there is no probability of being cloathed upon and therefore they cannot be supposed to go to purgatory naked since they that go thither are sure afterward to go to heaven Again vers 6 7. the Apostle tells us that whilest we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord and that Here the faithful desire to be absent from the body because it hinders them from the presence of the Lord and walking by sight now had they been acquainted with purgatory surely they would have express'd their desires of being absent from that also seeing that was like not only to be more irksome to them but also more durable and therefore a greater impediment since therefore they groan'd so much to be deliver'd from a short life here which hinders their enjoyment of Gods presence and not at all for deliverance from a hundred or two hundred years continuance in purgatory for so long saith Bellarmine the Church hath prayed for Souls in purgatory we infer they were not acquainted with it Again they that are to be receiv'd into Eternal habitations when their life fails them are to be received at death for then they fail But so are charitable men and by parity of Reason other pious souls The minor is proved from Luke 16. v. 8. Make unto your selves friends of the Mammon of unrighteousness that is use it so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that when you fail i. e. dy they may receive you that is may procure you a reception or rather as Doctor Hammond you may be received into everlasting habitations But our Author hath his arguments also Sect. 18 which come now to be considered And first he tells us of an express testimony for Purgatory in the Book of Macchabees Now not to call upon him for an Answer to Dr. Cosens of the Canon of Scripture as knowing how impossible it is to be done albeit it be necessary to make this Testimony a Cogent proof seeing he onely tells us that there is such a place in the Book of Macchabees I will add where the words may be found even in Dally page 439. where they are fully considered and it made evidently to appear that they come not up to a proof of Purgatory neither are they consistent with the received Maxims of the abettors thereof and whereas our adversary calls in the Universal Tradition and practice of the Synagogue of the Jews to justifie this place the same worthy person hath made it evident that neither this nor any other Testimony produced by them is any tolerable proof of such practice p. 449. 450. Nay he evinceth most clearly from this passage that this practice was not received in our Saviour's or the Apostles time Ne apud infimos corruptos Judaeos yea he spends the 14. Chapter of his second Book to evidence that the Jewes were ignorant of Prayers for the dead and should we after all this give any credit to your confident assertions of such evident untruths It concerns you if you respect your credit to answer what is extant in the forecited places of the Learned Dally and to evince this universal Tradition and practice you here speak of without the least offer of any proof unless what follows must be so esteem'd viz. that from the Jewes no doubt Plato borrowed this Doctrine and from Plato Cicero But I pray you Sir permit us who have the Arguments fore-mentioned to evidence that in our Saviours time the Jewes had no such Custome to doubt of what you boldly here assert l. 4. c. 5. p. 360. especially when the same Dally runs antipodes unto you and tells us though with greater modesty ab iis Platonicis ut videtur illam Purgatorii rationem baustam atque acceptam tum Judaei tum adversarii retinent Sect. 19 that both you and they as it seems received your Purgatory from the Platonists Mr. Cr. P. 120. You have one assault more from natural Reason which you say will tell us that heaven into which no unclean thing can enter is not so quickly and easily open to imperfect souls as unto perfect nor have we any sign that meerly by dying sinful livers become immediately perfect 1 Thess 4.17 Now to this I Answer that what ever natural Reason may seem to dictate I am sure the Oracles of God will tell us that they who are alive at the Resurrection if pious souls though surely some of them shall be imperfect shall not go to Purgatory for 100. years but be caught up into the Clouds to meet the Lord in the Air and so shall be for ever with the Lord. Secondly albeit there be nothing of Reason or Scripture to intimate that onely by dying we become perfect yet doth both Reason and Scripture more then intimate that presently after death we are amongst the Spirits of just men made perfect that when this Tabernacle is dissolved we go to an house Eternal in the Heavens when we are absent from the body we are present with the Lord and consequently are purified by the holy Spirit from the imperfections that adhered to us CHAP. XI Master Cressie's misadventures Sect. 1. His first Argument from 1 Cor. 11. Answered Sect. 2. His second from Reason Sect. 3. His Authorities spurious Sect. 4. As 1. Saint Basils Liturgy Sect. 5. Cyrils Mystag Catechism Sect. 6. The Acts of the Nicene Council Sect. 7. Greg. Nyssens Catechism Sect. 8. Saint Cyrils testimony considered Sect. 9. His Authorities say no more then our Churches Liturgy Sect. 10. Saint Chrysostome not for them but against them Sect. 11. His Citation abused by Master Cressie Ib. as likewise Saint Ambrose Sect. 12. The Doctours argument from the fruit of the Vine vindicated Sect. 13 14. Mr. Cressie's evasion confuted Sect. 15. The weakness of his argument against the Doctours Exposition evidenced and confessed by Jansenius Sect. 16 17. an argument against Transubstantiation Sect. 18. Why the Fathers not insisted on Sect. 19. The Fathers are not for the adoration of the Sacrament Sect. 20. Saint Chrysostome Saint Ambrose and Saint Austins testimonies considered Sect. 21 22 23. The contrary evidenced from Doctor Taylor Sect. 24. IN this Chapter we meet with many misadventures Sect. 1 Mr. Cressie p. 124. and mistakes as 1. that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as old as the first general Council whereas it was never used by any Father or at least never applied unto this matter for the space of a thousand years and upwards nor can I find any of their own writers besides himself that ever pleaded the use of such a word 2. Another mistake is that the Church onely saith the change made in the holy Sacrament is usually called Transubstantiation when the Trent Council expresly tells us Mr. Cressie p. 124. that it is called so propriè convenienter aptissime most fitly properly and conveniently 3. Whereas you tell us Sect. 5 that it is a difficult matter to define what is our Churches Tenent
the Saints in Heaven are prayed to at once as it is in many Collects and peculiarly on all Saints Dayes surely that day is not an holy day to the Guardian Angel who must be fain to trot to all the Saints in Heaven and acquaint them that Serenus Cressie being very sick and weak desires their prayers But when they pray to all Angels then the poor Angel must not travel over all the Heavens onely but the Earth to boot But we will not deal too severely with him let him proceed and thus he doth it History tells us that Magiclans have alwaies the Devil ready to come at their call why then should not Angels be witnesses of our Actions P. 184. and especially our prayers which as the Scrripture saith they offer as Incense to God Now to I eave the Scripture till anon Here we have more work for the Angel for seeing 't is an Angel Apoc. 8.3 that offers up the prayers and incense of all Saints the Guardian Angel must make a journey to him to unless you will have him to be Christ which will do our Author but little service 2. History likewise will tell us that Magicians and Witches can swim over the Sea in a shell can creep through a key-hole Can dip their finger in a little juice and flie away out of the Chimnie he may believe one as soonas the other Lastly the number of Magitians I hope is few in comparison of other men and so there is some difference as to that for one Devil may better afford to be nigh them especially seeing his service is so much promoted thereby As to that dispute of Saint Austine which concludes the Section I say 1. That he was very uncertain in it and one while denies and again suspects that such a thing might be 2. He saith only possit fieri it may be done this way And again 3. Vt quaedam cognoscant that they may know something and how little service this will do him every one may see P. 184. S. 8. 2. He further tells us We are ignorant how great the sphere of Activitie of the glorified Saints may be in respect of this whole visible world perhaps saith he in the words of Spalatensis the whole sensible world may be no more to one of them then its proper body to an humane soul informing it Answ And are not these men think you put to their shifts who are fain to coin such inventions to salve their Hypothesis But tell me is it probable they inform the whole world so as to be present each of them in every part of the world Or Secondly to operate in each part of the world albeit not present there If the first then will they be little short of omnipresent nor will it be proper to God to fill Heaven and Earth and they being in Hell as well as Heaven and also in Purgatorie How do they escape the fire How â—re the Angels said to ascend to Heaven and descend from it Is it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only How are the souls of the Fathers delivered from their limbus said to depart thence and to be with Christ to be absent from the body and present with the Lord was Lazarus's soul carried to Heaven and afterwards extended Again to what end is this extension seeing they may be happie without it and why should we imagine it seeing here 't is certain they are not extended beyond their bodies If the second let them tell me how or by what Operation a soul that is in Heaven can tell that such a one who praies in his mind only is praying to him And suppose two were praying together and the one prayed to Peter and the other to Paul by what operation can these spirits discern that the one prayed to him and not the other I suppose a Praier to Saint Paul makes a different motion in their Orb of Aether but then how doth St Paul know who it is that praies to him Perhaps different men make different motions but Saint Paul never knew them and how shall he be informed Why the Guardian Angel must go up and tell him 't is S. C. that makes such a motion and haply he will remember it But how will he know when he prayes Hypocritically why truly when an Hypocrite praies it makes a different motion from a sincere one in the spirits Orb of Air. This Platonical stuff is all that I can imgine to salve the Hypotheses Si quid novisti rectius istis candidus imperti Lastly be it that their presence or operations were so vast yet could they not judge of the heart seeing to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is proper to God and consequently must be as zealous for an Hypocrite as a devout Christian Thirdly Sect. 9 we cannot tell saies he what things God may reveal to them Answ Nor he whether he reveals any thing to them at all and therefore in these things he doth most evidently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. What a ridiculous thing is this to suppose such a Circle that when a man hath made a praier that praier should come to God and be revealed by him to a Saint and that Saint bring it to God again 3. Why must he be thought to reveal this to the Spirits in Heaven and not to the Souls in Purgatorie or if equally why are not they also praied to 4. But it is evident from Scripture that God doth not make any revelations of this kind for 't is said Eccles 9.5 The Dead know nothing that is done in this world neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the Sun And again Abraham is ignorant of us Esay 93.16 5. Bellar. himself confutes this Evasion by 2 Arguments 1. If it were so the Church would not say so boldly to all Saints Orate pro nobis but sometimes would prayto God to reveal our desires to them 2. No good reason can be given why Saints under the Old Testament should not be invoked for God might have revealed their Petitions to them though in Limbo Patrum and sure their praiers might have been as beneficial as the praiers of such as were alive 6. Why upon the same presumption should we not pray to the Saints living for albeit their praiers be not quite so effectual as the praiers of Saints departed yet they are effectual and consequently to neglect this will be to neglect one means conducing to our welfare I say upon the same presumption for this reason why God must be supposed to reveal our Praiers can be no other then our good and would not the reason move him to reveal them to Saints on Earth as well as those in Heaven Mr. Cr. p. 185. Oh but saith our adversarie If God said to Abraham a Pilgrim on Earth shall I hide from Abraham the thing that I do how much more may we imagine tha he hideth not the mightie works of his mercie
being conjoyn'd to his Brother He enjoyeth the pleasure of everlasting Life blessed are you both If my Oraisons can prevail any thing no day shall overslip you in silence no Oration shall pass you over unhonoured no night shall steal by wherein I will not bestow upon you some portion of my Prayers with all Oblations will I frequent you Onely the mischief is he doth not add till I find a Deliverance of you from Purgatory or any such words Indeed in his Oration on the death of the Emperour Theodosius he tells us that he will follow him to the Region of the living nor will he leave him till by his Prayers and tears he hath brought him into that place his deserts did challenge quò sua merita vocant viz. Into the Holy Mount of God where there was everlasting life where there was no Contagion of Corruption no sighings no grief no company of the dead doth he understand it of Souls then must none of the Souls of the dead be in heaven of bodies I hope our bodies must not go to purgatory with our souls But the Region of the Living where this mortall shall put on Immortality this Corruptible Incorruption But yet he presently tells us that Theodosius remains in light and glories in the companies of the Saints purgatory to be sure was a place that he had cause to glory of and enjoys rest for his soul they rest very quietly sleep in utramque aurem in purgatory Yea a little before he told us that he now enjoy'd Eternal Light I suppose as being enlightned by the fire of purgatory and continual tranquillity and for the things which he did in this body he rejoyceth in the fruits of Gods reward and was that think you purgatory and because he loved the Lord his God he hath obtain'd the society of the Saints But you will say If Saint Ambrose thought him in bliss or an happy State what is the meaning of his former words Ans You may see by what is said already that he cannot Intend to bring him out of purgatory by his prayers which is sufficient for me nor 2. Can he be supposed to weep for him till his mortal did put on immortality unless he thought he should live till the Resurrection or Theodosius rise before it Well then 3. Dally will tell you that 't is usuall in Scripture and Sacred Writers to speak of things as done which they were certain would come to pass So Isaac saith Gen. 27.37 I have made Jacob Esau's Lord and all his brethren his servants because he had foretold it would be so Even thus S. Ambrose saith he will never leave praying till the Emperours resurrection because he was sufficiently assured that God would raise him unto life Eternal and transser him to heaven Now then seeing 't is as clear as the Sun that Ambrose thought them both in Heaven or in Abrahams bosome viz. The Emperours Valentinian and Theodosius is it possible he should pray for their deliverance out of purgatory what good could they need besides that which he prays for a speedy resurrection who already enjoyed the pleasures of Eternal life If Eternal life be purgatory I will not give two pence for the Popes indulgences to be deliver'd from it This being so is not our Author a brave jugler who durst adde for deliverance to Saint Ambrose and that he might not be found out Cite neither place nor tell us of what Emperour whether Theodosius or Valentinian he meant it albeit he produceth the place only to prove that the Ancients thought the Souls departed to have some present refreshment which indeed they did allow to Saints supposed to be in Abrahams bosom And that from the company of Angels and Arch-angels and the vision of Christ which they were supposed to enjoy in those receptacles the increments of Divine light and joy which Ambrose speaks of He hath four places more out of Saint Austin in behalf of purgatory Sect. 14 Confes l. 9. c. 21 But the 1. where his mother begs that she may be remembred at the Altar falls strangely short of purgatory since I have made it appear that those who were suppos'd to be in Heaven were there remembred and this remembrance was made for divers other reasons Nor 2. Is there any thing in that which Saint Austine saith De cnra per mortem c. 5. we must by no means omit necessary supplications for the Souls of the Dead that repose might be obtained to them since 't is as clear as the Sun that they pray'd for repose to all the Servants of God departed and Saint Ambrose begs rest for the Emperour Theodosius of whom he tells us that he was in rest already Nor will the 3. place Cited out of his Enchiridion do him service viz. C. 110. That the Sacrifice is offer'd as a thanksgiving for Martyrs but as a propitiation for others For 1. It is evident that Saint Austine when he wrote this book was of Saint Chrysostoms opinion for as much as he tells us Eâ—ch c. 110. that these whom our suffrages do profit they do it either that they may have a full remission or a more tolerable damnation And then no wonder if he allowed the Sacrifice of the Eucharist or prayers to profit for the remission of sins 2. It might be offered for a propitation in respect of others and they not in purgatory but in Abrahams bosome as well as Saint Augustine might pray so earnestly for his mother that God would be propitious to her and yet she be in Abrahams bosom as above is manifested As to that 4. Instance which he calls convincing Ser. 32. de verbis Apost Note that this 32. Sect. is not to be found in the Index of Possidius the outmost that can be gathered from it is that in Saint Austin's and the Churches judgement it was not to be doubted that our Brethren were helped by these prayers so that God might deal with them more mercifully then their sins deserved and that prayers and offerings were made for them out of an intention of commending them to Gods mercy and what of all this For 1. Doth not the same Austine pray that God would deal more mercifully with his mother then her sins deserv'd did he not commend her to Gods mercy albeit he verily thought she was in Abrahams bosome 2. What is this more then what Saint Paul prays for Onesiphorus that he might find mercy in that day the day of Judgement and Saint Peter's speaking of sins to be blotted out at the day of our refreshment Well then they commended their brethren to Gods mercy as knowing that they deserved these punishments from which they could not be otherwise delivered then by the clemency and mercy of God which is very true and yet makes not at all for purgatory and indeed their prayers for pardon of sins was only thus that God would at the last day proclaim them pardon'd and would not cast them
succeed theirs and must it be therefore carnal as well as this service of the Jewes If this Argument be good our sacrifice succeeds a proper sacrifice and therefore it is so must not this also be esteemed so Our sacrifice succeeded a bloodysacrifice and therefore it is such our sacrifice succeeded a sacrifice of bruit beasts and therefore it is such Our second Consideration is that the Eucharist may be called a sacrifice symbollically as representing applying and some way impetrating for us all the benefits of Christs real sacrifice on the Cross For seeing the signes are often put for the things signified Chrysost H. 27. in Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb dem Evan l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vide For. Cons mod p. 451. and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acquire the names of what they represent and bring to our remembrance Yea seeing the Apostle tells the Galathians that Christ was crucified amongst them because his sufferings on the Crofs were most lively represented to them by his preaching why may not we on the same account call the Eucharist in this sense a sacrisice as being that in which Christs sufferings are far more lively and accurately set forth Yea a perfect remembrance of a sacrifice as the Fathers call it yea secondly we allow it to be a sacrifice in this sence as exhibi ting to us all the benefits of Christs sacrifice upon the Cross for we all allow that what ever Christ dying and shedding his blood for us procured is not only represented there but applyed to the faithful and exhibited to his faith And here come in the residue of his citations and 1. That of Ignatius is Spurious Epist ad Smyrn S. 2 p. 144. you may find the words upon which the force of the argument depends written in Red Letters in the Edition of Bishop Vsher Secondly As to that of S. Cyprian In his Epis to Caecil not Cyril as Mr. C. who was more a Priest of the most high God then our Lord who offered a sacrifice to God the Father and offered the very same that Melchisedec offered that is bread and wine to wit his own body and blood which it could not be otherwise then figuratively or significatively and commanded the same viz. bread and wine to be afterward done in memory of him that Priest therefore doth truly supply the place and function of Christ and imitates that which Christ did who undertakes to offer as he sees Christ himself offered viz. bread and wine as the Ancient Church was wont to do and this they believed our blessed Saviour himself did when at the Institution of this holy Rite Mr. Mede ib. he took the Bread and Cup into his hands and looking up to heaven gave thanks and blessed who after his example first offered the bread and wine unto God to agnize him Lord Paramount of the Creature and then received them from him again in a banquet as the Symbols of the body and blood of his Son now the words thus expounded have nothing in them Son now the pertinent to your purpose nothing to prove any sacrifice of Christs body much less to prove a true and proper sacrifice which that S. Cyprian never dream'd of we may be sufficiently assured from this Epistle to Caecilius whose words are these because saith he we make mention of Christs passion in all our sacrifices for the passion of the Lord is the sacrifice we offer we ought to do no other thing then what Christ did If the passion of Christ be the Sacrifice we offer how is the Eucharist properly so seeing the Scripture tells us that Christ ought to suffer only once and his glorious body is now impatible how doth he really suffer and if not then is there only a remembrance of his passion made and therefore his passion that is the Commemoration of it must sure be call'd the sacrifice offered by the Church Ubi supra and especially in his first Chap. of the same 2. part where Bellar. Arg. hence is abundantly refuted Mr. C. p. 145. And as Bochartus hath it how impertient is it to alledge a passage where it is said that Christ offered the same which Melchisedech offered which was undoubtedly true bread and wine without any transubstantiation to prove that Christ was sacrificed under the Species of bread and wine Lastly The eighteenth Canon of the Nicene Council tells us that it is a thing which neither Canon nor custome hath delivered that those who have no power of offering viz. the Symbols in commemoration of Christs sacrifice made upon the Cross should give the Body of Christ that is these Symbols of his body to those who offer Ans What of all this Is there any thing in this passage to evince a true and proper sacrifice of Christs body and blood Secondly Eusebius who was present at this Council can tell us what kind of sacrifice the Church then offered Dem. Evang. l. 1. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For thus he speaks Christ offered an excellent sacrifice for the salvation of us all delivering to us the memory thereof to be presented to God in lieu of a sacrifice And towards the end of that chapter we sacrifice the memory of that great sacrifice according to the mysteries delivered to us by Christ Secondly Gelasius from whose Authority you have this Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Premire partie Chapitre 10. tells us moreover that the Nicene Fathers said the Lamb of God was here sacrificed by the Priest without a sacrifice that is Representatively so for so the Grecians call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy things not offered as you may see evinced by Bochartus de la Messe where the interpretation of Cardinal Perron is abundantly refuted and it is made good that the words were not intended to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Cardinal contends but only sans estre Sacrifie which is the proper and natural signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly and lastly we allow it to be a propitiatory sacrifice for as much as by the right participation of it we enjoy remission of sins not as if we thought there was any force in those mysteries to satisfie Gods justice but because hereby we have sealed to us that remission which was purchased by the sacrifice of the Cross And this affords us an Answer to that of S. Chrysostome Hom. 21. Mr. C. p. 145. that the Eucharist is a sacrifice for remission of sins for the Priest that offers for the multitude for the procuring plenty which indeed it was esteemed partly upon this account that so many petitions were put up to God at the solemnity for this oblation of prayer was made through Jesus Christ commemorated in the creatures of bread and wine and it was the custome of the Antients upon the consecration of the dona Mede ib. to be the Body and Blood of Christ to offer to the Divine
the Priest as by the people as well at Mass as at Mattins as well at the Altar as in the body of the Church Indeed you tell us it might have been lawful if the Church had so ordered it But do you think S. Austin would have said so too is it not his business to distinguish betwixt the honour which was given to the Martyrs by the Christians and by the Gentiles to the Daemons and having said that they erect no Altars to them as the heathens did for sacrifice but sacrificed to God alone he adds that at this sacrifice the Martyrs were not invocated as the Gentile Daemons were but only nominated now what is it to his purpose to tell us they are not invocated at the Altar if they were invocated elsewhere well then your last refuge is the invocation of Latria which Saint Austin must be thought to speak of C. 21. because he tells us in his twentieth Book against Faustus Manichaeus that they do not worship the Saints with Latria Ans But who told you that invocation of them was not esteemed Latria by him why else doth he say that the Saints were not worshipped sicut dii as the Heathen Gods and then after this non invocantur Secondly Doth he not say non invocantur sed nominantur now I hope your invocation is not nomination and therefore 't is somewhat above it and consequently somewhat comprehended in that which he opposeth to it so likewise in the place you cite he tells us they afforded that cultum dilectionis and such as was given to holy men that were now alive yea saith he we sound forth their praises but we do not worship them with Latria where albeit Faustus there objected that they worshipped them votis similibus with such prayers or vows as the heathens worshipped their Idols with yet could he not get Saint Austin to acknowledge they prayed unto them at all but having told us that they praised them there he stops and riseth no higher albeit the objection and the business in hand which was to shew what honour the Saints did receive from them and what they thought not fit to yield unto them did require it Thus have we returned an Answer to our Authours pleas from Scripture and Antiquity our next work should be to confront to them those many arguments by which our Champions do confute this superstition and plead the cause of Christ against them but I shall wave it at present and content my self with evidencing the judgement and practice of Antiquity to run contrary to them And 1. Sect. 19 It is a strong presumption that this Invocation of Saints is not so pious so profitable as the Trent Council doth imagine in that we find neither precept nor example of all the Fathers of the Old Testament whereby this kind of service to them may be warranted To this the usual Answer of the Papist is Vid. Bellar. praefat in controvers de Eccles triumph ante that the spirits of the Patriarchs and Prophets and other Worthies who flourished under the Old Testament were kept in limbus patrum a place nigh to hell appointed for these Fathers to be retained in till the descent of our Blessed Saviour thither But this Answer is evidently grounded upon a false foundation it being clear from Scripture that they were not included in such a place but did enjoy the Kingdome of Heaven Luk. 13 28. For Abrahams bosom is clearly propounded as the place into which the Blessed Angels before the death of Christ convey'd the souls of those which departed in the favour of God Luke 16. and that this bosome is virtually and in terms equivalent Cap. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall ly down promised to those which afterwards should believe is sufficiently evinced from that place of Saint Matthew many shall come from the East and West and shall sit down with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of heaven for the joys of heaven are likened to a feast in which according to the custom then in use they lay down with the head of one towards the breast of another who is therefore said to lie in his bosom and therefore when 't is said of the faithful that believed after Christs death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they shall lie down at this feast with Abraham 't is as much as if he had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Euthymius paraphraseth it that is they shall lie down in the bosom of Abraham adde to this that when God translated Enoch and Elias was carried up in a Chariot to heaven they could not be conveyed to this limbus patrum a place so nigh to the receptacle of the damned spirits yea 't is not likely they were conveyed to a place where they had no vision of God and yet there is no reason to think Abraham David Daniel and other of the Prophets should be in a worse place or condition then Enoch or Elias seeing they had as large a testimony of their pleasing God as they We go farther yet and urge against them Sect. 20 that in the New Testament it self we can descry no footsteps of this Invocation more then we did in the Scriptures of the Old Saint Paul doth frequently sollicite his brethren to pray for him and for the furtherance of the Gospel P. 1. but not one petition can we find directed to an Angel or Saint departed here presently they flie to their traditions but in vain for if any such tradition as this were at first delivered we demand how it should come pass that for the space of 360 years together after the birth of our Saviour we can find no mention in the Fathers of any such thing but on the contrary when urged by heathens that it was their duty to pray to Saints and Angels they stoutly denied it and cried away with such evil counsel Irenaeus in his first book speaks of Hereticks that had strange phansies concerning Angels attributing much unto them in relation to which he denies that the Church did any thing l. 2. c. 57. viz. in reference to miraculous cures by invocation of Angels or by incantations but purely and manifestly directing prayers to the Lord which made all and invocating the name of our Lord Jesus Christ now whereas Fevardentius tells us that he speaks of the invocation of evil spirits we ask him why then is it that no limitation is given but all Angellical invocation absolutely denied why is it that he binds up the prayers of the Church to God the Father through the name of his Son Lib. de Orat. cap. 12. Tertullian saith we deservedly upbraid those prayers with vanity which are made without the Authority of any precept of our Lord or his Apostles for such are rather to be esteemed superstitious then Religious shew us then a precept of our Lord or his Apostles and we will cease to impeach your practice as superstitious vanity but seeing that is impossible
would not bee members of the church because not united to some Organical part of it Yea 2. In the daies of Elijah there would have been no Church there being no such organical body And 3. Under the prevailing of Arrianisme those Righteous souls who renounced Communion with the Arrians and fled into dens and caves must have renounced the Church Catholick as being Members of no such Organical Body Now hence it follows that the unity of the Church Catholick cannot be external which Mr. C. every where supposeâ—â— and takes for granted but onely internal or that of faith and charity and consequently to prove our separation from the holy Catholick Church it must bee proved that we have not that faith obedience and charity which is requisite to make us members of that Church which is a taske so hard that Mr. C. durst not set upon it 3. Sect. 4 That to be united in external Communion with some such part of the Church Catholick cannot bee necessary to my being a member of it Mr. Chilling p. 255. sect 9. this is evident 1. From the instances now produced 2. Because a man unjustly excommunicated is not in the Churches external Communion and yet hee is still a member of the Church And this also strengthneth the former Corollary 4. Sect. 5 Id. p. 264. That not every separation but onely a causelesse separation from the external Communion of any Church is the sin of Schisme This we have sufficiently proved above VVhence it evidently follows that those Protestants who say they forsook the external Communion of the Church visible that is renounced the belief and practise of some few things which all visible Communions besides them did believe and practise cannot precisely upon this account lye under the imputation of the sin of Schism any more then the seven thousand that refused to bow the knee to Baal or those in the primitive times that refused communion with the Arrian Churches As doing it upon conviction from Scripture Reason and Antiquity that all the visible Churches of the world had in these observances swerved from the Word of God Reason and Antiquity which is every where their plea. Mr. Chil. p. 265. sect 32. Now hence it follows that to leave the Church and to leave her external Communion is not the same that being done by ceasing to bee a Member of it that is by ceasing to have faith and obedience the requisites to make us such which can never bee necessary this by refusing to communicate with any Church in her Liturgies and publick worship and indeed were these the same it must of necessity follow that no two Churches divided in external communion can bee both true parts of the Catholick Church Mr. Chil. p. 271 sect 50. and consequently that either the Church of Rome which is thus divided from all other Christians is no part of the Catholick Church or which is more uncharitable that all the Churches of Christendome besides her must bee excluded from being parts of the Church Catholick as being divided in external communion from the Roman yea when the Western and Eastern Churches refused communion with each other one of them presently must bee excluded from the Catholick Church Yea it will follow that either there is some particular Church that is by promise from God freed from ever admitting any superstitions or corruptions into her Liturgies and publick services or else that to separate from superstitions and corruptions crept into these particular Churches is to become no Churches which is as rediculous as to say that to purge any person from those distempers which others labour under were to unâ—man him Indeed I know that the Roman Church pretends to bee the guide of the faith of others to be secured from these corruptions and consequently to bee the Root of Union to other true Orthodox Churches but this pretence is so assaulted by Mr. Chil. P. 337. sect 20. that I am confident they are not able to stand out against the evidence of his Reason Thus then hee Is it possible that any Christian heart can believe that not one amongst all the Apostles who were men very good and desirous to direct us in the surest way to Heaven instructed by the Spirit of God in all necessary points of Faith and therefore certainly not ignorant of this most necessary point of Faith should ad rei memoriam write this necessary doctrine plainly so much as once certainly in all reason they had provided much better for the good of Christians if they had wrote this though they had writ nothing else Meethinks the Evangelists undertaking to write the Gospel of Christ could not possibly have omitted any one of them especially this most necessary point of faith had they known it necessary St. Luke especially who plainly professeth that his intent was to write all things necessary Meethinks St. Paul writing to the Romans could not but have congratulated this their priviledge to them Meethinks instead of saying Your faith is spoken of all the world over which he saith also of the Thessalonians he could not have failed to have told them once at least in plain terms that their faith was the Rule for all the world for ever but then sure he would not have put them in fear of an impossibility as hee doth chap. 11. That they also nay the whole Church of the Gentiles if they did not look to their standing might fall away to infidelity as the Jews ahd done Meethinks in all his other Epistles or at least in one of them hee could not have failed to have given the world this direction had hee known it to have been true that all men were to bee guided by the Church of Rome and none to separate from it under pain of damnation Meethinks writing so often of Hereticks and Anti-Christ he should have given the world this as you pretend onely sure preservative from them How was it possible that St. Peter writing two Catholick Epistles mentioning his own departure writing to preserve Christians in the faith should in neither of them commend them to the guidance of his pretended successours the Bishops of Rome How was it possible that St. James and St. Jude in their Catholick Epistles should not give this Catholick direction Meethinks St. John instead of saying hee that believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God the force of which direction your glosses do quite enervate and make unavailable to discern who are the Sons of God should have said he that adheres to the Doctrine of the Roman Church and lives according to it hee is a good Christian and by this mark you shall know him What man not quite out of his wits if hee consider as hee should the pretended necessity of this doctrine to salvation ordinarily can possibly force himself to conceive that all these good and holy men so desirous of mens salvation should be so deeply and affectedly silent in this matter as