strain as is already declared Hence I say this part of the Dialogue is so inuincible à proof against Protestants in behalf The Centurist's Censure Theoderet of the real Presence that it cannot be answered and therefore the Centurist's with other Hereticks quoted by Brereley pag. 111. and pag. 258. hauing charged S. Chrisostome with the Doctrin of Transubstantiation censure Theoderet vpon the same score as one that speak's dangerously in the matter These men it seem's saw no great force in the later part of the Dialogue which our modern Protestants so much vrge and followes thus 16. When Eranistes had asserted that the Symbols by the inuocation of the Priest are changed and made other things and from that change inferred that our Lords body after his Ascension was conuerted into the Diuine substance The Orthodox Answer 's Thou art caught in the netts thou hast wouen Theodoret's Assertion For the Mystical symbols after Sanctification go not away from their nature For they remain in their former essence and figure and form and â—â—y be seen and touched aâ— before But yet they are vnderstood to be those things which they are made and belieued and adored to be those things as they are belieued Thus the Latin interpreter render's Theoderet's words you shall haue presently an other Lection though truely to read them as you see here after due reflection made vpon the precedent part of the Dialogue is so fully enough to ascertain euery one of this learned Father's meaning that I wonder any iudicious Man can scruple at it The genuin sense is Thou Eranistes maintain's that the visible circumscribed body of our His whole sense declared Sauiour was after his Ascension swallowed as it were vp or totally changed into his Godhead To illustrate this thy Doctrin thou takest à proof from the Mystical signes or Symbols of the blessed Sacrament and not only from the inward substance of bread which thou acknowledgest changed I tell thee thou art caught in thy own net the parity fail's there for the Mystical signes remain to sense as before in the same exteriour form and substance they are seen felt c. Darest thou Eranistes say Christ's sacred body retain's yet the same exteriour form it had on earth Has it yet in Heauen the same dimensions as these symbols haue after Consecration Is it visible or extended Answer as thou pleasest Here is an vnanswerable Dilemma for thee Either thou maintains't that A dilemma Chris'ts glorious body is now visible and extended as the Symbols of the Sacrament are Or contrariwise not sensible not seen not extended Grant the first Thou denies't thy own Doctrin and must assert that his whole glorious body is not conuerted into the Godhead Grant the second or say it has not the same exteriour form the same visibility and extension Thy instance and proofs taken from the Symbols of the Sacrament are Eo ipso made null and forcelesse for these signes keep the same form as before they are perceptible to sense extended c. and thus thou art both caught and conuinced 17. By what is now said you find Theoderet's discourse most solid against the Heretick who would needs infer grounding himselfe vpon the change made in the Sacrament that Christ's whole humane nature was conuerted into the Diuinity Thus much saith Theoderet is euidently false for these Symbols remain in their exteriour form vnaltered but Chris'ts humane body with thee remain's not so for all in it the very exteriour is changed into the Godhead Therefore thy proof taken from the symbols Theoderet only speak's of the Species or accidents remaining of the Sacrament not changed at all is void of strength faint and weightlesse Now that Theoderet speak's only of the outward symbols of the Sacrament is manifest First by what is noted already where he saith we are partakers of the true body and blood of Christ 2. By his answer to the Heretick where he openly professeth that though these symbols are seen and handled as before yet to the vnderstanding and Faith they contain the things we truely belieue That is Christ's real body and blood And thus much He proues in the following words where he asserts that they are to be adored no otherwise than Christ's immortal body is now adored sitting at the right hand of His Father for in both places as you may read in the text the same word of Diuine honour is referred to Christ in the Sacrament and now glorious in heauen 18. You must here haue à word of the other Lection already hinted at which clear's all and takes away the least shadow of à difficulty The most eminent and learned Cardinal Perron propound's it and proues it also absolutely the best by six stronge Arguments Liu. 2. De L'Eucharistie Chap. 12. P. 539. First Theodorets Text dubious saith he There is certainly in Theoderet's Greek Text à dubious form of speaking perhaps vsed on set purpose because of some Auditors present not yet initiated or first instructed in these Mysteries The Original words are thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is The symbols remain in their former essence and figure and form and may be seen c. But read them thus saith the Cardinal by à Transposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is For they remain and iâ— the form and in the figure of the first substance and all difficulty How the Cardinal read's ceases For by this construction Theoderet only sayes the accidents or species of bread and wine remain intimating nothing at all of any inward substance of bread remaining nay his whole context supposes the inward substances changed into Christs body 19. If this Construction be admitted so that the Genitiue case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be as it is à Genitiue and the other two follow in form of Latin ablatiues you haue this Connatural sense Manent in priâ—â—â— essentiae formâ figurâ The Symbols remain in the form and figure of their first essence which preiudices nothing the real Transmutation of bread into Christ's body but much confirm's it But such à Construction add's the learned Cardinal or Transposition of words is not only possible but very frequent in the Greek Language whereof he giues examples and one out of Theoderet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is The body of our Lord of the nature In lieu of saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est The body of the nature of our Lord. 20. The Cardinal maintain's the construction now giuen both as the more elegant and most agreable to Theoderet's whole context for many sound reasons Here is one taken from the Authors very next words But they are vnderstood to be those things which they are made and belieued and adored How Adored As they are truely belieued That is as containing the true body and The reason why he read's so blood of Christ For were this not really so Christ could not be adored For as
à man vnskilful in Musick that hearing one Note alone which seem's harsh slights all without more Adoe whereas he should listen to the whole Harmony before he iudges In like manner we often proceed with God by à Half-pondering Diuine Mysteries Contrariwife reflex Reason labours not to Conquer difficulties by it self or any half consideration but prudently waues that way and has recourse to à surer Principle wherof more presently Thus much premised 3. A second Proposition The fallacy of Atheists in their Arguments against Prouidence chiefly arises from this That the direct Iudgement of weak reason runs headlong into Mysteries The fallacy of Atheists Discouer ed considered only by halfs or in themselues without attending to the Solution most easily attained by à Iudgement which is reflex and Prudent For example The Atheist denies Prouidence because iust men suffer and the impious Preuail against the iust and hence inferr's negligence in God Here is one harsh vntuneable Note to his eare but reflect's not First That that which he calls Nature is as negligent and much worse left alone without God He reflect's not 2. That if God were supposed to Râ—le the world there would yet be fools enow to sind fault and think some thing amiss in the Gouerment He reflects not 3. That if God be an intellectual Being infinitly wise his thoughts are as far aboue our thoughts as the Heauens aboue earth And therefore aduentures desperatly to reiect Prouidence which his shallow head neither doth nor can Vnderstand Finally He neuer reflect's that to deny all diuine Foresight cast's Reason into more Mazes than to grant it For deny it we must say That this admirable and well ordered work of nature Gouern's it self The Sun Moon and Starrs moue themselues We must say That the vast and swift circulation What they are forced to grant against Reason of these Celestial Bodies depend on no Superiour cause vnless we faine many vnknown inuisible Gods or Genii Eternal of themselues And say These run about with the Heauens and regulate that admirable Motion But to Assert this without Proof offer 's more violence to our intellectual Faculties than to own one powerful Being essentially wise and therefore Vigilant ouer all Hee Gouern's In à word you see here this great Fabrick of Nature some rightly compare it to à Clock or Watch and find in it nothing like confusion but contrarywise à louely Order à Harmony most gracious beseeming God Yets say the foolish of the world we ate to diuorce it from his sacred Prouidence That is the Clock can moue the wheeles can turn about without à Superiour hand that winds all vp and orders all And why I beseech you Mark the reason of such as haue no Reason Free Causes men I mean indued with Liberty abuse liberty oppress the iust raise tumults breed confusion and Scramble who can get the greatest heap of dust together Ergo saith the half ey'd Atheist respiciens ad pauca there is no care had of vs which is to say Men comply not with their Duty but abuse their own Free will Therefore God is blameable because he either makes them not meer Animals Brutish or forces not Virtue vpon them against their wills It s an Errour 4. Thus much then concern's God To indue rational Creatures The abuse of liberty redound's not to God with Liberty to command the right vse of it but not to be responsable or held neglectiue if They abuse it No this touches them for T' is their own work that doe Euil Let then the Euil remain where it is Prouidence can forgiue but not forget And seriously consider the louely Harmony the recreatiue Order visible in the works of Nature here is Gods own admirable Oëconomy doe only thus much and reason so euidently discouer's à depth of Wisdom in these works that it cannot but exclaim with the wise man Sap. 14. 3. Tua ô Pater prouidentia gubernat Your Prouidence ô Father gouerns all This done cast your thoughts again as much as you will vpon the Monsters in nature which man freely beget's and freely bring 's forth What followes I beseech you but rhus much only That God after so many menacings so much Terrour laid before vs if we transgress leaues liberty to its own free choise and will seuerely punish the Offenders But that Spurious Progeny of euil Works he own 's not Therefore no Argument can haue force against Prouidence Liberty is lest to act without â—â—mpulsion vpon this account That liberty is permitted to act as liberty requires without Compulsion Were God forgetful or negligent would he not or could he not punish sin now or hereafter Atheists might vapour more boldly But hereof there is no danger for nature it self leaues this deep impression in all let who will Gouern it that one supreme Regent hates Iniquity and that as he often doth visibly in this life So he will more rigidly take Reuenge in the future Mihi vindicta Ego retribuam Rom. 12. 19. And this consideration alone of both present most clear and future Punishments so blunt's and dead 's the Atheists Plea that their best Arguments fall to nothing and are indeed resolued into pure Non-sense This consideration alone that God will reward the vniust sufferings of the Virtuous is comfort enough for them and euery rational prudent Creature 5. We are next to dispatch the main business with these Aduersaries who desire to haue as strong Proofs in behalf of Prouidence as they allege against it I will therefore for the better Satisfaction of all produce three most conuincing Arguments One is The Deity we all Adore is not inexorable but as clear and manifest Experience teaches and most known History in One clear proof of Prouidence all Ages relates hear's often the Prayers of iust men in time of Tribulation releasing them from sudden danger when no humane Power can help in the Exigency Innumerable after earnest Prayer and hands lifted vp to Heauen haue found speedy Assistance some in the peril of Shipwrak escaped others thrown to hungry lions haue been lest vntouched others cast into rhe fire not so much as scorched volumes might be writ of such particulars Therefore there is à Supreme Numen that has care of vs the Sun Moon and Starrs hear not nor can lend ayde in such pressing Necessities And to recurr to no man knowes what invisible Spirits is as we now said less intelligible and far more difficult than to own one powerful Being of Himself that both can and doth relieue at his good Pleasure 6. 2. The knowledge of future things Sublime and aboue the reach of all Creatures Argues à Power Omniscient and Omnipotent The reason is The Prenotion of what 's to come not yet limited to any Being in it selfe nor as yet determinately existing necessarily arises from an Infinite Knowledge and efficacy of light which extends it Selfe to what euer can be The knowledge of future things proues
beseech you Why did God impart truth and infallible truth to the world The end was not to improue his own knowledge being euer Omniscient It was not that the Angels and blessed in Heauen should belieue for Faith ceaseth in that happy State All there se intuitiuely what they once belieued The end therefore The Proof is taken from the End of Diuine Reuelation why God reuealed true and Infallible Doctrin was That we yet Pilgrims on earth walking by Faith should yeild Assent to it and belieue all as both true and infallible But this is impossible if the Church which immediatly Proposes the Doctrin can clash with Scripture or with Gods Reuelation and peruert his Verities Therefore She must be acknowledged both true and infallible in euery Doctrin She teaches 3. If any reply It seem's sufficient that the Church teaches Truth though She neither proposes nor teaches it so infallibly but that some times She may swerue from it He destroyes again Christian Religion Be pleased to obserue my reason If the Diuine reuelation is to be assâ—nted â—o infallibly infallibility of reuealed Doctrin be lost as it were in the way between God and vs If the Reuelation appear not as it is in it selfe infallible when we assent to it by Faith That is if it be not infallibly conueyed and applyed to all by an vnerring Proponent as it subsists in its first cause infinitly infallible Faith perishes we are cast vpon pure Vncertainties and may iustly doubt whether such à Doctrin separated from that other Perfection of infallibility be really true or no To se this clearly laid forth Please to make one reflection with me 4. May not either Iew or Gentil well inclined to Christian Religion rationally propose this Question to the Protestants or to any Has God reuealed any Doctrin which is only true God's reuealed Doctrin is no less infallible then true and not infallible You will Answer No because the same infinite verity which support's truth is powerful enough to vphold also its infallibility Say on I beseech you Can you who pretend to teach truth the worst of Heretiques haue done so Ascertain me also that you teach and propose Gods infallible Truths infallâ—blâ— Proue your Selues such Doctors and none will euer Question further the Truth of what you teach For if you once make this clear that you teach the infallible Doctrin which God has reuealed the truth inseparably connexed with infallibility is no more disputable but manifestly Credible But if you turn me off with à fair Story of teaching truth and Ascertain me not of your teaching it infallibly euery rational man will most iustly doubt of your teaching Truth And here is the reason à Priort 5. Euery Doctrin which is taught as à Verity founded vpon God the first Verâ—ty is no less Infallible than true Therefore who euer Ascertains me of the one must ioyntly ascertain me of the other Or if he will diuorce truth from that perfection of Infallibility There is no parting Infallibility from truth he giues me no more but at most the half of that Doctrin which God reueal's Nay I learn not so much from him seing God own 's no true Doctrin men can teach natural truths which is not as eminently infallible as true Now further If I be fob'd off with no man knowes what halfes of Diuine Doctrin That is if the Proponent parts truth from its infallibility and no Authority in Heauen or earth licences any to Separate what God has ioyned together I only learn the faint Sentiments when We belieue God's reuealed Doctrin or weak Opinions of fallible Teachers founded vpon fancy which God disclaim's And which is euer to be noted man by nature fallible can do no more but only propose them as meer humane or doubtfull Vncertainties But à humane doubtful Proposition though true beget's as is said aboue no certain faith in any Therefore who euer will not vtterly ruin the very life and Essence of Christian Religion must absolutely assent both to the truth and Infallibâ—lity of Religion and consequently acknowledge an Infallible Oracle which teaches and One Church only Infallible proposes Infallible Verities Infallibly But this is only the Roman Catholick Church as is said aboue for no other Society of men laies claim to teach Gods infallible truths infallibly 6. To solue all Obiections against this Discourse it will much auaile to be well grounded in this sure Principle Viz. A certain Principle It is one thing to teach truth and another to teach Diuine and infallible truth Man by natural reason can teach truth yet is insufficient to teach Diuine reuealed and infallible Truth this must come from à higher Power either from Diuine Assistance or Supernatural Wherevpon our Answers to Sectaries Illumination If therefore the Protestant Should demand Why we cannot belieue his Doctrin euen when he only Proposes those general Verities which all Christians admit He neuer offers to Obtrude vpon you his inferiour Tenents peculiar to Protestants Answer They are truths indeed and infallible truths but not proued so because he Vnassisted teaches them If he Ask again vpon what foundation do we Catholicks lay the truth and infallibility of that Doctrin we belieue and teach Answer are grounded Vpon this firm Ground that Scripture interpreted by an Assisted Oracle the Chruch which cannot beguile any Proposes all we learn as true and infallible Doctrin 7. If he reply 3. Protestants abstract from the Churches Interpretation and hold Scripture plain enough in all fundamental Doctrin necessary to Saluation Answer He err's not knowing the depth of Scripture which is so dark and vnintelligible in the abstruse Mysteries of faith that vnless certain Tradition and the Sense of the vniuersal Church cast light vpon it or impart greater clarity to the bare letter The wisest of men Scripture is obscure will be puzled in what they read or at most guess doubtfully at its meaning And therefore may easily swerue from truth To se what I say proued 8. Imagain only that twenty learned Philosophers or more who neuer heard of Church Tradition or of her Generael re 〈◊〉 Doctrin had our Bible drop't down from Heauen with Assurance that it contain's Gods infallible truths prouided all they read be rightly vnderstood but not otherwise Suppose The most learned Philosophers ignorant of Tradition and Church Doctrin 2. They peruse that one Sentence in S. Iohns Gospel Iâ— the beginning was the Word and that Wâ—rd was with God Thâ— same was in the beginning â—irâ— God c. Suppose 3. They also confer the Sentence with all other Passages in Holy Writ relating to this Mystery Could these Philosophers think ye by the force of their natural discourse only acquire exactly the infallible truth of the Incarnation iust so as the Church now teaches and belieues No. Euery Particle would put Cannot Vnderstand it them vpon à further Scrutiny What is signified Saith one by this In
Euidence of the Diuine Testimony CHAP. IX the vvhole Progress of â—aith Explained in order to its last Resolution Of that vvhich the Fathers Call the light of Faith It s vvholly different from Sectaries Priuate Spirit From vvhence Faith hath Infallible Certainty Obiections Solued 560 CHAP. X. The easiest way of resoluing Faith Laid forth in two Propositions The euidence of Credibility further declared Sectaries haue no Euidence of Credibility It is as euidently Credible that God now speak's by the Church as that He did anciently Speak by the Prophets 570 CHAP. XI Sectaries Obiections solued The fallible Agreement of all Concerning the Canon of Scripture no Proof at all No vniuersal Consent for the Sectaries Scripture or the Sense of it How the Church is both the Verity belieued and the Motiue why we believe Other Difficulties Examined 580 CHAP. XII The last Obiection Proposed Whether the Churches Testimony may be called the Formal Obiect of Faith Other Notes and Chnsiderations Concerning The Resolution of Faith 588 CHAP. XIII Protestants haue no Faith to resolve And vpon that account are freed from à vicious Circle Some yet are in à Circle Two Sorts of Sectaries refuted 596 CHAP. XIV The Mistakes of some Sectaries in this Controuersy It s necessary to distinguish between true Reason and fallacious Reasoning Priuate Reason liable to Errour Principles presupposed to the Decision of this Question Reason easily finds out true Religion by à rational Euidence preuious to Faith 603 CHAP. XV. From whence the Euidence hitherto mentioned Proceed's That Religion only is reasonable which Heauen declares reasonable The Declaration is euidently made in behalfe of the Roman Catholick Religion VVho is the misled reasoning Man Other Particulars handled The readiest way to Conuince Sectaries 615 CHAP. XVI Obiections solued Sectaries pretending not to Se the Churches Euidence are either blind or wilfully shut their Eyes The Assertion clearly proued A Parallel of the Primitiue and the present Churches Euidence How far Reason may be sayd to Regulate Faith 625 CHAP. XVII A Digression Concerning Doctor Stillingfleets Discourse VVhere he treat's of the Protestants Faith reduced to Principles He is all à long quite besides the matter handled and Sayes no more for Protestancy than for Arianism or any other Heresy 639 CHAP. XVIII The Doctors Inferences proued no Inferences but vntrue Assertions Hauing answer'd his Principles and Inferences Satisfaction is required to some few Questions proposed 652 CHAP. XIX The supposed grounds of our Protestants Reformation manifestly ouerthrown Protestancy no Religion but an improbable Nouelty The conclusion of this whole Treatise 665 COVRTEOVS READER YOu will soon perceiue by the many literal faults in this Treatise that à stranger to our language printed it and that the Cortector vsed not diligence Such errata as these are haue for haue Sponse for Spouse Prosylite for Proselyte Suspence for Suspense symtons for Symptons Citty for Citie Christians for Christians Church for Church wich for which hansom for handsome Religion for Religion must for most with many more like them I leaue to your charitable Correction Some greater faults are here noted PAge 2. For ciuillized Read ciuiliz'd line 22. read an vniversal Page 3. l. 33. r. voluntarily P. 4. l. â—2 for nonne r. none p. 5. l. 14. r strictly p. 10. l 3. r. Crimes l. 11. r. then and l. 27. for whem r. when Synogogue for Synagogue Cod for God hypoericy for hypocrisy distinguiched for distinguished and the like Errata following I omit P. 12. in the Title By reasonable r. by reason P. 18. l. 31. r. it hath p. 20. l. 19 For Elisi r. Eisi and l. 13. r Alcoran p. 35. l. 5. dele the. p. 36. l. 5. r. Concern and l. 23. r. Churches care p. 58. l. 31. r. perfected p. 62. l. 23. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 72 l. 10. r. meaning p. 101. l. 21. r. haue it p. 104. l. 26. r. full p. 107. l 21 r. Innumerable p. 116. l. 2. r. saying l. 6. r. reply and l. 13. r. Fathers p. 122. l. 29. r. Mali. p. 129. l. 32. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 144. l. 6. r. is it p. 161. l. 15. r. Say I is it p. 164. l. 1. r. Romanos and. l. 2. r. whos 's Faith p. 167. l. 3. r. desperate p. 173. l 4 dele p. 174. l. 20. r. Speculation p. 179. l. 9. r. Apotheoses and l. 16. r. sense and. l. 26. dele à . p. 185 r. gleanings p. 187. l. 4. r. suspence p. 189. l. 20. r. decides p. 191. l. 23 r. obsolete p. 190. in Titulo r. ascertain p 199. l. 15. r. guesses p. 200. l. 1. r. standing and in the Title r. way p. 214. l. 7. r. Title and l. 36 r. discourse p. 224 l. 9. r. Solution p. 228. in marg 1. Concession p. 231. l. 3. r Mass in the Church and l. 4. dele the word Church p. 236. l 3. read for very the name p. 239. l 3. r. pen to paper p. 236. l. 23. r. hinted at p. 266. lin vlt. r. Euident p. 275. in Marg r. vnanswerable p. 276. in the Title of the Chapter r. world p. 335. l. 12. r. Christ's kingdom p. 341. l. 8. dele the. p. 343. l. 25. r. Apostasy Afterwards you haue Deuide for diuide Mossias for Messias Apostacy for Apostasy Fabrik for Fabrick Sensuallity for sensuality Exceptor for Acceptor Legardemain for leger peccadilio for peccadillo Cherubins for Cherubims Seraphins for Seraphims Numbertles for numberless Nauatiani for Nouatiani Commissoned for Commissioned Test's for rest's banding for bandying yets for yet rhus for thus Chimera for Chimaera p. 369. l. 5. r. blaspheme and Contemn Parall'd for parallell'd p. 390. l 21. dele which you haue moreover rancked for ranked Phisitians for Physitians phisick for physick bountiffully for bountifully aparition for apparition limitated for limited lewish for Iewish traitorously for traiterously Afterward for afterwards vpward for vpwards Acquiese for acquiesce All plain Errats and easily corrected p. 506. l. â—â— for belieue r. beliefe p. 610. l. 17. r. without so p. 612. l. 16. for there r. three p. 626. l. 4. dele comma There are yet many and very many faults in Orthography and interpunctions vncorrected courteous Reader as you goe along vouchsaâ—e to correct them with your pen. Disc 2. after p. 353. please to correct the Errour in the next Page and read p. 354. p. 341. l. â— dele the. p. 383. in the Titler Chap. 13. And p. 481. in the Title for 19. r. Chap. 1. p. 516. in the Title of the Chap. r. vnlearned p. 677. l. for thy r. this and in the Aduertisement p. 7. l. 24 r. Achieuement in the Preface P. 9. l. 17. r. transcend's THE FIRST DISCOVRSE Of true Religion TO attaine à clear knowledge of true Christian Religion is the chiefe Design of this whole Treatise VVe are therefore in the first place to discusse matters seriously with Christ's professed Enemies and to proue that the propagation of our Sauiours
and both as you see stand opposite to Mr Stilling weak plea drawn from Sense and Reason 6. I might yet cite S. Chrisostome In. 1. Cor hom 24. Other Authorities Chrisostom Pachasius Damascan who saith The kingly body in heauen is set before vs on earth We touch it and do not only touch it but eate it This body the barbarous Magi after à long iourney adored with fear and trembling Thou add's the Saint See'st him not now in the manger but on the Altar not held in à womans arms but by à Priest present c. Therefore in his Oration of S. Perhilg he explain's himself further Truly this table supplies the place of the manger for here also is our Lords body laid Paschasius à latin author who liued about the year 800. is so express for the real Presence à nd Transubstantiation in his book De Corp. Sanguine Dm'i that the Centurist's Cent. 9. C. 4. Col. 215. Praetorius de Sacramen Pag 288. and other Sectaries charge him with the Doctrin of Transubstantiation and oral eating of Christs body No less plain and express is S. Iohn Damascen lib. 4. Ortho. Fid. whose discours on this subiect though long is most significant As bread saith he naturally meat and wine and water by drink are changed into the body and blood of him that eates and drink 's So this bread proposed the wine and water also by the inuocation and comming of the Holy Ghost are in à miraculous manner conuerted into Christs body and blood neither are they two but one and the same Our Lord himself hath said This is not à sign of my body but my body This is not à sign of my blood but my blood Hence Praetorius now cited P. 288. reiects the Doctrin and call's this miraculous Transubstantiation held by S. Iohn Damascen slight and fabulous sodo other Sectaries with him also 7. There are yet more ancient authorities most pressing to our purpose were it not Actum agere to say again what has been so often The Testimony of S. Ignatius Martyr clear noted First the Testimony of S. Ignatius Martyr who liued with our Sauiour and was Scholler to S. Iohn seem's to me vnanswerable Epist ad Smirnen not far from the beginning They saith he that is certain Sacramentarians admit not Eucharists and oblations because they do not Confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christ which flesh suffered for our sins and his Father graciously raised from the dead So Theoderet 12. ages since Tom. 4. Dialogo 3. reads And Iaac Vossius who followes the Florentine Copy differs little or rather nothing at all None can reasonably call the Epistle into doubt which Vossius places before the other Epistles and the sense as you see is most clear 8. The second authority as pregnant is taken out of S. Iustin Martyr in his Apology for Christians vsually called the 2. S. Iustin's also most significant Apology Paris print 1615. Towards the end at those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For we take not this Eucharist as common bread and common drink but as Iesus Christ our Sauiour by the word of God was made flesh and haed for our saluation flesh and blood so also after the same manner we are taught that the food which by the prayer of the word is by him consecrated with thanksgiuing of which food our flesh and blood are by transmutation nourished is the flesh and blood of that Iesus Christ which was Incarnate And for proof hereof he allegeth Christs own words This is my body This is my blood Thus S. Iustin speak's who liued not long after the Apostles about the year 150. and nothing can be more express in behalf of Catholick Doctrin I know some Sectaries Cauil at the expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by transmutation The sectaries Cauil answered and think Iustin held the Eucharist to be food for the body but his sense is clear for he saith only That the same food which nourishes our bodies by real transmutation is made after consecration the very body of Christ and therefore Gaspar Laurentius à learned Caluinist in his Orthodoxus Consensus Pag 368. translates Iustins S. Iustin's true sense words out of the Greek thus Sumimus autem hunc panem hunc potum non vt Communem sed eo modo quo edocti sumus Iesum Christum seruatorem nostrum habuisse pro salute nostra carnem sanguinem sic etiam cibum illum ex quo nostra Caro sanguis aluntur post benedictionem ipsius esse carnem sanguinem Domini That is in plain English The bread or food which naturally nourishes our bodies is by vertue of Consecration made the sacred body of our Incarnate Sauiour Conformable hereunto Gelenius also quoted in the Annotations vpon S. Irenaeus aduersus Haereses lib. 4. C. 24. n. 26. renders S. Iustins words Sic per verbum precationis gratiarum actionis sacratam ab ipso alimoniam quae mutata nutrit nostras carnes sanguinem Illius Incarnati Iesu carnem sanguinem esse didicimus The Interpreter also I follow significantly renders the same sense Alimoniam vnde c. The food from whence from which or where with we are nourished this very aliment is by Consecration made the body of our Incarnate Iesus Well but admit that Iustine call's the Eucharist nourishment to our bodies How some Fathers call the Eucharist Nourishment to the body he makes it not therefore Corporal food but Spiritual which nourishes them to à ioyful resurrection or to immortality and thus the other Fathers chiefly S. Irenaeus now cited c. 24. versus finem speakes Quomodo saith he rursus dicunt c How do these Hereticks plead again that our flesh shall come to corruption and not take life from the body and blood of our Lord where with it is nourished Again Sic corpora nostra c. and thus our bodies receiuing the Eucharist are not corruptible hauing hope of à ioyful resurrection But enough of these authorities Whoeuer desires more may peruse Cardinal Perron in his 2. book of the Holy Eucharist Out of what is said already I argue 9. Either the now quoted Fathers and the Church also haue most impiously betrayed Christs cause in deliuering false Doctrin contrary to sense and reason or worthily defended à Christian verity Grant this second we haue our intent But if Sectaries say these Fathers cheated the world into à false belief and impiously erred in their expressions Ponder first what à frontles impudence accompanies the reply Next make this true inference It is impossible that such à supposed vniuersal errour should euer be rased out of A Conuincing Argument the minds of men by the force of any thing which has the likelyhood of à receiued Principle For what proofs or vndoubted Principles can possibly outweigh the express words of Scripture our Tradition the sentiment of the Church and the iudgement
can cite Snares as if he fauored your late inuented Accidental mutation for you say he affirms these expressions of Fathers are more accommodated to that Sr. I haue read this learned Author in the place you quote 3. part Disp 50. sect 3. and perused also his 4 th Section where he Snares abused treat's largely of the Conuersion of bread into Christs body and expresly mantain's à Real action necessary in this Conuersion and calls the change Real and Substantial and it must be called so when the Terminus à quo and ad quem are as they are in this Mystery Real and Substantial T' is true he cites Diuines who say the Adduction of Christs body vnder the formes of bread is sufficient to verify à Real change Bread ceasing to be because of Christs body present without à new action or production terminated vpon that body and it is à probable opinion in Schools but as remote from your Accidental extrinsecal mutation as Heauen is from earth and to as Little purpose as an other wise question is when you Ask whether those who are changed by Regeneration A quaestion answered may be said to be Transubstantiated by it Friuolous Sr. when the Terminus ad quem in conuersions is substance it beares properly the denomination of Transubstantiation or Transelementation when it s meerly an Accident or quality as in Regeneration the denomination followes the nature of the quality produced and is rightly called an intrinsecal accidental change but not Transubstantiation Had you reflected on what is here said your pretty Criticism where you torture à poor Greek word and learnedly examin whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Gregory comes from the Noune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or from the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might well haue been spared I giue you your Choise take whether you will your cause lies where it was nothing at all aduanced But really I am weary of this sport which is more irksome to me then to kill the flies you so often talk of Howeuer I must haue patience and briefly say à word to one or two authorities more pitifully abused by you 13. That known passage of S. Cyril of Hierusalem Catech The Testimony of S. Cyril of Hierusalem Mystag 4. occurr's next in your 573. page The words are He Christ our Lord changed water into wine at cana in Galilee by his sole will and is he not worthy to be belieued that he changed wine into blood For if inuited to à marriage he wrought then that stupendious Miracle viz of changing water into wine shall we not Confess that much more he has giuen his body and blood to the Sons of the Spouse wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let vs take with all certainty the body and blood of Christ And he giues this reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For vnder the Type or Species of bread his body is giuen thee and vnder the type or species of wine his blood is giuen thee that by taking this body and blood of Christ thou mayst be made partaker of his body and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so we shall be Christophori Carrying Christ when we receiue his body and blood into our members Soon after he saith Do not therefore consider this as meer bread and meer wine for it is the body and blood All along most clear and significant of Câ—rist according to his own words for although sense suggest that it is bread and wine yet let faith Confirm thee and do not iudge of the thing by thy tast but hold this most certain by thy Faith that the body and blood of our Lord are giuen thee so that there arise no doubt at all in thee Again towards the end of this 4. Catechesis he repeat's and most energetically the verity he would haue vs learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Knowing and holding it most certain that the bread which is seen by vs is not bread but the body of Christ and the wine which is seen by vs although it seem to the sense of our tast to be wine The Church Speak's not in clearer terms yet is it not wine but the blood of Christ Thus this ancient Father and worthy Bishop speaks so significantly that the witt of man shall neuer force on him any other sense but that which the Roman Catholick Church taught in the Council of Trent and teaches to this day 14. Now listen à little to Mr Stilling glosses and say in Conscience whether they haue so much as à seeming probability Mr stilling glosses improbable First he tells vs it is euident and it was for his purpose to cry Euidence at the begining that Cyrills design here is to perswade the Catechumens from whom the Mysterious presence of Christs body in the Sacrament was wont to be concealed that the bread and wine were not meer common Elements but designed for à higher vse to â—xhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers Is this Sr your Euidence Is it euident that Cyril here intended to instruct the Catechumens only We read that the Saint was à laborious Preacher and complyed with that Charitable duty euery Sunday and day in Lent Surely all who heard him were not Catechumens and why may not these instructions contain part of that Doctrin he publickly deliuered to his Auditors All you can proue is that his first Catechesis was to the lately Baptized but that this of the B. Sacrament concerned them only is not probable Turn to the Edition of S. Cyril Paris print 1609. You will find after the Dedicatory Epistle vnder this Title De scriptis Cyrill That in his last fiue Mystagogical institutions he gaue solid food and explicated the Diuine Mysteries of our Faith of Baptism Chrism the Eucharist and that great Sacrifice of the Mass which Certainly belong to Christians of riper knowledge than Catechumens were Again I' ft be euident that S Cyrill is made to mâ—sse of his ayme the Saint in this Catechesis concealed the Mysterious presence of Christ in the Sacrament He missed extreamly of his intent for no Catholick can speak now with greater clearity of the Mystery or more fully express the Churches sense then S. Cyril did aboue thirteen ages since Yet one word Say I beseech you what need was there then of concealing this Mysterious presence i' ft be no more but as you say à piece of bread deputed to à holy vse or à meer sign of Christs body present Such à Mystery requires no secrecy at all Catechumens might as well haue heard of it without torturing their vnderstandings as now they hear of the Sacrament of Baptism Lastly is it euident that S. Cyril aimed at nothing but to show that bread and wine were not meer common Elements but things designed for à higher vse or as you say to Exhibiâ— the body of Christ to Belieuers T is improbable First because you add that to the Text which
neither the words nor the sense bear S. Cyril saith Do not consider them as meer bread and wine Then he tell 's you positiuely what they are For they are the body and blood of Christ Now your Gloss designed for à higher vse to exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers first Deads the very life of Cyrills words and then run's into nonsense I therefore Ask whether What is bread and wine to exhibit the body and blood of Christ this gloss Bread and wine exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers saies Bread and wine really changed out of their nature as water was at Cana in Galilee are after that change as really Christs body and blood as that water was really wine after Christs Miracle If your gloss say thus much you are à plain Papist if lesse it s none of S. Cyrills Doctrin for the Saint deliuers this as significantly yea and more fully then I now express it I well vnderstand S. Cyrills sense by his words but for my life I know not what you mean by your particle Exhibit Tell us I beseech you How do bread and wine Exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers Do they only mind vs of his body and blood A Crucifix representing our Lord bleeding on à Crosse can well serue for so much Do they shew or point vs out à Real presence of the same body and blood vpon the Altar which are now in heauen If so Belieuers haue an obiect of Faith and that truth to fasten on which the Church teaches but if your word Exhibit saies or signifies less then this or only expresses your euer yet concealed Sacramental presence you cheat the world with ambiguous dark Term's and in good earnest know not what you say 15. Answer therefore What is Christs body and blood to be Sacramentally present when really they are not vpon the Altar but absent in Heauen only The question deserues an Answer For you Sr distinguish between à Sacramental and à Corporeal Presence you grant the first and deny the second That which you grant is à Presence of Christs body and biood distinguished from the Catholick Real or as you call it Corporeal Presence Vouchsafe to enlighten vs à little concerning it which you page 574. seem to Our Aduersary is vrged to declare his sense make real There is say you à Real presence of Christ in and with them that is in and with bread and wine to the souls of Belieuers Very good Giue vs I beseech you the total Obiect which these Souls haue before them when they belieue à Real presence of Christ in and with bread and wine vpon the Altar Is this obiect Christ himself whom they pull as it were by Faith out of Heauen at the time they receiue your piece of Bread No. Christ still in Heauen is yet Locally distant and therefore not really present in and with bread and wine Vnless he be in two places at once And Consequently the Faith of these Belieuers has no real Obiect present to fasten vpon Is it that Christ is present in the Signes of bread and wine as Caesar is in his Image Pitiful He is thus present in euery Crucifix though really distant millions of Miles This no way makes him actually there in and with bread and wine as you Assert Doth finally this your Obiectiue presence imply only thus much that Christ by his power though really absent work 's the same effects in à worthy Receiuer as if he were actually there No. For he works the same effects and though absent produceth grace by the Sacrament of Baptism as if he were present dare you Therefore say he is in as peculiar à manner Really present in and with the water of Baptism as he is in this Sacrament in and with bread and wine Yet more Such à Moral The Sectaries Sacramental Presence contradict's all Authority Presence directly contradict's Christ's words This is my body It directly contradict's S. Cyrills words Though it seem to the tast to be bread it is not bread but the Body of Christs It directly contradict's that vnanswerable Truth As water was changed into wine so wine is changed into blood c. 16. And thus Sr you see how impossible it is to giue your poor Belieuers any thing like à Real obiect which may be called à true Real Presence though I hold you obliged to help both them and me to à clear Notion of it Because Christ's Sacred body and blood are Real things you attribute to these two Real things à true real Presence in and with bread and wine which cannot but denominate them really present with these two Substances vpon the Altar Therefore you are obliged to tell me what that is A parte rei which I once more say is impossible For as your Sacramental presence in your sense is à word no man vnderstand's so your Doctrin is as wholy vnintelligible Yet I haue not said all In this your discourse of à Sacramental and Real presence you would fain take some aduantage against vs by other words of S. Cyril Do not consider them as meer bread and wine for they are the body and blood of No aduantage giuen Sectaries by any other words of S. Cyril Christ according to his own word Hence you infer it is plain He speaks of à Sacramental presence for he doth not oppose the body and blood of Christ to the substance of bread and wine but to meer bread id est That they should not look on the bread and wine as naked signes but as Signa efficacia or efficacious signes Answ First The Saint has not à Syllable of either Signes or Signae efficacia Next your Speculation about meer bread is à meer nothing For meer bread is bread without Consecration S. Cyril opposeth the body and blood of Christ present to meer bread Ergo He opposeth them to bread without Consecration but bread without Consecration or meer bread is the very Substance of bread Therefore he opposeth the body and blood of Christ present to the substance of bread vnless you can find the Meerness might one speak so or nakednes of bread distinct from its substance which is not only improbable but impossible 17. Vpon this solid and vndeniable Ground it imports your A meer quibble about à word cause nothing whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Cyril signifies Species as it is commonly rendred by Interpreters or as you say that which doth figure or represent for as long as this verity stand's vndoubted that vnder the Type or Species of bread Christ gaue his own body and That that body is opposed to the very Substance of bread the expression is so clear and the same with our Catholick Doctrin that were à hundred Glosses more laid vpon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All would not do nor rack it to any contrary meaning You Reply S. Cyril speak's of such à presence as hath relation
Ponderation of my Replies is so far to iudge between vs. But here is not all I must Say more Though I am as fallible in excepting against His glosses as he is in making them yet my Faith depend's not vpon my Exceptions but vpon the Doctrin of my Church The express words of Scripture and Fathers These oblige me vnder pain of damnation to belieue as I doe But all that Mr Stilling hath for his Faith is only the vncertainty of his own No man builds faith vpon his own Glosses coniectures ancient Church he has none nor express Scripture nor one Clear sentence of any Ancient Father And will hee Dare to oblige me vnder pain of damnation to belieue his Glosses or the opinion he would mantain by them vpon no other Ground but his weak Coniectures I appeal to his own Conscience for an Answer Well Be it how you will thus much is euident and T' is the only thing I aime at in this whole Discourse if Scripture and Fathers be interpreted in high matters of Faith by two Aduersaries of different Religions when no surer Principle is at hand to rely on but the fallible Glosses of the One and à contrary fallible combating with those Glosses in the Other they may both as the world goes now sit long at the sport before one Controuersy Other mean◠to end Controuersies then meer Glosses be ended Therefore God as I said aboue has Prouided vs of an easier way to end these weighty difficulties or we may All turn Scepticks Some may say The old mode of the World was to dispute by Scripture and Fathers dare we reiect this way of arguing as insufficient Answ No truely It is an excellent way amongst Christians though insignificant to Heathens when the Aduerse Parties can Clear the sense of Scripture and Fathers vpon certain Principles But if the very sense of Scripture and Fathers be called into Question As now à daies it is by Sectaries We must of necessity haue Recourse to an other more Clear easy and indubitable means of ending all Debates euer in vse among the Holy Fathers Whereof more afterward In the Interim the ensuing Chapter may giue you entertainment CHAP. XIV It is further proued that neither Scripture alone nor any other Principle distinct from an Vnerring Church can with certainty decide Controuersies in Matters of Religion or Regulate Christian Faith 1. THis Assertion not slightly proued in the other Treatise Disc 2. C. 4. I hold so certain That the wit of man shall not rationally contradict it And to giue yet more light to what is there said Be pleased to exclude or mentally only to cast aside All thought of an vnerring Church of her infallible Tradition al so of the Definitions of General Councils For all these which Sectaries hold fallible are Essential to an vnerring Church If any such thing be in the world whereof we shall Treat afterward Next look about you And consider well what remain's to end Controuersies withall or to regulate Diuine Faith You haue VVhat Principles Sectaries Can Pretend to distinct from an Infallible Church first Scripture which à Pagan wholly and à Iew partly reiects Yet with such Aliens from Christ à Christian can argue rationally yea and clearly conuince them as I shall proue in the second Discourse After Scripture you haue the sublime Mysteries of Faith the Fathers Doctrin laid forth in their Volumes and the History of the Church Here are all the Principles imaginable left Sectaries besides their priuate Spirit which can be no more à sound Principle to them than the contrary Spirit is to Their Aduersaries 2. Let vs now See how weakly the Sectary endeauours to end any Controuersy by these Principles without an infallible Church And be pleased euer to attend to the Aduersary he Treat's with If he attempt's to do good on à Heathen by Scripture or bring 's in the Reasonableness of Christian Religion The Heathen and Iew also laugh at his Folly And wish him to proue his Book to be Diuine If he proues that by the Vniuersal Tradition of all Called Christians the Heathen perhaps will not yet quarrel with him as I may hereafter about the Fallibility or Infallibility of Tradition but desires him to goe among the Chineses and lay his Bible down by That book which their supposed Prophet Confusius wrote full of excellent Moral Precepts Thus much done the Contest Begin's The Sectary saith his Bible is Authorized by à great Prophet called Christ A learned Bonzius Answer 's and his is also Authorized by à great Prophet called Confusius The Sectary saith all Christians own his book vpon à neuer interrupted The Protestants Contest with ◠Heathen Concerning the Bible Tradition to be indited by the Spirit of Truth The Bonzius replies All China of à mighty vast Extent age after age hath the like perpetuated Tradition for his Bible What followes but that These two Aduersaries peruse their Bibles The Bonzius read's ours and Reasonably ask's whether the Sectary can infallibly proue such strange Mysteries as are registred there for example à Trinity the Incarnation of the Diuine word to be Truths Reuealed by Almighty God The Sectary answers All the infallible certainty he hath of these particular Verities lastly Relies only vpon Scripture it selfe For what euer Principle can be imagined distinct from that written word whether Church or Tradition is Fallible and may deceiue If so saith the Heathen your Bible gain's no Credit with me Because you proue the Mysteries contained there by that which causes my doubt or is the matter in Question for you say all I read is of Diuine inspiration because your Bible relates them and therefore make that à proof of your Doctrin which is the Matter in question or causes my doubt O saith the Sectary read on with Humility and you will find that the very Maiesty of the style the Energy of the words will quit you of doubting And to ease you of too much pains know we Protestants hold That the Belief of à very few chief Articles or simple Truths as that Iesus is the Christ The Diuine Word is incarnated c is faith enough to gain Heauen Contra The Heathen except's against the Protestants plea. Replies the Heathen I see no other Maiesty in the Style of your Bible than in mine and other pious books The exteriour Syntax or ioyning of words together is common to all such Writings But aboue all I wonder why you talk to me of no man knowes what splendor shining in the bare Letter when you say that shines not to Pagans but only to those who haue the Spirit of God and are the Elect amongst you Now to what you Add of à few chief Articles necessary to be belieued and no more I answer first Your Scripture saith no such Thing nor tell 's me or you which Articles are necessary which not and if it did so you are only where you were before in darkness
Church of Christ the only Rule of Faith which decides all Controuersies Concerning Religion CHAP. IV. The one and only true Church of Christ was is and shall euer be the Holy Apostolical and Catbolick Roman Church Her Antiquity and Constant Perseuerance in the Ancient primitiue Doctrin without Alteration proues The Assertion 1. IT is hard to illustrate à manifest Truth because what euer reasons are brought to light for it surpass not much the Euidence of the thing you would make clear Who euer goes about to proue by Arguments that the Sun is the most luminous Body in the Heauens will haue much to do because that 's euidents to our senses and so is the true Church of Christ saith S. Austin digito demonstrari potest She can be pointed at with your finger Origen adds Hom. 33. in Matth. She is like à sun casting her beams from one part of the world to the other Howeuer because we now treat with men who either see not or pretend not to see I will giue them all the Euidence gathered from demonstratiue Signes which à heart can wish for 2. I say first before we come to more conuincing Arguments Antiquity is à certain Note of Christ Church The reason is As God was before the Diuel and Truth before falshood So the Orthodox Church whether you take it from Adam or Antiquity denotes the true Church from the first preaching of Christian Doctrin was before all Sects and Heresies The Roman Catholick Church only which Christ founded and is so much extolled by the Apostle has this Precedency It was when the Arians were not we know their first Rise it was when the Pelagians were not we know their Beginning it was when rhe Donatists were not their Origen is as well known as that of Protestants which first peeped out with one unfortunate Luther something aboue an age since Might not then the Roman Catholick Church more ancient than all these Sectaries haue most justly questioned each of them at their first appearance as the learned Tertullian Lib de Prescrip did those of His time Qui estis vos who are you new men Vnde quando venistis From whence came you Vbi tam diu latuistis Where haue ye been hid so long No body yet saw you or heard of you I waue the Testimonies of other Fathers chiefly of S. Austin and S. Hierome though none presses this Argument drawn from Antiquity with greater efficacy than Optatus Meliuitan Lib 2. contra Parmeâ—an They are known to euery one But this Mark must not goe alone 3. I say 2. Antiquity and à neuer interrupted Continuance The Church once true neuer Changed her Doctrin of the same Visible Society Age after Age and the same Doctrin vpheld without change or Alteration clearly euidences Christs Church This Scripture strongly Asserts Osee 2. where the Church is said to be espoused to Christ in Sempiternum for euer Math 16. Hell gates shall neuer preuail against it Math. 28. Christ will be with it to the end of the world vpon which Passage S. Hierome speaks most clearly Qui vsque ad consummationeâ— sae 〈…〉 c. He who promised to be with his own Disciples to the end â—f Authority â—nd the world both showes that these blessed men shall euer liue in their successors And that he will not depart from the true Belieuers Videtur sicut luna c. They are words of S. Ambrose lib 4. Hexam The Church may be seen like the moon eclipsed but neuer perisheâ— She may be clouded and ouer cast with darknes but cannot fail The reason is If Christs Church could fail not only all memory Reason proue the Assertion of his sacred Passion with the other Mysteries of our Faith but the whole Scripture also would for that time of her supposed Deficiency haue been no obiects of Belief None could then haue said with truth I belieue the Holy Catholick Church or haue had Access to it because it was not then in Being Now further As the Church cannot fail so She cannot Alter from her self or change Christs Doctrin For if She did so She were no more Orthodox Christ could not own Her for his Spouse Ponder S. Austins Discourse on this subiect in Psal 101. Existâ—â—t qui dicunt c. There are some who say This is not the Church of all nations which once was No. That 's gone and thus they Speak saith the Saint because they are not of the true Church O impudentem S. Austins Iudgement vocem illa non est quia tu in illa non es O impudent speech it is not the same Church it was because thou art not in it Vide ne tu ideo non Sis. look to thy self least thou be not for the Church will be although thou were not in the world Then he decries this Doctrin of the Churches failure as most abominable detestable and pernicious And in Psalm 60. positiuely Asserts the permanency of it to the end of the world 4. Hence I argue But the Roman Catholick Church only hath euer continued in being without interruption and neuer The probation vrged changed or Altered the Doctrin which She first learned of Christ Protestancy which began one only Age since most euidently wants this continuance and euery year put 's on à new countenance Therefore the Roman Catholick Church and not that of Protestants is the Spouse of Christ That the Roman Catholick Church stood permanently in being euer since Christ is as demonstrable as that Protestants were not before Luther The Visible perpetual Succession of our Popes of our Bishops of our Pastors and of our Catholick People in all ages is an irrefragable Proof Neither do Sectaries much cauil at this Personal Succession or the exteriour Permanency of our Church for What Sectaries obiect that 's euident But here is their Plea This Church say they once Orthodox changed from her selfe forged new Articles of faith Contrary to the primitiue Doctrin Herein lies the great Charge Now if I demonstrate that the Roman Catholick Church once confessedly Orthodox hath euer since been Visible in the world and neuer swerued from the pure Primitiue Doctrin in after Ages She is certainly the Church of Christ still without Alteration You will Ask how can this be euinced 5. Some may think 't is best done by Paralleling our present known Church Doctrin with that of the Primitiue Times Very good But by what means shall we come to à right Parallel One may Say Make A diligent Inspection into the Records and Writings of those worthy Fathers who liued in the first Ages And all is done I Answer This Rule precisely considered help 's nothing For what if those Fathers neuer medled with most of the Controuersies now agitated between vs and Sectaries And t' is no wonder at all if they did not For may not à new Sort of Hereticks rise vp to morrow whose Errours neuer entred into the thoughts either of the
Church once Orthodox began to innouate to bring in new Doctrins of an vnbloody Sacrifice of Transubstantiation of praying for the Dead of Purgatory c. Now be pleased to obserue the Demonstration When An Argument against Sectaries the Roman Church began these new supposed Doctrins and actually erred There was at that very time an other Orthodox Church in the world or was not If not Christ had then no Orthodox Church on earth and Consequently that Article of our Creed was false I belieue the Holy Catholick Church For no man can truly belieue in à Church which really is not If contrarywise they own à pure Orthodox Church to haue been on earth when the Roman began to erre That because Orthodox and pure was certainly à Society of Christians distinct from the then supposed fallen and false Church of Rome 3. Hence I argue Eirher that Orthodox distinct Church sensible of Gods cause and the Honour of Christian Faith vigorouly opposed censured and condemned those imagined errours of the Roman Church now fallen or Carelesly let all alone and omitted that Duty If it omitted that duty it was no true Church For if true Her Charge was and is She hath à command from Christ to do it to crush and suppress false Doctrins when they first rise vp or begin to infect the body of Christianity This duty that Church neglected and for that cause was not Orthodox Moreouer the Roman is also Supposed actually drawn from Truth Clear and Conuincing Condemned Hereticks made vp no Church We had then in those daies à strange world indeed when Christ the Supreme Head looked down from Heauen and saw his Mystical body the Church pitifully Corrupted when he cast an eye vpon poor Christians and found them all Churchless 4. If Sectaries own such an Orthodox Society which opposed and censured the Roman Errours that must be à Truth as Notoriously known to the world as it is now supposed that the Church of Rome had Errours Notoriously known And Here I desire the Iudicious Reader to reflect on what I Shall propose And wish our Aduersaries to Answer Can they Imagine the Errours of the Roman Church openly discouered so many Centuries since and judge that no Orthodox Christians then liuing who beheld Truth run to ruin made Opposition against them The Errours say Protestants were palpable for our new men espy them now yet no Orthodox Christans are heard of to this day who then stood vp for Gods cause and defended the Ancient truths of Christ against this supposed erring Church This yet lies in darkness The Fault must be noised as both criminal and publick And yet there is no newes at all of such as lent à helping hand to redress it 5. Again Can it be imagined that the Roman Catholick Church which Age after Age condemned innumerable Hereticks And giues in an exact Catologue in order as They rose vp These Sectaries Paradoxes and. particulars are exactly known And yet that no Author Friend or Enemy Can bee found who giues so much as the least hint of any sound Christians that condemned the now decryed Errours of this one Church Finally and here is the wonder must we suppose our Church to haue grosly erred à thousand years since when yet all good Christians were silent and reprehended it not And that now after ten whole Ages are past And Millions of Souls damned for want of Faith A company of iarring Protestants Can probably begin to talk of them to Reproue to Argue Vast improbabilities and offer to settle Christianity right vpon its old Fundations No thought of man can fall vpon more desperate improbabilities yet they pass as current among Sctaries But of this point more hereafter in the 13 Chapter 6. Now here is the Conclusion and the true Trial of this cause It is possible that our new men who pretend knowledge in Antiquity name an Orthodox Church which openly Protested What Sectaries are obliged to doe but Cannot against these supposed Errours before Protestants were in Being It is possible to tell vs when this Church strongly Acted against the Roman Errours It is Possible to say what became of that Orthodox Church at last whether after it had done that great work and Censured the Roman Doctrin It quickly disappeared Or still remain's in the world It is I say Possible that Sectaries Euidence these particulars of most high Concern or impossible If the first can be done we Catholicks ought to Reform But I must vnbeguile the Reader and absolutly Assert All the Protestants who now are or shall bee hereafter Shall as soon destroy all Christian Faith as name any Orthodox Society any thing like à true Church which censured these supposed Roman Errours Therefore And it is an euident Demonstration Our Catholick Church once true continued so in all Ages Or there was none in the world Orthodox The Articles She maintained then and yet defend's are no Errours but Primitiue Verities And thus the whole Plea of our new men Concerning Errours entring the Church de facto ends as it deserues in à flat Calumny What do they think to bring Errours to light now whereof the most learned Churches in the world neuer took notice before Will they speak of false Doctrins when all Orthodox Societies said nothing of them Dare they accuse and condemn à Church which Millions of Souls so highly reuerenced that the best of Christians liued and dyed happily in it Nothing can be more exotical Wherefore I say when our Nouellists can work this Perswasion into mens minds That Crowes once white turned black in time though no body must say when Then and not Their Attempt impossible before they may perhaps hope to make vs mad and induce All to belieue that our Church Anciently pure became tainted in time with gross Errours though when or in what Age this deformity appeared they know not nor Can euer know because the Change is de subiecto non supponente not supposable 7. One may reply Though the Sectary cannot point at an Orthodox Church which condemned these now Supposed Roman Errours yet he has plenty of witnesses to ground his Assertion vpon For in past Ages many though reputed Hereticks vehemently decryed the Doctrins of our Church as Nouelties Sweruing from the primitiue Truths Answ Very true indeed For thus Arius of old decryed Consubstaâ—tâ—ality and the Supreme Godhead in Christ Pelagius Original sin The Monathelits two wills in our Sauiour Humane and Diuine Luther an vnbloody Sacrifice And the Diuel after all if you 'l belieue him will oppose euery Truth which Christ taught But what is all this to the purpose which yet to my great wonder I find vrged by some Is the Authority of these condemned and confessedly known Hereticks precisely considered to be parallell'd with à Church The Votes of Aduersaries without Proofs weightless which was neuer condemned by Orthodox Christians Must the condemned Party be heard when it Accuses And the Innocent or
say Antiquity erred no less than we do now And therefore Caluin professeth he followes none of the Fathers but S. Austin Though when He pleases he is too bold with the Saint and scornfully reiect's his Authority also See Bellar de notis ecclesiae lib 4. What Sectaries Nouelties are Cap. 9. I might also show that our Sectaries Nouelties for the greatest part are nothing els but à List of old long since dispersed and condemned Heresies now brought to light again and knit together in one bundle to poison the world withall They haue renewed the Heresy oâ— the Donatists who taught that the Church of God had perished throughout the world except in some few obscure Corners They renew the Heresy of the Arians teaching it vnlawful to offer Sacrifice for the dead They renew the Heresy of the Eunomians saying that by Faith only man may obtain life Euerlasting You haue with These men the Heresy of the Iconomachians in breaking down the Images of Christ our Lord and His Saints reuiued again Of the Berengarians denying the true Body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ really present in the Eucharist as likewise of the Vigilantians that slighted the Inuocation of Saints denying Honour due to the Relicks of holy Martyrs But I need not to insist vpon these and many more reuiued Heresies they are things Vulgarly known to all largely laid forth in the writings of our Catholick Authors Se Bellar now Cited CHAP. VII Manifest and most vndeniable Miracles peculiar to the Romani Catholick Church only prone Her Orthodox withall show that She still retain's the Primitiue Doctrin 1. BY this word Miracle or Miracles I vnderstand à supernatural work done by Almighty God aboue the power and force of Nature For there is no doubt but that God who What is meant by Miracles created Nature has within his boundles Omnipotency Supereminent effects of Grace which far surpass the little Might of all Creatures made by him These are finite The Author of them infinite And can do more 2. 2. This Principle is certain God hath wrought innumerable Miracles not only to Testify He can do more then Nature Why Miracles are wrought but with this express Designe also that by the Manifestation of such wonders All may come to the knowledge of those Oracles whereby He speaks and Reueals most sublime Mysteries far aboue the reach of our weak Reason Now whether these Oracles be Prophets Church or Apostles seems one and the same thing If they be equally Manifested by miraculous Effects and speak in his name who Assumes them to teach the world 3. I say manifâ—sted Oracles by Signes And say it for this End That all may reflect vpon the depth of Diuine wisdom which may on the one side Seem too rigorous in obliging vs to belieue most Difficult Mysteries neither seen by Eye nor heard by eare They facilitate Faith Were it not That on the other side the burden is lessened and our Faith much facilitated by the Euidence of most prudent and conuincing Motiues For t' is à great Truth Non sine testimoniâ— reliquit Semetipsum benefaciens de Caelo His Goodnes so fauorably condescend's to our weaknes that though he remoues not Vneuidence and Obscurity from the Mysteries belieued Yet he makes them all so euidently Credible to prudent Reason Benefaciens de Caelo by the Lustre of Signes and Wonders That the man who belieues not after à Sight had of such glorious Marks stand's guilty before Gods Tribunal of damnable Sin 4. The third Principle Miracles eminently great in number and quality for example the raising of the dead to life Chiefly when wrought by Persons of Singular virtue to Confirm our Christian Faith are from God and euident Signes leading to the knowledge of true Religion None can doubt of the Assertion seing Christ our Mord. Matt. 11. When Questioned whether He was the true Messias proued the Affirmatiue by his Signal Miracles The blind see the lame walk Lepers are Cleansed And lead to the knowledge of true Religion the deaf hear the dead rise again c. Which is to say in other Terms These wonders speak in my behalfe and plainly Testify that I am the Messias For only to say I am à Prophet sent from God without prouing the Truth to Reason by Signes and wonders Conuinces nothing Induces none to Belieue Therefore Iohn 10. Christ remitted the vnbelieuing Iewes not to the Euidence of his Doctrin for really no Doctrin of Mysteries aboue Reason though most true is or can be its own Self-euidence But to his manifest Miracles The Works which I do in the Our Sauiour pleaded by His Miracles name of my Father These giue Testimony of me Again If you wâ—st not belieue me belieue my works Blessed S. Paul might haue Long preached the Sublime Doctrin of Christ and without Fruit vnless Miracles had confirmed it which he call's the Signes of his They were Signes of Pauls apostleship Apostleship 2. Cor. 12. And How long think ye would Nabuchodonozer haue remained in his Idolatry vnless He had beheld that prodigious Wonder wrought by God vpon the three Israelites in the fiery Fournace Daniel 3. But when he saw them walk in the flames nothing hurt He cryed out Blessed be the God of Sydrack Misack and Abdenago who hath sent his Angel c. Miracles therefore are powerful Inducements to Beliefe which Truth might be yet more largely demonstrated by the Wonders of Moses of Elias of the Prophets and Apostles But these I waue and briefly take notice of our Sauiours sacred words Iohn 15. If I had not come and spoken to them they should not haue finned but now they haue no excuse of their sin c. And to show that Speaking only was no sufficient Conuiction The Text add's If I had not done among them works which no other man hath don they should not haue sinned but now they haue seen and hate me and my Father c. 5. Three things follow from hence First That eminent Miracles of their own Nature are Marks of Christ's Doctrin and true Religion 2. That Our Sauiour most iustly condemned Why the Iewes were taxed of Incredulity the Iewes of infidelity not so much for reiecting his word or Preaching as for not belieuing after they had seen it confirmed by Wonder 's from Heauen For t' is Said plainly Had they not seen they had not sinned A Doctrin Therefore attested by Miraculous signes and wonders renders the Vnbelieuer guilty of Infidelity Consider it alone deuested of such Marks what haue we High Mysteries preached But without Proofs antecedently laid forth to Reason Truths taught but yet vnknown whether so or otherwise In à word we haue the Decrees of à great Monarch obliging all to submission but without his Seal or Signature 6. And Hence it is that our blessed Lord impowred those first great Masters of the Gospel Matt. 10. not only to teach his Sacred Verities but to teach
here and there he seem's to me à little obscure yea to build with one hand and to Pull down with the other How euer by what is clear we haue enough and may well refute his Errours 15. Page 19. In the Book now cited He takes leaue to blame all those who declare in behalf of the Protestant Church that it depart's or Separat's from the Church of Rome For Saith he seeing it hath bin granted in and by this Church euer since the Reformation that there is and alwayes was saluation to be had in the Church of Rome as à true Church though corrupted I am very confident that no Church can Separate from the Church of Rome but they must make Themselues thereby Schismaticks before God I grant 1. Such are Schismaticks as leaue this Church I grant 2. Saluation was and will euer be had in this Church Yet say 3. It is Calumny yea à plain Contradiction to grant Saluation attainable in this Church and to impeach Her of Errour or corrupted Do rin The Calumny Church Motiues either proue that Oracle pure in all She teaches or in Nothing is vnquestionable because the Marks the signes and exteriour Euidence of our Church already insisted on either proue her Gods Oracle as sound and faithful in all She teaches as the Primitiue Church was or conuince nothing What then can these Aduersaries ayme at Will they grant Her no less illvstrious in Marks and Motiues which induce to faith than the Apostical Church was and yet make Her à Monster à harlot and prefidiously false in proposing Faith Haue so many learned Doctors Age after Age taught Her Doctrin so many Martyts shed their blood In defense of it so many Saints wrought glorious Miracles to confirm it and after all can it vpon no proof but vpon à vain and most vniust Supposition be called false and vnorthodox Nothing can be more extrauagant You must therefore either deny the Euidence we plead by which is vndeniable or own this Church entirely sound in euery Doctrin proposed as Faith Whence it is that when Iewes Gentils and Hereticks conuert themselues to Catholick Religion drawn thervnto by the light of euident Motiues they frankly belieue no Part but all Church Doctrin without Exception And the Reason of belieuing thus Wholly and not The Reason of belieuing entirely and not by halfes by halfs is giuen aboue C. 5. 6. where we Demonstrate that if the Roman Catholick Church has erred in the proposal but of one Point of Faith and obliged Christians to belieue that vnder pain of Damnation She is not only traiterous to Christ and therefore can be belieued in nothing But moreouer at this present day there is no true Faith professed in the Christian world Contrarywise if She be true and vnerrable in all teaches She is to be belieued in euery Article without reserue 16. Now to the double Contradiction in the words alleged It is granted Saith Mr. Thorndicke that there is and alwayes was Saluation to be had in the Church of Rome as à true Church though corrupted I Answer this is implicatory For if true She is not corrupted in Doctrin or if corrupted in Doctrin She is not true Vnless one makes by meer fancy à Chimera of the Catholick Church and sayes à true Church may be corrupted which is impossible for truth excludes corruption Therefore no Orthodox Christian euer owned à Church partly true partly false You Sr say 2. Saluation may be had in this Church Very good Ergo Her Faith is sound able to produce The Contradiction euinced against this Author in euery soul Repentance the loue and fear of God and what euer els is necessary to acquire Heauen Or if it want this Essential Perfection and bring not men to à security of Saluation it is no Faith at all and consequently Catholicks must be damned for want of diuine Faith hauing no true Church to belieue in See more Disc 1. C. 21. n. 7. Finally wheras you Assert No Church can Separate from the Church of Rome but they must make themselues thereby Schismatieks before God The Inference Sr is true but most clear against your Selfe And proues that both you and the Protestant Party are Schismaticks before God and man too For this matter of Fact Viz. That you Separated from Protestants proued Schismaticks and rebelled against the Roman Catholick Church is as euident as That England once Catholick communicated with Rome in Points of Faith in the vse of Rites Liturgies Sacraments And afterward diuorced it self from that Communion Reply or tell vs you had cause to do so and so far only receded from this Church as She receded from Her Ancient purity You make again à false Supposition your Proof your self Iudge in à cause you haue nothing to doe with And the louely Spouse of Christ loyal and perfidious Chast and à harlot with one breath 17. Yet one word more You say the Church of Rome is à true Church wherin Saluation is had though corrupted One clear Inference against Mr Thorndick Hence I Argue Either you in England are now at this instant separated from this Church as it is True or not If separated from it as true the Reformation belongs to you only you are to cancel your own Errours according to the form of Doctrin in our Church for She if true is so far pure that she cannot be reformed And thus much you seem to grant P. 33. It is out of loue to the Reformation that I insist vpon such à Principle as may serue to re-vnite vs with the Church of Rome being well assured that we can neuer be well reunited with our Selues otherwise That not only the Reformation but the common Christianity must needs beâ—lost in the Diuisions which which will neuer haue an end otherwise What is this to say but to wish the English Church reformed by the Roman Catholick Therefore something if these quoted words bear sense is amiss not in the Roman but in the English Church which needs Reformation Now on the other side if you say the Roman Catholick was and is à true Church Another Inference as clear and that the English also is altogether as true as she or hath not separated from the Roman in matter of true Doctrin it followes ineuitably if the Supposition hold's that neither of them needs Reformation in matter of Truth for here we speak not of Rites and Ceremonies which are alterable To what purpose then is it to talk of reforming either Church in point of Truth when both are Supposed so true that neither can be reformed nor differ if true in faith from one another 18. Perhaps you may yea and must reply if your Discourse haue sense Though they are true in Doctrins called fundamental yet both haue their lesser corruptions and these need Reformation This is all that can be Asserted For if both are false in fundamentals neither of them at this day is the Orthodox
They destroy not eo ipso Probability in Arianism or in any other false Sect Therefore the Conuiction drawn from these Arguments must be so strong That one as is now noted may without Hesitancy The Strength of this Euidence boldly Say first Induced by the force of Euidence its manifest to reason that God has founded one only true Religion 2. Induced by the force of Euidence I'ts manifest This and none but this is the Religion He founded 3. Induced by the force of Euidence its manifest to reason that All other Sects called Religions are false And not only false but in the highest degree perniciously improbable 28. These Assertions Stand firm vpon this one Principle God Gouern's the world whereof no Christian doubt's He The works in nature speak Gods power and Wisdom giues Being to euery creature His Power and Wisdom are most discernable by these works in Nature And shall we haue no clear knowledge think ye of his Wisdom care and singular Prouidence drawn from the Noble works of Grace laid open to all Mens View and most manifest before our Eyes in that admirable Fabrick of true Christian Religion founded by him Shall the works in Nature speak plainly their Creator And the Admirable wonders of Grace be silent And shall the manifest works of Gâ—ace be silent of their Author The common Sense of all rational men disclaims the Paradox And must if induced by Reason acknowledge an Euidence in that Oracle whereby God vouchsafes to Speak But if à false Sect could either Surpasse in its Marks and Indications or so much as Equalize The true Religion That Specious Euidence leading to belieue would Cease and be so much Eclypsed that none could by the force of Reason Say This is the way that lead's to Heauen This is the Religion which God founded And consequently all might shake of the Obligation of belieuing seing none can belieue without à preuious Clear knowledge had of what He is bound to Assent to The Religion therefore I am obliged to liue and dye in must bee Clearly made discernable by its Marks from all false Spurious Sects or This obligation ceases whereof enough is said already CHAP. XV. From whence the Euidence hitherto mentioned Proceed's That Religion only is reasonable which Heauen declares reasonable The Declaration is euidently made in behalfe of the Roman Catholick Religion VVho is the misled reasoning Man Other Particulars handled The readiest way to Conuince Sectaries 1. IT remains now to Examin from whence the rational Euidence here pleaded for proceeds Methinks That receiued Maxim in Schools Qui dat Formam dat Consequentia God who founded Religion ad formam Help 's much to Answer pertinently For if the Cause that giues à Thing being giues it also what 's consequent or belongs to its Being And if all Vnanimously agree concerning the Cause and Author of true Religion This necessarily followes 2. The same God and infinite Goodnes that founded Religion laies also be fore vs the Euidence we Propugn But Layes forth its rational Euidence an Euidence proceeding from such an Author whose works are perfect and is annexed to the Religion which Wisdom it selfe giues Being to must needs bee clear and haue force to Conuince the most obdurate hearts May Prudence Sway and Passion be laid aside To explicate what is here said is to proue it All know that God who will haue vs walk to our last End by obscure Faith giues no Euidence of the Mysteries Considered in Themselues For none knowes the Trinity or that great work of the Incarnation by any Euident It is called the Euidence of Credibility On what it is grounded Principle clearly proposed to Reason Therefore the Euidence wee seek after must bee Extrinsick to the Mysteries belieued which Diuines rightly call the Euidence of Credibility and it is grounded vpon those visible supernatural works of Grace which an infinite Power only can produce And vpon this ground I Said The same God that found 's Religion laies before the Eye of reason its rational Euidence also 3. Hence I boldly Assert and T' is no less of singular comfort to all Faithful belieuers then of shame and Confusion to Heauens declaration Iewes and Heretiques That Religion only is reasonable and brings with it an Obligation of belieuing which Heauen it selfe declares reasonable That Religion only is reasonable which Euidently Supernatâ—ral Signs beares the Marks the Characters and Supernatural signatures of an Infinite Power and Wisdom That Religion only is reasonable which haâ— been approued by the publick Iudgement of the very best the most choise Publickly approued and learned who haue liued since the Creation of the world That Religion only is reasonable which by God's special Assistance hath wrought Admirable Conuersions Neuer Censured Strange Conuersions giues in Euidence of vndoubted Miracles preserueâ— vnity and was neuer yet Censured by any known Orthodox Christian That Religion finally is only reasonable which Assures euery one by à present Vniuersal Tradition of à Church diffused the whole world ouer VVhat God has Said what Christ hath taught and what Doctrin the Apostles preached Here is both Reason and in Tradition the Rule That giues Assurance of Faith with it Find me out then such à Faith such à Religion as euidences these Illustrious Marks the Cognisances and Signs of Heauen that 's only reasonable or none euer was or can be accounted Reasonable 4. We are now in the last place to Examin what Prophets what Teachers or finally what Church haue been Signalized with these strong pleading Testimonies with these Signs and Marks of Who or what Religion can shew these Masks and Signs Power and VVisdom The Iewish Church had them in some measure when Almighty God Exodus 9. 16. told Moses Posui te c. I haue placed thee my Seruant vt â—stendam in te fortitudinem meam to show my Power and Might And that by thee my name may be spoken of through the whole earth Certainly Christ our Lord manifested yet far greater Wonders Iohn 15. 24. If I had not done among them works which no other Man hath done c. Whilst the blessed Apostles preached none can doubt of their Miraculous Signs which Heauen Euidenced and God himselfe manifested by them Thus much supposed and no Sectary can Question the certainty of my Supposition 5. I will come neerer home And to lay Forth the Evidence of the Roman Catholick Church Speak this great truth None but She euer Since those Apostolical times hath had not only the like Vnity in Faith The like Supernatural Marks and The effects of power and wisdom wonders wrought in Her by an Infinite Power and Wisdom But also more Miracles greater Conuersions à greater number of Belieuers and Consequently à more Vniuersal consent of Hearts ioyned together in one Beliefe In à word as full an refulgent in the Marks of the Roman Catholick Church Euidence euery way
would haue done also 6. Now I Demand and the Question is very pertinent vpon what Euidence of Credibility By what prudential Motiues laid forth to Reason could These men had they then The Primitiue Euidence of Credibility was not as some may Imagin been in the world belieued that S. Matthew for example wrote truely the Life and Preached exactly the Doctrin of Iesus Christ Did God Ascertain all men then liuing by priuate Reuelation that the Euangelist was his Diuine Oracle Or did He openly proclaim that Verity to the world by an audible Voice in the Aire Was an Angel sent from Heauen to testify that S. Matthew deliuered Truth and nothing but Truth Or was the Holy Ghost seen in any visible Form to suggest all He spake and wrote And to secure his tongue and hand from Errour in euery Syllable in euery least Iota No. Although God could haue done all this and more yet wee read of no such Wonders 7. Say Therefore Vpon what prudent Motiues by what Euidence of Credibility would Sectaries had they then liued been Induced with Iewes and Gentils to belieue the Words and Writings of this one blessed Euangelist or of any other The Brtâ—â—itiue Euidence explained Infallible Oracle The Gospel Answers Luk. 16. They went forth and preached euery where Our Lord working with them Confirming the word with Signes which followed And the Signes are known to all They cast out Diuels raised the Dead cured the Infirm Suffered persecution Conuerted Nations to the Faith of Christ which was one and perhaps not the least among their many other glorious Miracles The great Apostle Heb. 2. 4. Speak's most significantly this Sense God withall testifying by Signes and wonders and diuers Miracles and Distributions of the Holy Ghost according to his will Here we haue the Apostolical Euidence laid before vs And by it the Doctrin they taught made Credible to Reason Hence I Argue 8. But most certainly the Roman Catholick Church and The Roman Catholick Church only Shewes the like Euidence no other Society demonstrat's the very same Miracles the very same Signes and wonders not one Excepted as is largely proued aboue And to raise Her Glory aboue that which à short time allowed not the primitiue Christians to Se Hitherto neuer wanted the tryal of à 1671 years Persecution from Heathens with an Aduentage Turcks Heretiques licentious Catholicks and Diuels also And yet to Gods Glory be it She keep 's Her Posture Still immoueable Inuincible 9. One word more Had we liued in those happy Dayes Particulars insisted on wee should haue seen or heard of à great Conuersion wrought by our Sauiour vpon one Zacheus à Principal Publican à rich man and à Sinner A plain Miracle cries one of the Older Protestants And therefore The Conuersion comes in with an Ecce Behold the wonder It this so was it indeed à Miracle strange Conuersionâ— Ecce Behold Innumerable notorious Sinners accustomed to vice Conuerted to the true Faith and reclaimed from their lewdness by the incessant Labour of this one Roman Catholick Society 10. Again Had we liued in those Dayes wee should haue seen or heard of à Couragious S. Stephen who sealed with his blood that very Doctrin which the Euangelists wrote And the Apostles afterward Preached We should haue seen or heard how Martyrdoms zealously the blessed man prayed for his merciless Persecutors And from thence haue concluded no other but God gaue the Martyr that Courage to fight on to the end and Charity to dye as Hee did most Gloriously Here cast your thoughts again vpon the Roman Catholick Church in after Ages and Manifest in the Church Ecce Behold for one S. Stephen you haue had Thousands armed with Courage with Charity and Constancy who as behooued true Valiant Souldiers of Iesus Christ stoutly shed their blood for that very Doctrin She maintains at this day 11. Thirdly had you liued in those dayes you would Contempt of the world in those Primitiue tirnes haue heard à new Doctrin preached contrary to corrupted nature and the worlds Vanity you would haue seen moreouer whole Multitudes of Conuerts repaire to the Apostles and cast their wealth down at their feet calling nothing their own but God only who rich in Mercy was their Possession And would you not haue Said after to great à wonder such Preachers were certainly inspired by the Holy Ghost to teach And that those who complyed with the Doctrin were faithful Seruants of the most high God None can doubt it The like in the Church at this day Now. Ecce Behold the very same Learning is yet and has been euer taught in the Roman Catholick Church And to proue by real Effects of what Power it is Thousands ouerflowing with worldly Fortune slighted all and to contemn the Vanity retyred Themselues Some into Desert places others to the Solitude of Religious Cells where rich in Virtue they liued and dyed happily Thus much for à hint only 12. Besides wee haue in this ancient Mother Church other More Aduantages yet Rules of Perfecteon great Aduantages of Holyness and Deuotion answerable to the Practise of the Primitiue times We want not those who earnestly striue to obserue the highest Rules of perfection and to follow the footsteps of the most blessed Saints that now are glorious in Heauen We want not Means to reclaim Imitation of Saints Means to reclaim sinners Submission the most obdurate Sinners and to help on aspiring Souls in the Exercise of mental Prayer and Diuine Contemplation We want not Doctrin worthy of God set forth in the profound Mysteries of our Faith nor à dutiful Submission to them by the greatest Capacities of the world We want not our Fasts our long Abstinences and other Corporal Mortifications Hard lodging poor Fare course Apparel watchings And the like medicinal Austerities weary not out but proue delightsome to Innumerable that might haue had both pleasure Fasts and Austerities and plenty in à secular Condition 13. By the little here briefly hinted at you may learn though à volume might be written of this Subiect How exactly the Roman Catholick keeps Parallel in euery particular with that Primitiue and most perfect Christian Society The The Parallel Euery way Exact Euidence of Credibility is the very same in both Churches The signatures of Diuine Power and Wisdom are no less illustrious in the Church at this Day than when the Apostles preached 14. Hence I Argue And remind the Reader of my Proposition aboue much to this sense Sectaries either Se or A most pressing Argument drawn will not Se the Euidence of our Church Motiues already spoken of These Conuersions these Miracles These Martyrdoms These Austerities c. Appear to them no less clear Effects of Gods Diuine Power now than the very like Signatures or Motiues appeared to the first Conuerted Christians when the Apostles Preached Say They are no less clear no less perswasiue From what