secure them from falling into Errors they gave them a Draught of their Christian Doctrine especially of all those points which these modern self commissionated Apostles did preach against and endeavour to undermine particularly declaring to them the Faith they had been bred up in which they had receiv'd from their Forefathers and been deriv'd even from the Apostles Securing them that whatsoever was contrary to this was Novelty and Error And now in the Pastors declaring this to the Faithful where was the Innovation The Council did nothing but propose fully and explicately what before their meeting was the Doctrine of all Christendom and had been so amongst the Primitive Fathers 'T was they made Innovation who preach'd contrary to the Doctrine thus believ'd and receiv'd which Luther was not asham'd to own himself guilty of plainly acknowledging that He seperated from the whole World But it seems that the whole World was then corrupted and the Religion then every where profess'd was overgrown with Superstitions Errors and Abominations such as had crept into the Church some five Hundred Years before some nine Hundred and some a Thousand and 't was from these Luther seperated intending to Reform Christianity and bring it to the purity of the Primitive times of the first three Hundred Years And was it not very strange now that so many gross Fooleries idle Superstitions and even down-right Idolatry should câ—eep into a Church and spreading it self through all Nations infect the whole World becoming the publick profession of Christendom for so many hundred Years and be confirm'd and establish'd by the Laws of every Kingdom and that no body should take notice of any such thing either at its first Rise or in all its progress of so many Years Insomuch that had not Luther made the Discovery 't is likely we should never have come to the knowledge of these Thousand Years Errors and Corruptions No thinking Man certainly but judges it impossible that the very Fundamentals of Christianity should be shaken and the Religion planted by the Apostles turned into Idolatry and yet that no Leaned Man should any where appear to contradict these Abominations no Zealous Pastors to withstand them no pious Princes to oppose them History sufficiently satisfies any Curious Reader that from the first planting of the Church there has been in no Age any Man yet that has preach'd any Heterodox and Erroneous Tenets and by introducing Novelties has endeavour'd to infect the minds of the Faithful with Heresie and Superstition but immediately have stood up Virtuous and Learned Men in defence of the Truth in their Writings and Sermons publickly confuting and condemning the Errours and giving an Alarm to the World to beware of such Deceivers and their wicked Doctrine and withal never omitting to Record their Names to Posterity with an account of the Year when they began to Preach under what Emperours and what was the occasion of their Revolt Was not all this and even more done against Arius How many appear'd against the Manichees How many against the Donatists against the Novatians against the Macedonians the Nestorians the Eutychians the Pelagians the Berengarians c. So that never any thing has made so much noise in the World so many commotions so many disturbances nothing as been so impossible to be carryed on with secresie and silence as the broaching any new Heresie the making a Schism the alteration of Religion the starting up of some new Society and Pretenders to Reformation What Tumults did all the fore-mentioned Apostles raise disturb'd at the Doctrine of Mahomet and the crying up the Alcoran What Stirs and Commotions at the Reformation of Church and Faith pretended by Luther Zwinglius and Calvin How then can it be judg'd in the least probable that great variety of erroneous Tenets and Antichristian Doctrine should be introduc'd by the Papists contrary to the sense and belief of all Christianity either in the fourth fifth sixth or tenth Century and yet that there should not be the least dâ—sturbance occasion'd by it not tumults or opposition but all done with so much quietness in such a profound Peace and Silence that had it not been for the News brought some Ages after we had never suspected the Alteration And is this possibâ—e Is it possible that the whole Câ—ristian World should change their Religion both as to the Internal Belief and external Profession and exercise of it and no body be sensible of the change so as to withstand the Abomination or to transmit to Posterity even so much as the least word of its beginning or propogation Let any man upon some consideration tell me whether it be possible that this one little Kingdom of England should fall from this pure Apostolical Doctrine it now professes into down right Popery or any other way alter the whole Scheme of its Religion and have the Alteration coâ—firmed by several Acts of Parliament and continue in the publick Exercise of it for a thousand five hundred or even one hundred years and yet no one in this Kingdom or out
call him to any account for any thing he has done although he should chance to die without the least remorse of Conscience or Repentance for his sins HE believes it damnable to hold that the Pope or any other Power in Heaven or Earth can give him leave to commit any sins whatsoever Or that for any Sum of Mony he can obtain an Indulgence or Pardon for sins that are to be committed by him or his Heirs hereafter He firmly believes that no sins can be forgiven but by a true and hearty Repentance But that still there is a Power in the Church of granting Indulgences which concern not at all the Remission of sins either Mortal or Venial but only of some Temporal Punishments remaining due after the Guilt is remitted So that they are nothing else but a Mitigation or Relaxation upon just causes of Canonical Penances which are or may be injoyn'd by the Pastors of the Church on penitent sinners according to their several degrees of demerit And this he is taught to be grounded on the Judiciary Power left by Christ in his Church of binding and loosing whereby Authority was given to erect a Court of Conscience to assign Penalties or release them as circumstances should reguire And this Authority he knows S. Paul plainly own'd 2 Cor. 2.6 where he decreed a Penance Sufficient says he to such a man is this punishment And 2 Cor. 2.10 where he released one For your sake speaking of the Penance injoyn'd the incestuous Corinthian I forgive it in the Person of Christ. And what Mony there is given at any time on this account concerns not at all the Pope's Coffers but is by every one given as they please either to the Poor to the Sick to Prisoners c. wherefore they judge it most Charity And tho' he acknowledges many abuses have been committed in granting and gaining Indulgences through the default of some particular Persons yet he cannot imagine how these can in Justice be charg'd upon the Church to the prejudice of her Faith and Doctrine â—specially since she has been so careful in the retâ—enching them As may be seen by what what was done in the Council of Trent Dec. de Indulg cum potestas VIII Of Indulgences 1. THey must be extreamly ignorant who take the Power of Indulgences to be a Leave from the Pope to commit what Sins they please and that by virtue thereof they shall escape Punishment for their Sins without Repentance in another World Yet this is the sense of the Misrepresentation which he saith is made of it And if he saith true in his Preface That he hath described the Belief of a Papist exactly according to the apprehension he had when he was a Protestant He shews how well he understood the Matters in difference when I think no other Person besides himself ever had such an apprehension of it who pretended to be any thing like a Scholar 2. But now he believes it damnable to hold that the Pope or any other Power in Heaven or Earth can give him leave to commit any Sins whatsoever or that for any Sum of Mony he can obtain any Indulgence or Pardon for Sins that are to be committed by him or his Heirs hereafter Very well But what thinks he of obtaining an Indulgence or Pardon after they are committed Is no such thing to be obtained in the Court of Rome for a Sum of Mony He cannot but have heard of the Tax of the Apostolick Chamber for several Sins and what Sums are there set upon them Why did he not as freely speak against this This is published in the vast Collection of Tracts of Canon Law set forth by the Popes Authority where there are certain Rates for Perjury Murder Apostacy c. Now what do these Sums of Mony mean If they be small it is so much the better Bargain for the Sins are very great And Espencaeus complains that this Book was so far from being called in that he saith the Popes Legats renerred those Faculties and confirmed them It seems then a Sum of Mony may be of some consequence towards the obtaining Pardon for a Sin past tho' not for a Licence to commit it But what mighty difference is there whether a Man procures with Mony a Dispensation or a Pardon For the Sin can hurt him no more than if he had Licence to commit it 3. He doth believe there is a Power in the Church to grant Indulgences which he saith concern not at all the Remission of Sins either mortal or venial but only of some temporal Punishments remaining due after the Guilt is remitted Here now arises a material Question viz. Whether the Popes or the Representer be rather to be believed If the Popes who grant the Indulgences are to be believed then not only the bare Remission of Sins is concerned in them but the plenary and most plenary Remission of Sins is to be had by them So Boniface the 8 th in his Bull of Iubilee granted Non solum plenam largiorem imo plenissimam veniam peccatorum If these words had no relation to Remission of Sins the People were horribly cheated by the sound of them In the Bull of Clement the 6 th not extant in the Bullarium but published out of the Vtrecht Manuscript not only a plenary Absolution from all Sins is declared to all persons who died in the Way to Rome but he commands the Angels of Paradise to carry the Soul immediately to Heaven And I suppose whatever implies such an Absolution as carries a Soul to Heaven doth concern Remission of Sins Boniface IX granted Indulgences à Poenâ à Culpâ and those certainly concerned Remission of Sins being not barely from the temporal Punishment but from the Guilt it self Clement VIII whom Bellarmine magnifies for his care in reforming Indulgences in his Bull of Iubilee grants a most plenary Remission of Sins and Vrban the 8 th since him not only a Relaxation of Penances but Remission of Sins and so lately as A. D. 1671. Clement the 10 th published an Indulgence upon the Canonization of five new Saints wherein he not only grants a plenary Indulgence of Sins but upon invocation of one of these Saints in the point of Death a plenary Indulgence of all his Sins And what doth this signifie in the point of Death if it do not concern the Remission of Sins 4. Indulgences he saith are nothing else but a Mitigation or Relaxation upon just Causes of Canonical Penances which are or may be enjoyned by the Pastors of the Church on penitent Senners according to their several degrees of Demerits If by Canonical Penances they mean those enjoined by the Penitential Canons Greg. de Valentia saith This Opinion differs not from that of the Hereticks and makes Indulgences to be useless and dangerous things Bellarmin brings several Arguments against this Doctrine 1. There would be no need of the Treasure of the Church which he had proved
occasions of mentioning it if ever Christ had instituted a Headship in the Church gâ—ven it to S. Peter and his Successors in the See of Rome 19. For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's death till he come 1 Cor. 15.26 The Apostle speaking to all Communicants plainly shews that the Institution of Christ was That all should partake of both Kinds and so to continue to do as long as this Sacrament was to shew forth the Death of Christ viz. till his Second coming And there is no colour for asserting the Christian Church ever looked on observing Christs Institution in this matter as an indifferent thing no not for a thousand years after Christ. Altho the Practice and the Obligation are two things yet when the Practise was so agreeable to the Institutâ—on and continued so long in the Church it is hardly possible for us to prove the sense of the Obligation by a better way than by the continuance of the Practise And if some Traditions must be thought binding and far from being indifferent which want all that Evidence which this practise carries along with it How unreasonable is it in this Case to allow the Practise and to deny the Obligation 20. And whom he justified them he also glorified Rom. 8.30 But whom God justifies they have the Remission of their Sins as to Eternal Punishment And if those who are thus justified must be glorified what place is there for Purgatory For there is not the least intimation of any other state of Punishment that any who are justified must pass through before they are admitted to Glory We grant they may notwithstanding pass through many intermedâ—aâ—e trials in this World but we say where there is Justification there is no Condemnation but where any part of guilt remains unremitted there is a Condemnation remaining so far as the punishmâ—nt extends And so this distinction as to Eternal and Temporal Pains as it is made the Foundation of Purgatory is wholly groundless and therefore the Doctrine built upon it can have no Foundation in Scripture or Reason 21. I will pray with the Spirit and I will pray with the Understanding also 1 Cor. 14.15 What need this Praying with the Understanding if there were no necessity of attending to the sense of Prayers For then praying with the Spirit were all that was required for that supposes an attention of the Mind upon God And I can hardly believe any Man that thinks with Understanding can justifie praying without it especially when there are Exhortations and Invitations to the People to joyn in those Prayers as it is plain there are in the Roman Offices 22. Then Peter opened his mouth and said Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of Persons but in every Nation he that feareth God and worketh Righteousness is accepted with him Acts 10.34 35. Whereby we perceive that God doth not limit the possibility of Salvation under the Gospel to Communion with the See of Rome for if S. Peter may be believed the capacity of Salvation depends upon Mens fearing God and working Righteousness and it is horrible Uncharitableness to exclude those from a possibility of Salvation whom God doth not exclude from it 23. That ye should earnestly contend for the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints Jude v. 3. Therefore all necessary Doctrines of Faith were at first delivered and whatever Articles cannot be proved to have been delivered by the Apostles can never be made necessary to be believed in order to Salvation Which overthrows the additâ—onal Creed of Pius IV. after the Council of Trent and puts them upon the necessity of proving the Universal Tradition of those Doctrines from the Apostolical Times and when they do that we may think better of them than at present we do for as yet we can see neither Scripture nor Reason nor Antiquity for them THus I have Represented that kind of Popery which our Author who complains so much of Misrepresenting allows and I have in short set down how little ground we have to be fond of it nay to speak more plainly it is that we can never yield to without betraying the Truth renouncing our Senses and Reason wounding our Consciences dishonouring God and his Holy Word and Sacraments perverting the Doctrine of the Gospel as to Christ's Satisfaction Intercession and Remission of Sins depriving the People of the Means of Salvation which God himself hath appointed and the Primitive Church observed and damning those for whom Christ died We do now in the sincerity of our Hearts appeal to God and the World That we have no design to Mis-represent them or to make their Doctrines and Practâ—ses appear worse than they are But take them with all the Advantages even this Author hath set them out with we dare appeal to the Judgments and Consciences of any impartial men whether the Scripture being allowed on both sides our Doctrines be not far more agreeable thereto than the New Articles of Trent which are the very Life and Soul of Popery Whether our Worship of God be not more suitable to the Divine Nature and Perfections and the Manifestations of his Will than the Worship of Images and Invocation of Fellow-Creatures Whether the plain Doctrine of the necessity of Repentance and sincere Obedience to the Commands of Christ do not tend more to promote Holiness in the World than the Sacrament of Penance as it is delivered and allowed to be practised in the Church of Rome i. e. with the easiness and efficacy of Absolution and getting off the Remainders by Indulgences Satisfactions of others and Prayers for the Dead Whether it be not more according to the Institution of Christ to have the Communion in both Kinds and to have Prayers and the Scriptures in a Language which the People understand And lastly whether there be not more of Christian Charity in believing and hoping the best of those vast Bodies of Christians who live out of the Communion of the Church of Rome in the Eastern Southern Western and Northern Parts than to pronounce them all uncapable of Salvation on that Account And therefore out of regard to God and the Holy Religion of our Blessed Saviour out of regard to the Salvation of our own and other Souls we cannot but very much prefer the Communion of our own Church before that of the Church of Rome But before I conclude all I must take some notice of his Anathema's And here I am as much unsatisfied as in any other part of his Book and that for these Reasons 1. Because he hath no manner of Authority to make them suppose they were meant never so sincerely And if we should ever object them to any others of that Church they would presently say What had he to do to make Anathema's It belongs only to the Church and the General Councils to pronounce Anathema's and not to any private Person whatsoever So that if he would have