broach Heresyes impugn her defend themselves with the same principles I am now arrived at the end of this real or pretended Conference without omitting any one material point of it I hope I haue given reasonable satisfaction of which others will judge more impartially then my selfe if I am mistaken by judging too favourably of my owne labours my replyes be found vnsatisfactory J desire that defect be charged on my weakenesse not on the cause I defend which is invincible being secured by the promise of Christ from all possibility of errour for Against it the gates of Hell shall never prevayle I haue given a reason in the preface why I take no notice of the Father's answers as they are couched in this Relation My intention is only to defend the Church from the Objections of the Learned Doctor To which it is enough to shew as I think I haue don that his Premisses are false his Jllations incoherent his whole discourse not convincing Thus Wisdome is justified of her children Mat. 11.19 THE SECOND BOOK A REVISION OF THE ARGVMENT FROM SENSES AGAINST TRANSVBSTANTIATION THE PREFACE I Never began to read any Treatise with greater Horrour nor ended with greater Indignation than this which J now come to review Horrour to see doubts of divine Doctrine submitted to the depositions of facultys common to Beasts a jury of the Senses impanelled to decide controversys of Faith set on a throne to judge the judg of the world determine the meaning of the words of eternal Truth of divine veracity althô they are vncapable of vnderstanding the words of the meanest vnderstanding most illiterate Pesant I expect shortly to see some other appeal to Beasts seing many of the better sort of these surpasse man as to quicknesse of Senses which in them are much more perfect then in most if not al men therefore may be sayd to be more competent judges of the objects of Senses then men can be Indeed Seducers proficiunt in peius wax worse worse 2. Tim. 2.13 it is not so great a step from the Senses of men to those of Beasts which are of the same Species are rather more than lesse perfect in their kind J as it is from the Church directed by the Holy Ghost for our jnstruction in Faith to Carnal senses That having something of divine by reason of the Holy Ghost assisting these being meere Corporal below all that hath any thing of Reason A fit judge indeed for such a Church as the Protestant is My horrour changed into Indignation when I heard the Verdict brought in by this Iury the Sentence pronounced by this Vmpire this Brutish judge yet from such a Iudg little lesse could be hoped for in such a matter by which the Scripture is silenced Tradition trampled vnder foot Fathers rejected the Practice Faith of the whole Catholick Church condemned the Communion with all Faith full all the Catholick Church renounced a horrid execrable Schisme authorized And all this vpon the deposition of so vile a witnesse by the Sentence of so contemptible a judg as Carnal sense And this Sentence accepted of recommended by a learned Doctor of divinity a pretended Ryght Reverend Bishop Is Christianity is Divine Faith brought to this Yet J find one sign of Modesty vnlesse it were rather Cunning craftinesse in adorning the stage for this piece of Pageantry disposing for this extravagant judgment that there is ether no mention at all of the grounds of Catholick Faith in this treatise or else it is so silent low a mention that it is scarce perceptible For had you set before the eyes of your Readers the practice of the Church the Testimonys of Fathers the decrees of councils the written vnwritten word of God in fine the vnanimous vote of the primitiue present Church averring that to be Christs Body Bloud the Readers would not haue heard the sentence of this mock judg would haue pulled him off the Bench forced him to yeild the victory to Truth For if we Must pull out our eye if it scandalize vs we must shut our eyes stop our cares renounce all our Senses when thy contradict God's expresse word But if by this you made sure of such a sentence as you wisht you discovered the vnjustice of it by not admitting the plea of the contrary party For qui statuit aliquid parte inauditâ alterâ aequum licet statuerit hand aequus fuit This argument is not of the Doctors invention it is as old as the Sacramentarian Heresy Berengarius vsed it so did Zuinglius Calvin F. Stillingfleet G. Burnet And the answer is as common To confute this Treatise it were enough to reprint the 33. Chapter of Anti-Haman so no new reply is necessary Yet least he think himself neglected I will review what he says SECTION V. 1. Ancient Fathers re'yed not on sense 2. S. Paul teaches the senses are not to be relyed on 3. Reason convinces the same SEnses no competent judges in this Controversy Are not our Senses the same now as they were a thousand or sixteen hundred yeares ago Are their objects changed Are not the sensations they cause the same now as then Did not Bread tast like Bread wine like wine than as well as now Are not their colour odour the same at all times And had not men then as much reason to rely on their Senses in framing a judgment of their objects as now Sure they had Now what judgments did Ancients frame of this object in debate Let S. Cyril of Hierusalem speak for all the rest Althô it seemes to be Bread yet it is not Bread Althô it seemes to be wine yet it is not wine Thus this great saint ancient Father delivering Christian Doctrine in a Catechisme So this is not his private sentiment but that of the Church not things of his own invention but of publick Tradition Till then Christians retained a sincere entire veneration for the word of God they harkned indeed to Senses but more to God when these two interfered one saying That is Christ's Body the other it is not such It is Bread they did not hesitate which to follow they easily resolved pronounced in favour of Faith subscribed to the son of God Who had words of life even life everlasting Io. 6.69 Animalis homo non percivit ca quae sunt spiritus Dei c. says the Apostle 1. Cor. 2.14 The natural man as your Translation hath-it Receiues not the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnesse vnto him nether can he know them because they are spiritually discerned Thus the Holy Apostle is not Faith one thing of the spirit of God Is it not of Faith or revealed Truth preached by the Apostle that he speakes in that place Now if Faith be aboue the reach of the whole Natural man how comes it to be below Senses which
as abandon Christ's Body which is the Church according to the expresse words of the Apostle Colos. 1.24 4. Proofe out of Fathers S. Austin l. 4. de Bapt. cont Donat. C. 1. having sayd that the rivers which risse in Paradise watred Mesopotamia Aegipt thô these countryes were not partakers of the happinesse of Paradise so Baptism may be had out of the Church yet could not conveigh eternal Blis but to those who are within It which hath received the keys to bind loose And lib. cont Faustum manich 12. C. 17. Praeter arcam omnis caro c. Out of the Ark all creatures living on the Earth were destroyed by the deluge because out of the Communion of the Church the water of Baptism althô it be the same out as in the Church yet it avayles not to salvation but rather to ruin S. Cyprian hath a long treatise against Schismaticks In it he says they are the work of the devil who finding his Temples abandoned his Altars overturned his sacrifices contemned his rites slyghted his kingdom destroyed by the conversion of the world to Christianity with design to recover his interest on Earth introduced Schismes multiplyed Schismaticks And what opinion he S. Cyprian had of them take in these words Can he retain his Faith who dos not retain the Communion of the Church can any man hope to be in the Church who resists it who abandons the Chair of Peter vpon which the Church is built whosoever leaving the Church cleanes to the Harlot forgoes all promises made to the Church he becomes a stranger a prophane man an enemy God is not a Father to him who ownes not the Church his mother And he assures that nether Faith nor working of miracles nor knowledg of mysteryes not martyrdom it self can entitle a man to eternal life who dyes in a Schism that is out of the Communion of the Church To be short see what the Fathers say severally against the Meletians the Quarto decimans the Novatians the Donatists others With what fervour they plead the necessity of Communion with the Church with what horror they reject the crime of Schism which some think the greatest of crimes My 5. proofe is Remission of sins is necessary to attain Heaven That is not to be found but in the Church Wherefore in the Creed after the Article of the Holy Catholick Church two others are added the Communion of Saints Remission of Sins as being sequels of dependants on that other Which is Calvin's Reflection My 6. Proofe is from the Testimony of such as were actual Schismaticks themselves Calvin l. 4. Instit C. 1. S. 4. says Discamus ex hoc vno matris Elogio quam vtilis sit nobis Eccesiae Communio imo necessaria quando non alius est ad vitam ingressus nisi nos ipsa concipiat in vtero nisi pariat nisi nos alat suis vberibus denique sub custodiâ gubernatione nos teneat donec exuti carne mortali similes erimus Angelis .... Adde quod extra eius gremium nulla speranda est peccatorum remissio nec vlla salus The Church is our Mother out of which title wee may learne how vsefull nay how necessary is our Communion with her seing there is no possibility of attaining to life vnlesse shee conceiues vs in her wombe brings vs forth suckles vs with her breasts protect defends vs till leaving this mortal life we become like vnto Angels .... Out of her bosome no hopes of Remission of Sins nor of salvation Whence he concludes Semper exitialis est ab Ecclesiâ discessio It is always damnable to depart from the Church Thus this grand sower of Schismes the greatest Enemy to Church Communion that ever was whose furious spirit communicated with his writings hath caused more discords Schismes Seditions Rebellions Murthers than all other sects together His followers sometimes wanting Power but never the will to introduce those plagues their ordinary Attendants How odjous this sin is appeares by the industry all Hereticks vse to remoue it from themselves charge it on the Catholicks as knowing it to be of so deformed a nature that nothing can excuse it the stain it leaues of soo deep a dye that a floud of Teares cannot wash it out Thus much to proue the major or first Proposition I passe now to the minor or second 2. That Protestants are out of the tru Church the body of Christ tru Schismaticks is evident Luther their Pratriarck renounced all Communion with the Roman Church nether before nor after communicated with any Church even Schismatick So he separated when he began to Dogmatize from all Christians living for he had not gotten followers consequently had not framed them into a Church Wherefore if ever any one was a Schismatick he was one Such were likewise those who joyned with him in that sinfull separation And he and they continued such till their dying day even when framed into a Congregation for Non firmatur tractu temporis quod ab initio de jure non subsistit Reg. Iuris Processe of time cannot make an Action legal which from the beginning is contrary to law Perseverance in sin is a circumstance which aggravates it it is a Paradox to say that a hainous crime should cease to be such for being long continued as if the devil could become a saint by being obstinate in his wickedness A new way to sanctity vnknown to ancients So my minor is vndeniable So then the first Protestant made a tru Schism those who joined in Communion with him joined in a tru Schisme those who continu in it are in a tru Schisme tru Schismaticks So The guilt of Schisme a sin of the first magnitude lyes at the Protestanes doore they are Say Papists If they liue dye Protestants with out hopes of salvation as living dying in a greivous mortal sin Which is the conclusion of that syllogisme You say 1. that we forced you vpon the Separation by imposing vpon our Communion vnlawfull conditions Which is Gratis dictum sayd without any sufficient proofe for no one point of our faith was ever proved false by you we having much stronger grounds for than you again it So the most you can draw from your reasons is that our doctrine is not absolutely certain whereas nothing can excuse your Schisme but an absolute total certainty that the thing is naught which we enjoine v. c. Prayers to Saints because you ran in to Schisme to avoyd a thing which you know not certainly whether it be good or bad Nay you haue much greater reason to judge good than otherwise 1. for the authority of the past present Church practising it 2. because you rather reproach vs with indiscreet speeches of pious men or some practice of silly women then with the doctrine of the Church defined in our Councils Which shews you haue little to say against our
being vncyp hered by their actions the best interpreters of them Wherefore F. Darcy's argument remaines in force that it is safer to joine with the Catholicks than with the Protestants as it was safer to avoyd Treason to joine with the king than with the Parliament there being no sin in remaining in the Communion of the Catholick Church two great sins Schism Heresy in joining with the Protestants You say that this Reason would proue that in S. Austin's time it was safer to joine with the Donatists than with the Catholicks seing both sides agreed that the Donatists could be saved the Donatists denyed that possibility to the Catholicks Answer you are here grossely mistaken pardon that word for S. Austin never sayd a Donatist remaining such Could be saved nay a great part of his workes against them is employed to proue that they cannot be saved that their Baptism avayles them nothing but serues for their greater damnation Let me beseech you only to open any leafe any page of the several bookes written against them there is none which will not correct that mistake What you should say is only that both sides owned tru Baptism amongst the Donatists which these denyed amongst Catholicks Which argument the Donatists not only myght but did make vse of to pervert Catholicks as you may see in S. Austin L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 3. l. 2. cont Petilianum c. 108. else where To this I answer that such a reason from a Donatist to a Catholick is of no force he having no good ground at all for that reason to rely on therefore denying Baptisme in the Catholick Church only out of a peevishnesse of nature Religion it was by them sayd with no more cause than Quakers had to say Thou art damned when they had nothing else to say Where as Catholicks proue that Assertion of theirs with jrrefragable reason drawn from those two crying sins Schisme Heresy of which we accuse the Protestants these do not nay cannot sufficiently cleere I haue all ready explicated these reasons That those of the Donatists were frivolous is evident for they sayd some Bishops of the Catholick Communion were Traditores had delivered the sacred bookes to the Persecutors that all Catholicks by communicating with them did contract the same guilt had lost the Holy Ghost And hence they inferred there could be no valid Baptisme in the Catholick Communion for those who haue not the Holy Ghost cannot give him to others To which the Catholicks answered 1. that those Bishops accused of that shamefull compliance with the jmperial Edicts against Christians were jnnocent of that crime which was never sufficiently proved vpon them no man ought to be condemned vnlesse the crime be evidently proved against him 2. They answered that althô the persons accused were really guilty yet their personal guilt could not prejudice all Catholicks communicating with them because another man's sin cannot prejudice me vnlesse J make it my own by commanding or perswading approving defending or imitating it Now the Catholicks were so far from being accessory to that pretended sin in another that they detested the sin always condemned it in all persons who were really guilty of it but never could find sufficient grounds to pronounce those accused by the Donatists guilty of it as those would haue them doe They answered 3. that supposing not granting that the Persons accused were really guilty that guilt had infected the whole body of Catholicks by communicating with them yet their Baptism myght be valid this not depending on the Personal sanctity of its Minister but on the justitution promises of Christ the operation of the Holy Ghost Hence S. Austin sayd he did not regard Peter when he Baptizes nor Paul nor Iohn nor Iudas but he considered the Holy Ghost who is the Baptist who ever he be who washes the body pronounces the words as Minister of that Sacrament You se how frivolous the reasons of the Donatists were to deny the validity of Baptism in the Catholick Church Shew that ours are as frivolous J will grant the parity but this you can never doe So our Reason stands good against you that of the Donatists against vs falls to the ground It seemes not discreet in an English Protestant to mention the Donatists there being so great a resemblance betwixt these two schismatical Churchs that they may seem sisters the later to haue copyed the other which appeares by these paralel points 1. Donatists were no where out of one corner of the world Africa Protestants of the Church of Eng. that is such as agree with her in points of Doctrine Hierarchy no where out of England 2. Donatists sayd theirs was the only perfect vnspotted Church you say yours is the only Apostolical Church perfectly reformed c. 3. Those endeavoured to justify their separation with some pretended faults of particular men you to justify yours alleadg some indiscreet devotions of old women and vnwary words of some otherwise pious Authours 4. Those appealed to some parts of scripture which you vse against vs And the Fathers proved against them the Vniversality of the Church the necessity of Communion with her out of the same texts which we vse against you 5. Donatists called Rome the seat or Chair of pestilence you call it a Pest-house letter to her R. H. P. 17. the seat of Antichrist 6. Those had their Circumcellions who thought to do God good service in murthering Catholicks you haue some of the same perswasion as appeares by their workes Yet I own a great difference betwixt the old Circumcellions the new ones Those when the toy took them would ether break their own necks or force others to cut their throates the new ones in this do not imitate them they loue too much their mothers sons 7. Those had the Maximianists who left them for the same reasons they had broken off Communion with the Church these haue the Presbiterians others who will not conforme with them vpon the same grounds for which they refuse to conform to the Catholick Church 8. And lastly the Non-conformist donatists made evident to the world that the Donatists had no real ground to break the Catholick Communion by forcing them to solue their owne Objections against the Church of which S. Austin l. 2. Retract C. 35. And your Non conformists with the same successe force you to answer all your pretences against vs breake those weapons with which you haue hitherto fought against the Church Those who will take the paines to examin further the Donatists principles will discover more points of agreement betwixt them you These are sufficient to shew that what is now hath been before will be that as the Church sticks constantly through all ages to the same Faith ways of defending it so Factious spirits seditious Brethren break her Communion turn Schismaticks
things in motion which stir not in rest others which moue shewing substance other then it is colours where there are none As for Hearing some raving haue seemed to heare a consort of musicke A person of my acquaintance was once awakened with an exceeding great noise as if guns had ben shot off at his bed side Calling to mind that there was nether Canon nor any thing else neere which could cause that vast noyse he concluded it must be something in his eare picking it he pulled out a little insect bred in some roses which the day before he had throwne over the tester of his bed which falling from them creeping into his eare with the motion of its little tender feete caused that huge noyse Whither these such like instances of the vncertainty of our Senses sufficiently proue that they were not designed by the Authour of nature God Almyghty for instruments of sciences or to conveygh new notions into our mind or only as Guards or sentinels for our security preservation the only thing they can be designed for in Beasts thô these haue their Senses as perfect as men I leaue to the judgment of others as also to determine whither these examples can ground a judgment in that doubt what I gather hence is That Senses are often mistaken that even about their proper objects That these errours are sometimes corrected by our owne reason or discourse some times by advice or information from other men For example we know that on oare hath a strong consistency of parts to which those of the water yeild as having no consistency at all Whence thô our eyes represent it as broken in the water we conclude their deposition false 1. because water cannot breake a strong oare gently thrust into it 2. because if it were broken by the water it would not be whole when taken out as we see it is Thus reason corrects our eyes By discourse likewise we find that the diameter of the moone is much bigger then a foote as our eyes represent it Now an illiterate Bumpkin who knowes not how the tru quantity of a body seemes lesse by reason of its distance from the eye heare 's one whome he beleiues to be a learned clark say the moone is bigger then all his grounds are he beleiues him vpon his credit corrects that errour of his eyes So he preferres the word of that learned man before his syght 4. It is easy to draw from these premisses the conclusion cheifely intended viz that it is rash presumptuous to alleadge rely on any sensation contrary to the word of God or any revealed Truth For if your reason discourse or the Authority of a man more knowing experienced then our selues are sufficient to make vs frame a judgment different from or contrary to the depositions of the most perfect of our Senses our eyes with much greater reason ought we to suspect their depositions nay reject them when we find them disagree from what God hath attested For J hope the world is not brought as yet by Dogmatizers to such a degree of Libertinisme Atheisme as to say that God either can be deceived him selfe through ignorance or can maliciously deceiue vs. And if the credit of a man be sufficient to reforme the judgments we frame on our sensations shall that of God be lesse regarded Wherefore we must nether prefer Reason before Faith with Socinus nor which is worse Sense before Faith with Dr. Morley but with S. Paul the Church submit both Sense Reason to Faith let God be tru all men lyars And this conclusion holds tru whither one or more Senses bepose the same thing or whither the revealed Truth be confirmed by any Sense or no for if a clowne doth prudently prefer the word of one whome he thinks learned before his syght which no other sense doth or can correct it is certainly prudent to prefer the word of God before all Senses before our reason too SECTION VII How far senses are serviceable to Faith 1. Cartesian doubts destroy science human society 2. Nature of Faith as it comprehends divine humane 3. Two things necessary to a witnesse knowledge veracity 4. Both eminent in the Apostles 5. Miracles very serviceable to Faith 1. ALthô I think the Senses sometimes are often may be mistaken for that reason think we ought to reject their depositions when they are contrary to such things as we haue greater reason to trust to yet J am far from the senselesse errour of those who say no credit at all is du to them or that by them we cannot be sufficiently assured that we haue nether hornes nor a coxcombe on our head that our nose is nether the bille of a cocke nor the trunk of an Elephant or that our Body is flesh not glasse or butter Which is the sentiment of the Authour of the Search of Truth Cartesius teachs vs more to doubt whither we are awake or a sleepe or haue any body at all Which doubts if really admitted not pretended only afford an excellent pretext to all Ignoramus jurys to all malefactours who may pretend the witnesses are not certain of what they depose to all Rebells Refractory subjects who may alleadge their doubts against the King's Proclamation lastly to all knaues who may pretend ignorance of the promises which they haue no mind to keepe So this Cartesian way to knowledge certainty by casting off all former knowledge senses as vncertain lays the Axe at the roote of all Authority dissolues all bonds of commerce amongst men is only good to make Scepticks Atheists too seing it leaues no certain meanes to teach or learne Faith to vnderstand scripture or Councils So that nether Church nor state can stand if these doubts against the depositions of Senses without any ground to the contrary besides the general fallibility of our Senses themselues be really admitted Wherefore when D. Morley often repeates that we deny all authority to our Senses he is either deceived himself or deceiues his reader which is worse for we rely on our Senses where Reason or greater Authority doth not contradict them of both which J haue giuen examples So a man sees Titius kill Simpronius deposes it vpon oath his deposition ought to be admitted notwithstanding all Cartesian doubts So Peter relyes on a promise of Paul to Pay him within such a time 100. l. Paul is bound to make it good Peter may exact it by law 2. Faith taken generally as it comprehends Divine Humane is an Assent giuen to a thing as Tru vpon the credit of another In the first operation of our mind which consists of single thoughts called in our schooles Simple Apprehensions there can nether be Truth nor Falshoode these being propertyes of combined thoughts which are called Propositions these are the second operation of our mind for
gathered into stackes or the Atlandick Ocean by ruming into halfe a dozen Fish-ponds What corner in all the Kingdome without some of your ministry before the troubles How then did this mysterious Dispersion spread them some of them travelled it is tru but haply as many did so before what Seeds did they sow abroade You your self were so wary as not to speake of Religion till you had a Iesuits hand word that it would not be ill taken A broade then you did not sow those seedes Did you sow them in England who sowed the Seedes of Treason falshood of which there was such store that it overrun the Nation are not as yet weeded out Were the Ministers negligent in sowing those good seedes before the war Or was their labour industry lost And how was it so successefull after the wars that it should be a work of Providence But you thought it honourable that Providence should appeare in the concernes of your Ministry so you bring it in without well considering to what intent purpose 5. D. M. p. 18. Begins to excuse the Bishops neglect of Excommunication all the time of the troubles Vpon which I aske him some questions Haue not the Bishops Power to excommunicate Js not that Power to be vsed against obdurate sinners Were there none such from 1640. till 1650 Sure there were How comes this censure to be forgotten The Parliament say you p. 21. could not be excommunicated Ryght but the Persons in of the Parliament myght if the censure did not bring them to their wits nor restore them to their duty it would haue fryghted many well meaning men who adhered to the others innocently Which is one effect of censures 1. Trin. 5.20 Vt caeteri timorem habeant D. M. p. 22. We would not cast our Pearls vnto swine nor our holy things to dogs p. 26. nor expose Christ to contempt who sayth who so ever despiseth you despiseth me Rev. A pretty pretext for all hen-harted Prelates The Apostles Fathers were of a far different opinion let one speake for all Non calcatur qui persecutionem patitur sed qui persecutionem timendo infatuatur Aug. l. 1. de serm D. in mon. c. 6. Heis not despised who suffers persecution but who through Feare of persecution is infatuated so as to neglect his duty Had the Apostles primitiue Bishops been so timorously prudent Paganisme had never been destroyed Semen est sanguis Christianorum says Tertullian Plures efficimur quoties metimur Our Bloud is seed our number encreases by our being mowed downe with your swords One graine falls hundreds grow vp One Christian is martyred thousands of Pagans embrace his faith the remnant honour Christ his Vicegerents even when they persecute them But this lesson is not learnt in the Protestant Church D. M. p. 22. Thirteene Bishops made a trial of their Authority when they made a solemn publick Protestation against the forcible keeping of them out of the House of Peeres were for that impeached of Hygh Treason clapt vp in the Tower Rev. What is this to the purpose Is Protestation an Episcopal Act Cannot meere lay men enter a Protestation Is your seate in the house of Peeres of Divine Ryght Shew the canon of a General Council or a text of Scripture that ground either of these two things If you can shew none no wonder the thing should not succeede which is not of your Ecclesiastical Function But how comes that concerne for your seate in Parliament to be greater than for all other things how sacred soever You see Faith destroyed by Heresy you are silent the Church torne in pieces by Schismes you are silent the Royal Power vndermined by Factions the King 's sacred person endangered by Seditions affronted by Insolent varlets souls poysoned with damnable opinions you are silent You are debarred sitting in the house of Peeres you cry out so loud as to provoke the Rebells to shut you vp in a Cage Js this seate of greater importance than souls than the King's person than Royal Authority than the Church than Faith D. M. p. 24. The Bishops thought they were obliged not to draw that sword of Excommunication to cut nothing but the Ayre with it or by striking on a Rocke to blunt or breake the Edge of it Rev. A straw is as good as such a sword which must strike only the Ayre or it will fly in pieces Oh but we must not strike Rockes Are then all the children of your Church as insensible of your censures as a Rocke of the stroke of a sword If so whose is the fault but yours who haue the breeding of them D. M. p. 25. By Excommunication they had exposed not only their Persons but their Order it self to be ruined for who can tell whither those who imprisoned some for the Protestation would not haue taken away their liues if they had interdicted the houses of Parliament and excommunicated their adherents And then what would haue become of the Episcopal Order it self of our Church Rome would giue vs no Bishops Lutherans Calvinists can giue none other Churchs are too far off Tarbox Revisor Did I not know your intention I should think you prevaricated your reasons are so far from giving satisfaction to a Christian so contrary to what hath been practiced Nothing but temporal motiues humane respects in all your discourse Was not the whole Catholick nay Christian Church in as greate danger when all the Bishops in the world were in Hierusalem And did this make them be silent Quite contrary they resolved to preach on beseeched God to confirme tem in this resolution Behold their threatnings sayd they Act. 4.29 grant vnto thy servants that with all boldnesse they speake thy word D. M. p. 29. We think the Power of Excommunication in the Church to be more then either a Political a Parliamentary or a meerly Ecclesiastical constitution as being an Ordinance Institution neither of the State or of the Church but of Christ himself Rev. It is not worth the while to examin whence you haue it when many doubt whither you haue it at all this neglect of vsing it in such vrgent occasions confirmes them in that doubt The same of other questious which pa. 29. You propose why the Pope did excommunicate Henry VIII Why not Charles V. Which are nothing to our purpose J will only say that if the Pope had no better nor other grounds than you alleadge his case is hard to be excused D. M. p. 32. Cressey May confesse truly that this whole passage was put into his Book by another hand without his knowledge that as he was forced to owne it at first so he was not permitted to retract or correct it in his second edition Rev. Here are three odious Accusations 1. Against the Benedictins of corrupting another man's workes making him say what he never sayd The 2.
A REVISION OF DOCTOR GEORGE MORLEI'S IVDGMENT IN MATTERS OF RELIGION OR AN ANSWER TO SEVERAL TREATISES WRITTEN BY HIM VPON SEVERAL OCCASIONS CONCERNING THE CHVRCH OF ROME AND MOST OF THE DOCTRINES CONTROVERTED BETWIXT HER AND THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND TO WHICH IS ANNEXT A TREATISE OF PAGAN IDOLATRY BY. L. W. Permissu Superiorum 1683. THE PREFACE SEing my Lord of Winton is pleased to wipe off that odious aspersion of his being a Papist which myght in the late conjuncture haue cost him his civil endangered his natural life by declaring not only his judgment in matters of Religion but also the grounds on which it relyes contained in severall treatises long since compounded but never till now made publick I presume he will not be offended that with the respect due to his quality of Peere of the Realme these be reviewed Reviewed I say for althô Appellations lye only to hygher Revisions are committed to equal or even inferiour courts He protests he is no Papist I think so too I wish it were as easy to cleere him of Calvinisme of which he ownes pag. XII that he hath beene suspected to it he seemes enclined when he says that God by Miracles promoted the Jdelatrous worship of the Pictures Relickes of Saints This I think in reality is to make God the Authour of sin Which Blasphemy I do not beleiue the Church of England will owne thô it be a choice flower in Calvin's garden He declares his loyalty to the government establisht the Royal Family c. And J beleiue him in this also nay I judge as favourably of the greatest part of his rank moreover that they are loyal not only for their Interest but for conscience out of a sense of their duty to God their soveraigne their country that he they will oppose to their Power Schisme in the Church Faction in the State Yet I think all their endeavours will be ineffectual to prevent ether considering the constitution of the Protestant Church qualifications of its Clergy For as in some natural Bodyes there is a defect which maugre all care of Physitians cuts the thred of life before it be spun to its ordinary length so in some Bodyes Politick that of the English Protestant Church in particular Here are some reasons to proue this 2. The first Protestancy is a Schisme those who liue in it liue in a Schisme It is a Schisme because it is a party separated from the whole Catholick Church Luther was a Schismatick so was Calvin so was Zuinglius so was each Patriark of your Reformation for each of these at their first breaking forth left the Whole Catholick Church or Congregation of Christians of what denomination soever not any one single Person in the whole world to whome he or they did joine himself So that if ever any man was truly Schismatick each one of these was such Wherefore all who joined to them as all Protestants did were Schismaticks Now it is not probable that God will giue that greate Blessing of Ecclesiasticall Peace to Schismaticks who hate it oppose it My 2. is Protestants are Hereticks that is Choosers of the points which they beleiue For the Catholick Church delivered to her children not only what they beleiue but also many articles which they reject Each Protestant takes this complex examins it finding some Articles not to please him he casts them out of his creede Hence one rejects the Real presence another Free will A third Merits a fourth the Possibility of keeping God's Commandments c. Each one culling out what Articles he pleases composing of them not a Catholick but a Protestant Faith not a Faith of the Ghospels but of this time their Phancyes What more evident signes of Hereticks Now if they be such can we think them fit instruments to oppose Heresy who did introduce do still defend it This shall be further confirmed by my fifth Reason My 3. Protestants are a Cadmean broode they sprung out of the Earth armed no sooner did their soveraigne Lords see their faces but they felt their Jron hands Witnesse Germany France Hungary Bohemia Scotland swethland Denmark the Low countryes Geneva Our English Protestants say they are not concerned in these Rebellions but that is not tru for by approving applauding them they make them their owne encourage the Practice by commending the precedent With what force can they teach Obedience to his Majesty who praise Rebellion against other Or divert men from Treason who transforme Traitors into Heroes canonize Regicides My 4. There nether is nor ever was any Authority vnder the Heavens better grounded than that of the Catholick Clergy consisting of the Pope Bishops was before the Reformation It was establisht by Christ setled by the Apostles ratifyed by general particular Councils confirmed by an vninterrupted Possession of almost fifteene hundred yeares backt by all Laws Ecclesiastical Civil acknowledged by all Christians then aliue What gentleman can say so much for his estate What officer for his Authority What King for his crowne What Parson for his Tith What Protestant Bishop for his miter When a Calvin a Luther c. to say no more private men starte vp declame against that Clergy as a humane invention an Antichristian establishment you applaude them with them trample vnder feete the whole sacred Order teach your followers no submission no obedience is due to it When you haue taught them to breake such cables can you expect to bind them to their duty with single threds The English Protestant pretence to Bishops doth no satisfy 1. Because in reality they had no canonical ordination as we say proue 2. Althô they had imposition of hands were real Bishops which we deny See Anti-Haman Chapt. xxxv yet They entred not by the doore but climed vp some other way Iohn X. 1. Were not promoted according to any canonical forme ether ancient or moderne Wherefore what can we judge of them but according to Christ's words Loco citato 3. Your first Protestants promoted their Religion Spreade their noveltyes contrary to all even English Bishops in contempt of them first in Henry VIII his time Tindale others Secondly in Q. Elizabeths time when all the Bishops aliue detested your Reformation were for that stript of their jurisdiction deposed from their seates confined What wonder then your followers doe not regard that Crosier which you haue broken nor honour the Miter which they haue seene you trample vnder your feate Lastly suppose your Bishops wereas validly canonically consecrated as any ever were can you say that their Authority is better grounded than that of all the Catholick Clergy Sure you cannot pretend to better grounds for your Authority than our Clergy had As it was than lawfull laudable to three or four private men to contradict our whole Clergy then in being why may not
some private men amongst you withstand yours What reason can you alleadge against a Tub preacher Some texts of scripture Canons of Councils Tradition of the Church Laws of the Realme All these stood in favour of our Clergy against the first Reformers as more evidtntly than for you against your dissenters So your Schisme Reformation hath deprived you of all meanes to preserue the Peace of the Church My 5. Is taken from the manner of your Reformation From Rome our Ancesters had received by the same hands a systeme of Faith a body of Ceremonys some Ecclesiastical Laws The whole Faith as necessary to be beleived the Ceremonys as decent to entertaine devotion The laws as convenient to government order And your first Reformers changed all Jn Faith they first rejected the whole vnwritten word Tradition a greate part of the written scripture They secondly perverted many places of this by new interpretations retaining the word without its sense The Ceremonys laws were treated as licentiously throwing out of dores whatsoever they pleased Now why may not another imitate these your Patriarks Cur non licebit Valentiniano quod licuit Valentino de arbitrio suo fidem innovare What was lawfull to Luther is sure lawfull to a Lutheran what was laudable in the sixteenth is not a sin in the seventeenth age to giue new interpretations to scripture abolish other ceremonys repeale more Canons Especially the motiues of reforming being common Which is My 6. Your first reformers rejected some Articles of Faith as being delivered by fallible men some Ceremonys as men's inventions some laws as contrary to Evangelical liberty Now all this holds as strongly against what they Keepe in as what they leaue out for all Canons were imposed by men all Ceremonys prescribed by men scripture it self brought to you continued amongst you by fallible men as much as the real presence Now as you blot this out of your creede why may not another strike out Baptisme a third the Trinity a fourth the Incarnation afifth the vnity of God a sixth the Deity it self so farewell all Faith What reason is there to say that our Roman Missioners sent by S. Gregory were infallible in delivering the mysterys of the Trinity or Incarnation fallible in speaking of Purgatory or the Real presence They say they pared away these Articles because they were not from the beginning were abuses But will not a Monothelit alleadge the same against the distinction of wills in Christ an Eutychian against the distinction of natures a Nestorian against the vnity of Person in him a Macedonian against the Divinity of the Holy ghost an Arrian against that of the son a Manichean against the vnity of the Divine nature a Iew against the new Testament a Libertin and Atheist against both old new God himself These are not wyre drawne conclusions by obscure mediums far fetched illations but natural obvious sequels of the fundamental principles of your Reformation which are inconsistent with any constancy in Faith and settlement in Church government So I must conclude that your Church building is such as no principles can beare your principles are such as can beare no building By which we may guesse from whome your reformers had their vocation from Abaddon Apollion the Destroyer seing their principles are good only to Destroy Churchs not at all to Build them In fine a prudent man without casting a figure might haue seene the fate of the late troubles in their principles which were inconsistent with any setled forme of civil gouvernment would ruin them all successively as they did without any hopes of rest vnlesse these were layd aside the just ancient government restored The like conjecture may be made of Protestantisme its principles being inconsistent with any setled forme of Faith Church government will destroy them all by Schisme Heresyes no probability of a settlement vnlesse these be renounced the Ancient Catholick Apostolical Faith Government restored For a further proofe of this I appeale to experience which is a demonstration A posteriori as the former is A priori which is My 7. Experience shews that t is much easier to destroy than to settle a government ether in Church or State Nothing of Art or Power was wanting to the establishment of the Prelatical Church in England She appeared first with the plausible colours of an Apostolical Reformation was cherisht by Royal favour armed the severest laws imaginable Yet one age had not past over her head when the peccant humours bread within her layd her in the dust the crowne it self with her which it was hoped she would vp hold Both were againe restored yet how soone was the joy of that over both brought againe into a like danger Seeke no where abroade the spring of these mischeifes they rise from the Reformation are inseparable from the Protestant Church My 8. And last reason is drawne from the Protestant Clergy it self which as it is modelled principled can never sufficiently influence the Nation to preserue its vnion in the Worship of God its duty to the King to prevent Schisme in the Church Faction in the State This appeares by experience The reasons I reserue till some further occasion be given 3. D. M. so we shall hereafter call my Lord of Winton says in his Preface pag. 11. A french Iesuit called Mainbourg publisht something as writen by her late R. H. he repeates afterwards four times in the Preface once in his post script Mainbourg the Iusuit when it was Mainbourg the secular Preist who printed it Which that booke of his tells all the world so did the publike Gazets containing his dismission out of the society His superiors did never permit him to print it whilest he was a Iesuit knowing how sacred the secrets of Princes ought to be So that paper crept about only in written copyes seene by few of these not many beleiving it to be hers whose name it beares Now D. M. hath spreade it the rumor of her Change in Religion for his owne vindication so prejudiced his mother the Church of England for I doubt not but her R. H. example will moue more Powerfully to leaue that Church than D. M. S. judgment to retaine men in it He questions the Conference betwixt her R. H. the Bishop which being a matter of Fact must rely on the deposition of witnesses their credit interest She is positiue he conjectural she had no motiue but Truth he concerned for the honour of his Church his owne His topick is if the Bishop answered so he was nether so Learned nor Conscientious nor Prudent as he ought to be Which many will easier grant then that her R. H. in a matter of fact would wittingly tell an vntruth He relates many things in his Preface to little purpose v. c. His coming out of