The Church of Rome teaches Doctrinesâ— which in many things are destructive of Christian Society in general and oâ— Monarchy in special Both which the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland does by her Doctrines greatly and Christianly support 260 A DISSUASIVE FROM POPERY To the People of IRELAND The Introduction THe Questions of difference between Our Churches and the Church of Rome have been so often disputed and the evidences both sides so often produc'd that those who are strangers to the present constitution of affairs it may seem very unnecessary to say them over again and yet it will seem almost imâ—impossible to produce any new matter or if we could it will not be probable that what can be newly alleged can prevail more than all that which already hath been so often urged in these Questions But we are not deterr'd from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the same medicaments are with successe applyed to a returning or an abiding Ulcer and the Preachers of Gods word must for ever be ready to put the People in mind of such things which they already have heard and by the same Scriptures and the same reasons endeavour to destroy their sin oâ— prevent their danger and by the same word of God to extirpate those errors which have had opportunity in the time of our late disorders to spring up and grow stronger not when the Keepers of the field slept but when they were wounded and their hands cut ofâ—â— and their mouths stopp'd lest they should continue or proceed to do the work of God thoroughly A little warm Sun and some indulgent showers of a softer rain have made many weeds of erroneous Doctrine to take root greatly and to spread themselves widely and the Bigots of the Roman Church by their late importune boldness and indiscreet frowardness in making Proselytes have but too manifestly declar'd to all the World that if they were rerum potiti â— Masters of our affairs they would suffer nothing to grow but their own Colocynths and Gourds And although the Natural remedy for this were to take away that impunity upon the account of which alone they do encrease yet because we shall never be Authors of such Counsels but confidently rely upon God the Holy Scriptures right reason and the most venerable and prime Antiquity which are the proper defensatives of truth for its support and maintenance yet we must not conceal from the People committed to our charges the great evils to which they are tempted by the Roman Emissaries that while the King and the Parliament take care to secure all the publick interests by instruments of their own we also may by the word of our proper Ministery endeavour to stop the progression of such errors which we know to be destructive of Christian Religion and consequently dangerous to the interest of souls In this procedure although we shall say some things which have not been alwayes plac'd before their eyes and others we shall represent with a fittingness to their present necessities and all with Charity too and zeal for their souls yet if we were to say nothing but what hath been often said already we are still doing the work of God and repeating his voice and by the same remedies curing the same diseases and we only wait for the blessing of God prospering that importunity which is our duty according to the avice of Solomon In the Morning sow thy seed and in the Evening withhold not thy hand for thou knowest not whether shall prosper either this or that or whether they both shall be alike good CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Roman Church in the Controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive Sect. I. IT was the challenge of St. Augustine to the Donatists who as the Church of Rome does at this day inclos'd the Catholick Church within their own circuits Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel it self or out of the Letters of the Apostles Read it thence and we believe it Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith the Old and New Testament the words of Christ and the words of the Apostles For nothing else can be the Foundation of our Faith whatsoever came in after these for is est it belongs not unto Christ. To these we also add not as Authors or Finishers but as helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the Senâ—iments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God in the Ages next after the Apostles Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private opinion even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr but that we all acknowledge that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of Doctrine and sound words which was at first delivered to the Saints and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosom of Christ and seal'd the true faith with their lives and with their deaths and by both gave testimony unto Jesus and had from him the testimony of his Spirit And this method of procedure we now choose not only because to them that know well how to use it to the Sober and the Moderate the Peaceable and the Wise it is the best the most certain visible and tangible most humble and satisfactory but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity Indeed the present Roman Doctrines which are in difference were invisible and unheard-of in the first and best antiquity and with how ill success their quotations are out of the Fathers of the first three Ages every inquiring Man may easily discern But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages where secular interest did more prevail and the writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of controversie and ambiguous senses fitted to their own times and questions full of proper opinions and such variety of sayings that both sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring sayings for themselves respectively Now although things being thus it will be impossible for them to conclude from the sayings of a number of Fathers that their doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alleged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then matter of faith or a Doctrine of the Church for if it had these had been Hereticks accounted and not have remain'd
of Bishops was greatly diminished at the erecting of the Cluniac and Cistercian Monks about the year ML but about the year MCC it was almost swallowed up by privileges granted to the Begging Friers and there kept by the power of the Pope which power got one great step more above the Bishops when they got it declared that the Pope is above a Coâ—ncil of Bisâ—ops and at last it was turn'd into a new doctrine by Cajetane who for his prosperous invention was made a Cardinal that all the whole Apostolick or Episcopal power is radical and inherent in the Pope in whom is the fulness of the Ecclesiastical authority and that Bishops receive their portion of it from him and this was first boldly maintain'd in the Council of Trent by the Jesuits and it is now the opinion of their Order but it is also that which the Pope challenges in practise when he pretends to a power over all Bishops and that this power is deriv'd to him from Christ when he calls himself the Universal Bishop and the Vicarial Head of the Church the Churches Monarch he from whom all Ecclesiastical Authority is derived to whose sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be subject Now this is it which as it is productive of infinite mischiefs so it is an Innovation and an absolute deflexion from the primitive Catholick Doctrine and yet is the great ground-work and foundation of their Church This we shall represent in these following testimonies Pope Eleutherius in an Epistle to the Bishops of France says that Christ committed the Universal Church to the Bishops and S. Ambrose says that the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ and is his substituteâ— But famous are the words of S. Cyprian The Church of Christ is one through the whole world divided by him into many members and the Bishoprick is but one diffused in the agreeing plurality of many Bispops And again To every Pastor a portion of the flock is given which let every one of them rule and govern By which words it is evident that the primitive Church understood no Prelation of one and Subordination of another commanded by Christ or by virtue of their Ordination but onely what was for orders sake introduc'd by Princes and consent of Prelates And it was to this purpose very full which was said by Pope Symmachus As it is in the holy Trinity whose power is one and undivided or to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed none is before or after other none is greater or less than another so there is one Bishoprick amongst divers Bishops and therefore why should the Canons of the ancient Bishops be violated by their Successors Now these words being spoken against the invasion of the rights of the Church of Arles by Anastasius and the question being in the exercise of Jurisdiction and about the institution of Bishops does fully declare that the Bishops of Rome had no superiority by the laws of Christ over any Bishop in the Catholick Church and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him than Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocese And therefore all the Church of God whenever they reckoned the several orders and degrees of Ministery in the Catholick Church reckon the Bishop as the last and supreme beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For as the whole Hierarchy ends in Iesus so does every particular one in its own Bishop Beyond the Bishop there is no step till you rest in the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls Under him every Bishop is supreme in spirituals and in all power which to any Bishop is given by Christ. S. Ignatius therefore exhorts that all should obey their Bishop and the Bishop obey Christ as Christ obeyed his Father There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine institution But as Origen teaches The Apostles and they who after them are ordainâ—d by God that is the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church and the Prophets have the second place The same also is taught by P. Gelasius by S. Hierom and Fulgentius and indeed by all the Fathers who spake any thing in this matter Insomuch that when Bellarmine is in this question press'd out of the book of Nilus by the Authority of the Fathers standing against him he answers Papam Patres non habere in Ecclesiâ sed Filios omnes The Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church for they are all his Sons Now although we suppose this to be greatly sufficient to declare the Doctrine of the primitive Catholick Church concerning the equality of power in all Bishops by Divine right yet the Fathers have also expresly declared themselves that one Bishop is not superiour to another and ought not to judge another or force another to obedience They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops or by tyrannical power drives his collegues to a necessity of obedience since every Bishop according to the license of his own liberty and power hath his own choice and cannot be judged by another nor yet himself judge another but let us all expect the judgment of our L. Iesus Christ who onely and alone hath the power of setting us in the Government of his Church and judging of what we do This wasâ—spoken and intended against P. Stephen who did then begin dominari in clero to lord it over Gods heritage and to excommunicate his brethren as Demetrius did in the time of the Apostles themselves but they both found their reprovers Demetrius was chastised by S. Iohn for this usurpation and Stephen by S. Cyprian and this also was approv'd by S. Austin We conclude this particular with the words of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome who because the Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal Bishop said It was a proud title prophane sacrilegious and Antichristian and therefore he little thought that his successors in the same See should so fiercely challenge that Antichristian title much less did the then Bishop of Rome in those ages challenge it as their own peculiar for they had no mind to be or to be esteemed Antichristian Romano pontifici oblatum est sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assump sit His predecessors it seems had been tempted with an offer of that title but none of them ever assumed that name of singularity as being against the law of the Gospel and the Canons of the Church Now this being a matter of which Christ spake not one word to Saint Peter if it be a matter of faith and salvation as it is now pretended it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent But though he was silent of any intention to do this yet S. Pauâ— was not silent that Christ did otherwise for he hath set in his Church primùm Apostolos
upon the wayes and ask after the old paths and walk in them lest they partake of that curse which is â—hreatned by God to them who remove â—he Ancient Land-marks which our Fathers in Christ have set for us Now that the Church of Rome cannot not pretend that all which she imposes is Primitive and Apostolick appears in this That in the Church of Rome there is pretence made to a power not only of declaring new articles of faith but of making new Symbols or Creeds and imposing them as of necessity to Salvation Which thing is evident in the Bull of Pope Leo the Tenth against Martin Luther in which amongst other things he is condemn'd for saying It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or Pope to constitute Articles of Faith We need not adâ— that this power is attributed to thâ— Bishops of Rome by Turrecremata Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona Petrus de Ancorano and the Famoâ—â— Abbot of Panormo that the Popâ— cannot only make new Creeds buâ— new Articles of Faith that he can make that of necessity to be believ'd which before never was necessary that he is the measure and rule and the very notice of all credibilities That the Canon Law is the Divine law and whatever law the Pope promulges God whose Vicar he is is understood to be the promulger That the souls of Men are in the hands of the Pope and that in his arbitration Religion does consist which are the very words of Hostiensis and Ferdinandus ab Inciso who were Casuists and Doctors of Law of great authority amongst them and renown The thing it self is not of dubious disputation amongst them but actually practis'd in the greatest instances as is to be seen in the Bull of Pius the fourth at the end of the Council of Trent by which all Ecelesiasticks are not onâ—y bound to swear to all the Articles of the Council of Trent for the present and for the future but they are put into a new Symbol or Creed and they are corrobroated by the same decretory clauses that are us'd in the Creed of Athanasius that this is the true Catholick Faith â— and that without this no Man can be saved Now since it cannot be imagined that this power to which they pretend should never have been reduc'd to act and that it is not credible they should publish so inviduous and ill-sounding Doctrine to no purpose and to serve no end it may without furtheâ— evidence be believed by all discerning persons that they have need of this Doctrine or it would not have been taughâ— â— and that consequently without moâ—â—adoe it may be concluded that some 〈◊〉 their Articles are parts of this new faithâ— and that they can therefore in no senâ—â— be Apostolical unless their being Roâ—man makes them so To this may be added another conâ—sideration not much less material thâ—â— besides what Eckius told the Elector 〈◊〉 Bavaria that the Doctrines of Luthâ—â— might be overthrown by the Fatherâ— though not by Scripture they haâ—â— also many gripes of conscience conceâ—â—ning the Fathers themselves that thâ— are not right on their side and of thâ— they have given but too much demonstration by their Expurgatory indices The Serpent by being so curious a defender of his head shews where his danger is and by what he can most readily be destroyed But besides their innumerable corruptings of the Fathers writings their thrusting in that which was spurious and like Pharaoh killing the legitimate Sons of Israel though in this they have done very much of their work and made the Testimonies of the Fathers to be a record infinitely worse than of themselves uncorrupted they would have been of which divers Learned Persons have made publick complaint and demonstration they have at last fallen to a new trade which hath caus'd more dis-reputation to â—hem than they have gain'd advantage â—nd they have virtually confess'd that â—n many things the Fathers are against â—hem For first the King of Spain gave a â—ommission to the Inquisitors to purge â—ll Catholick Authors but with this clause iique ipsi privatim nullisque consciis apud se indicem expurgatorium habebunt quem eundum neque aliis communicabunt neque ejus exemplum ulli dabunt that they should keep the expurgatory Index privately neither imparting that index nor giving a copy of it to any But it happened by the Divine providence so ordering it that about thirteen years after a copy of it was gotten and published by Iohannes Pappus and Franciscus Iunius anâ— since it came abroad against their wills they find it necessary now to own it and they have printed it themselvesâ— Now by these expurgatory Table what they have done is known to aâ—â— Learned Men. In St. Chrysostomâ— Works printed at Basil these words The Church is not built upon the Maâ— but upon the faith are commanded 〈◊〉 be blotted out and these There is 〈◊〉 merit but what is given us by Christ and yet these words are in his Sermoâ— upon Pentecost and the former worâ— are in his first homily upon that of Sâ—â— Iohn Ye are my friends c. Tâ—â— like they have done to him in many other places and to St. Ambrose and to St. Austin and to them all insomuch that Ludovicus Saurius the Corrector of the Press at Lyons shewed and complain'd of it to Iunius that he was forc'd to cancellate or blot out many sayings of St. Ambrose in that edition of his works which was printed at Lyons 1559. So that what they say on occasion of Bertrams book In the old Catholick Writers we suffer very many errors and extenuate and excuse them and finding out some commentary we feign some convenient sense when they are oppos'd in disputations they do indeed practise but esteem it not sufficient for the words which make against them they wholly leave out of their editions Nay they correct the very Tables or Indices made by the Printers or Correctors insomuch that out of one of Frobens indices they have commanded these words to be blotted The use â—f images forbidden The Eucharist no â—acrifice but the memory of a sacrifice Works although they do not justifie yet are necessary to Salvation Marriage iâ— granted to all that will not contain Venial sins damn The dead Saints afteâ— this life cannot helf us nay out of the Index of St. Austins Works by Claudius Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur Dele Soluâ— Deus ador andus that God alone is to bâ— worshipped is commanded to be blotted out as being a dangerous Doctrineâ— These instances may serve instead oâ— multitudes which might be brought oâ— their corrupting the witnesses and razing the records of antiquity that thâ— errors and Novelties of the Church oâ— Rome might not be so easily reprov'dâ— Now if the Fathers were not againâ—â— them what need these arts Whâ— should they use them thus Their oâ—â— expurgatory
And now if it be considered what influence these Doctrines have upon Societies and Communities of men they will need no further reproof than a meer enumeration of the mischiefs they produce They by this means legitimate adulterous and incestuous marriages and disanul lawful Contracts They give leave to a Spouse to break his or her Vow and Promise and to Children to disobey their Parents and perhaps to break their Mothers heart or to undo a Family No words can bind your faith because you can be dispens'd with and if you swear you will not procure a Dispensation you can as well be dispens'd with for that perjury as the other and you cannot be tied so fast but the Pope can unloose you So that there is no certainty in your promise to God or faith to men in Judicatories to Magistrates or in Contracts with Merchants in the duty of Children to their Parents of Husbands to their Wives or Wives to their contracted Husbands of a Catholick to a Heretick and last of all a Subject to his Prince cannot be bound so strictly but if the Prince be not of the Popes persuasion or be by him judg'd a Tyrant his Subjects shall owe him no obedience But this is of particular consideration and reserv'd for the III. Sect. Sect. II. THere is yet another instance by which the Church of Rome does intolerable prejudice to Governments and Societies In which although the Impiety is not so apparent yet the evil is more own'd and notorious and defended and that is the Exemption of their Clergy from the Jurisdiction of Secular Princes and Magistrates both in their Estates and Persons Not onely in the matters of Simony Heresie and Apostasie but in matters of Theft Perjury Murther Adultery Blasphemy and Treason In which cases they suffer not a Clergy man to be judged by the Secular power untill the Church hath quit him and turn'd him over and given them leave to proceed This was verified in the Synod of Dalmatia held by the Legats of Pope Innocent the III. and is now in the Church of Rome pretended to be by Divine Right For it cannot be proved that Secular Princes are the Lawful Superiors and Iudges of Clergy men unless it can be prov'd that the Sheep are better than the Shepherd or Sons than their Fathers or Temporals than Spirituals said Bellarmine And therefore it is a shame says he to see Princes contending with Bishops for precedency or for Lands For the truth is this whatever the custom be the Prince is the Bishops Subject not the Bishop the Princes For no man can serve two Masters the Pope is their own Superior and therefore the Secular Prince cannot be So both Bellarmine and Suarez conclude this Doctrine out of Scripture And although in this as in all things else when he finds it for the advantage of the Church the Pope can dispense and diverse Popes of Rome did give power to the Common-wealth of Venice to judge Clergy men and punish them for great offences yet how ill this was taken by Paulus V. at their hands and what stirs he made in Christendom concerning it the World was witness and it is to be read in the History of the Venetian Interdict and not without great difficulty defended by Marcus Antonius Peregrinus M. Antonius Othelius and Ioachim Scaynus of Padua beside the Doctors of Venice Now if it be considered how great a part of mankind in the Roman Communion are Clergy men and how great a portion of the Lands and Revenues in each Kingdom they have to pretend a Divine Right of Exemtion of their Persons from Secular Judicatories and their Lands from Secular burthens and charges of the Common-wealth is to make Religion a very little friend to the Publick and causes that by how much there is more of Religion by so much there is the less of Piety and Publick Duty Princes have many times felt the evil and are always subject to it when so many thousand persons are in their Kingdoms and yet Subjects to a Forein Power But we need not trouble our selves to reckon the evils consequent to this procedure themselves have own'd them even the very worst of things The Rebellion of a Clergy man against his Prince is not Treason because he is not his Princes Subject It is expresly taught by Emanuel SÃ and because the Frenchmen in zeal to their own King could not endure this Doctrine these words were left out of the Edition of Paris but still remain in the Editions of Antwerp and Collen But the thing is a general Rule That all Ecclesiastical persons are free from Secular Iurisdiction in causes Criminal whether Civil or Ecclesiastical and this Rule is so general that it admits no exception and so certain that it cannot be denied unless you will contradict the principles of Faith So Father Suarez And this is pretended to be allowed by Councils Sacred Canons and all the Doctors of Laws Humane and Divine for so Bellarmine affirms Against which since it is a matter of Faith and Doctrine which we now charge upon the Church of Rome as an Enemy to publick Government we shall think it sufficient to oppose against their Pretension the plain and easie words of S. Paul Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers Every Soul That is saith Saint Chrysostom whether he be a Monk or an Evangelist a Prophet or an Apostle Of the like iniquity when it is extended to its utmost Commentary which the Commenters of the Church of Rome put upon it is the Divine Right of the Seal of Confession which they make so Sacred to serve such ends as they have chosen that it may not be broken up to save the lives of Princes or of the whole Republick saith Tolet No not to save all the World said Henriquez Not to save an Innocent not to keep the World from burning or Religion from perversion or all the Sacraments from demolition Indeed it is lawful saith Bellarmine if a Treason be known to a Priest in Confession and he may in general words give notice to a pious and Catholick Prince but not to a Heretick and that was acutely and prudently said by him said Father Suarez Father Binet is not so kind even to the Catholick Princes for he says that it is better that all the Kings of the World should perish than that the Seal of Confession should be so much as once broken and this is the Catholick Doctrine said Eudaemon Ioannes in his Apology for Garnet and for it he also quotes Suarez But it is enough to have nam'd this How little care these men take of the lives of Princes and the Publick Interest which they so greatly undervalue to every trifling fancy of their own is but too evident by these Doctrines Sect. III. THe last thing we shall remark for the instruction and caution of our Charges is not the least The Doctrines of
earnestly and therefore Controversies may become necessary but because they are not often so but oftentimes useless and always troublesom and as an ill diet makes an ill habit of body so does the frequent use of controversies baffle the understanding and makes it crafty to deceive others it self remaining instructed in nothing but useless notions and words of contingent signification and distinctions without difference which minister to pride and contention and teach men to be pertinacious troublesome and uncharitable therefore I love them not But because by the Apostolical Rule I am tyed to do all things without murmurings as well as without disputings I consider'd it over again and found my self reliev'd by the subject matter and the grand consequent of the present Questions For in the present affair the case is not so as in the others here the Questions are such that the Church of Rome declares them to reach as far as eternity and damn all that are not of their opinions and the Protestants have much more reason to fear concerning the Papists such who are not excus'd by ignorance that their condition is very sad and deplorable and that it is charity to snatch them as a brand from the fire and indeed the Church of Rome maintains Propositions which if the Ancient Doctors of the Church may be believ'd are apt to separate from God I instance in their superaddition of Articles and Propositions derived onely from a pretended tradition and not contain'd in Scripture Now the doing of this is a great sin and a great danger Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Si non est scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus detrahentibus destinatum said Tertullian I adore the fulness of Scripture and if it be not written let Hermogenus fear the wo that is destin'd to them that detract from or adde to it S. Basil says Without doubt it is a most manifest argument of infidelity and a most certain sign of pride to introduce any thing that is not written in the Scriptures our blessed Saviour having said My sheep hear my voice and the voice of strangers they will not hear and to detract from Scriptures or adde any thing to the Faith that is not there is most vehemently forbidden by the Apostle saying If it be but a mans testament nemo superordinat no man adds to it And says also This was the Will of the Testator And Theophilus Alexandrinus says plainly It is the part of a Devillish spirit to think any thing to be Divine that is not in the authority of the holy Scriptures and therefore S. Athanasius affirms that the Catholicks will neither speak nor endure to hear any thing in Religion that is a stranger to Scripture it being immodestiae vaecordia an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written Now let any man judge whether it be not our duty and a necessary work of charity and the proper office of our Ministry to persuade our charges from the immodesty of an evil heart from having a Devillish spirit from doing that which is vehemently forbidden by the Apostle from infidelity and pride and lastly from that eternal Wo which is denounc'd against them that adde other words and doctrines than what is contain'd in the Scriptures and say Dominus dixit The Lord hath said it and he hath not said it If we had put these severe censures upon the Popish doctrine of Tradition we should have been thought uncharitable but because the holy Fathers do so we ought to be charitable and snatch our Charges from the ambient flame And thus it is in the question of Images Dubium non est quin Religio nulla sit ubicunque fimulacrum est said Lactantius Without all peradventure where ever an Image is meaning for worship there is no Religion and that we ought rather to die than pollute our Faith with such impieties said Origen It is against the Law of Nature it being expresly forbidden by the second Commandment as Irenaeus affirms Tertullian Cyprian and S. Augustine and therefore is it not great reason we should contend for that Faith which forbids all worship of Images and oppose the superstition of such Guides who do teach their people to give them veneration to prevaricate the Moral Law end the very Law of Nature and do that which whosoever does has no Religion We know Idolatry is a damnable sin and we also know that the Roman Church with all the artifices she could use never can justifie her self or acquit the common practises from Idolatry and yet if it were but suspicious that it is Idolatry it were enough to awaken us for God is a jealous God and will not endure any such causes of suspicion and motives of jealousie I instance but once more The primitive Church did excommunicate them that did not receive the holy Sacrament in both kinds and S. Ambrose says that he who receives the Mystery other ways than Christ appointed that is but in one kind when he hath appointed it in two is unworthy of thâ— Lord and he cannot have Devotion Now this thing we oughâ— not to suffer that our people by so doâ—ing should remain unworthy of thâ— Lord and for ever be indevouâ— â—â— cozen'd with a false shew of devotion or fall by following evil Guides into the sentence of Excommunication These matters are not trifling and when we see these errours frequently taught and own'd as the onely true Religion and yet are such evils which the Fathers say are the way of damnation we have reason to hope that all wise and good men lovers of souls will confess that we are within the circles of our duty when we teach our people to decline the crooked ways and to walk in the ways of Scripture and Christianity But we have observed amongst the generality of the Irish such a declension of Christianity so great credulity to believe every superstitious story such confidence in vanity such groundless pertinacy such vicious lives so little sense of true Religion and the fear of God so much care to obey the Priests and so little to obey God such intolerable ignorance such fond Oaths and manners of swearing thinking themselves more oblig'd by swearing on the Mass-book than the four Gospels and S. Patricks Mass-book more than any new one swearing by their Fathers soul by their Godsips hand by other things which are the product of those many Tales are told them their not knowing upon what account they refuse to come to Church but onely that now they are old and never did or their Countreymen do not or their Fathers or Grandfathers never did or that their Ancestours were Priests and they will not alter from their Religion and after all can give no account of their Religion what it is onely they believe as their Priest bids them and go to Mass which they understand not and reckon their Beads to tell the number and the tale of
indices are infinite testimoâ—â— against them both that they do so aâ—â— that they need it But besides these things we haâ—â— thought it fit to represent in onâ— aspect some of their chief Doctrines 〈◊〉 difference from the Church of Enâ—â—land and make it evident that they 〈◊〉 indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles Sect. II. FIrst we allege that that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by â—he sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus â— That it should not be lawful for any Man â—o publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall â—are to compose or offer any such to any â—ersons willing to be converted from â—aganism Iudaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of P. Martin the fifth declar'd foâ— the Popes Supremacy But Iohâ— Gerson who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advance'â— the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of thâ— Pope which afterwards moderate Meâ—â—durst not speak but yet some otheâ— spake them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Lateran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an article of faith But for the present it is a probationary article and according to Bellarmine's expression is ferè de fide it is almost an article of Faith they want a little age and then they may go alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new article but it is sine controver si â credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted that although the Ancient Fathers did give the Communion to infants yet they did not believe it necessary to salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himselfâ— and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian belief But we proceed to other instances Sect. III. THe Roman Doctrine of indulgences was the first occasion of the great change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproch to Christendom it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Prieriaâ— Bishop Fisher of Rochester says that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of indulgences and that they began after the people were awhile affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the XII Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the first of England 1300 years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely form himâ—elf to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon Law written by Gratian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of P. Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as ancient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease lest they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merits and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of merits or at lest of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these
Scotus says it was not ancient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory the VII nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiation is Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English Jesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Peter Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there was any substantial change or no. His words are these If it be inquir'd what kind of conversion it is whether it be formal or substantial or of another kind I am not able to define it Onely I know that it is not formal because the same accidents remain the same colour and taste To some it seems to be substantial saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance that it is done essentially To which the former authorities seem to consent But to this sentence others oppose these things If the substance of bread and wine be substantially converted into the body and blood of Christ then every day some substance is made the body or blood of Christ which before was not the body and to day something is Christs body which yesterday was not and every day Christs body is increased and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the conception These are his words which we have remark'd not onely for the arguments sake though it be unanswerable but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new not the Doctrine of the Church And this was written but about fifty years before it was said to be decreed in the Lateran Council and therefore it made hast in so short time to passe from a disputable opinion to an Article of faith But even after the Council Durandus as good a Catholick and as famous a Doctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly maintain'd that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd and although he says that by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held yet it is not onely possible it should be so but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christs body and yet the matter of bread remain and if this might be admitted it would salve many difficulties which arise from saying that the substance of bread does not remain But here his reason was overcome by authority and he durst not affirm that of which alone he was able to give as he thought a reasonable account But by this it appears that the opinion was but then in the forge and by all their understanding they could never accord it but still the questions were uncertain according to that old Distich Corpore de Christilis est de sanguine lis est Déque modo lis est non habitura modum And the opinion was not determin'd in the Lateran as it is now held at Rome buâ— it is also plain that it is a stranger to antiquity De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio said Alphonsus à Castro There is seldome mention made in the ancient writers of transubstantiating the bread into Christs body We know the modesty and interest of the man he would not have said it had been seldome if he could have found it in any reasonable degree warranted he might have said and justified it There was no mention at all of this Article in the primitive Church and that it was a mere stranger to Antiquity will not be denyd by any sober person who considers That it was with so much uneasiness entertained even in the corruptest and most degenerous times and argued and unsettled almost 1300 years after Christ. And that it was so will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this question which we find in the Canon law For Berengarius was by P. Nicolaus commanded to recant his error in these words and to affirm Verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi sensualiter non solùm in sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri That the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually not onely in sacrament but in truth is handled by the priests hands and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy France and Germany yet at this day it is renounc'd by the Church of Rome and unless it be well expounded says the Gloss will lead into a heresie greater than what Berengarias was commanded to renounce and no interpretation can make it tolerable but such an one as is in another place of the Canon law statuimus i. e. abrogamus nothing but a plain denying it in the sense of Pope Nicolas But however this may be it is plain they understood it not as iâ— is now decreed But as it happened to the Pelagians in the beginning of their heresie they spake rudely ignorantly and easily to be reprov'd but being asham'd and disputed into a more sober understanding of their hypothesis spake more warily but yet differently from what they said at first so it was and is in this question at first they understood it not it was too unreasonable in any tolerable sense to make any thing of it but experience and necessity hath brought it to what it is But that this Doctrine was not the doctrine of the first and best ages of the Church these following testimonies do make evident The words of Tertullian are these The bread being taken and distributed to his Disciples Christ made it his body saying This is my body that is the figure of my body The same is affirmed by Iustin Martyr The bread of the Eucharist wâ—s a figure which Christ the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion Origen calls the bread and the chalice the images of the body and bloud of Christ and again That bread which is sanctified by the word of God so far as belongs to the matter or substance of it goes into the belly and is cast away in the secession or separation which to affirm of the natural or glorified body of Christ were greatly blasphemous and therefore the body of Christ which the Communicants receive is not the body in a natural sense but in a spiritual which is not capable of any such accident as the elements are Eusebius says that Christ gave to his Disciples the Symbols of Divine
of the mysteries So Aquin as also affirms According to the ancient custom of the Church all men as they communicated in the body so they communicated in the bloud which also to this day is kept in some Churches And therefore Paschasius Ratbertus resolves it dogmatically That neither the flesh without the bloud nor the bloud without the flesh is rightly communicated because the Apostles all of them did drink of the chalice And Salmeron being forc'd by the evidence of the thing ingenuously and openly confesses That it was a general custom to communicate the Laity under both kinds It was so and it was more There was anciently a Law for it Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur said Pope Gelasius Either all nor none let them receive in both kinds or in neither and he gives this reason Quia divisio unius ejusdem mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest pervenire The mystery is but one and the same and therefore it cannot be divided without great sacrilege The reason concludes as much of the Receiver as the Consecrator and speaks of all indefinitely Thus it is acknowledged to have been in the Latine Church and thus we see it ought to have been And for the Greek Church there is no question for even to this day they communicate the people in the chalice But this case is so plain and there are such clear testimonies out of the Fathers recorded in their own Canon Law that nothing can obscure it but to use too many words about it We therefore do exhort our people to take care that they suffer not themselves to be robb'd of their portion of Christ as he is pleas'd sacramentally and graciously to communicate himself unto us Sect. VII AS the Church of Rome does great injury to Christendom in taking from the people what Christ gave them in the matter of the Sacrament so she also deprives them of very much of the benefit which they might receive by their holy prayers if they were suffered to pray in publick in a Language they understand But that 's denied to the common people to their very great prejudice and injury Concerning which although it is as possible to reconcile Adultery with the seventh Commandment as Service in a Language not understood to the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians and that therefore if we can suppose that the Apostolical age did follow the Apostolical rule it must be conclude that the practise of the Church of Rome is contrary to the practise of the Primitive Church Yet besides this we have thought fit to declare the plain sense and practise of the succeeding Ages in a few testimonies but so pregnant as not to be avoided Origen affirms that the Grecians in their prayers use Greek and the Romans the Roman language and so every one according to his Tongue prayeth unto God and praiseth him as he is able S. Chrysostom urging the precept of the Apostle for prayers in a Language understood by the hearer affirms that which is but reasonable saying If a man speaks in the Persian Tongue and understands not what himself says to himself he is a Barbarian and therefore so he is to him that understands no more than he does And what profit can he receive who hears a sound and discerns it not It were as good he were absent as present For if he be the better to be there because he sees what is done and guesses at something in general and consents to him that ministers It is true this may be but this therefore is so because he understands something but he is onely so far benefited as he understands and therefore all that which is not understood does him no more benefit that is present than to him that is absent and consents to the prayers in general and to what is done for all faithful people But If indeed ye meet for the edification of the Church those things ought to be spoken which the hearers understand said S. Ambrose And so it was in the primitive Church blessings and all other things in the Church were done in the Vulgar tongue saith Lyra Nay not onely the publick Prayers but the whole Bible was anciently by many Translations made fit for the peoples use S. Hierom affirms that himself translated the Bible into the Dalmatian Tongue and Ulphilas a Bishop among the Goths translated it into the Gothick Tongue and that it was translated into all Languages we are told by S. Chrysostome S. Austin and Theodoret. But although what twenty Fathers say can make a thing no more certain than if S. Paul had alone said it yet both S. Paul and the Fathers are frequent to tell us That a Service or Prayers in an unknown Tongue do not edifie So S. Basil S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose and S. Austin and this is consented to by Aquinas Lyra and Cassander And besides that these Doctors affirm that in the primitive Church the Priest and People joyn'd in their Prayers and understood each other and prayed in their Mother-tongue We find a story how true it is let them look to it but it is told by AEneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the II. that when Cyrillus Bishop of the Moravians and Methodius had converted the Slavonians Cyril being at Rome desir'd leave to use the language of that Nation in their Divine Offices Concerning which when they were disputing a voice was heard as if from Heaven Let every spirit praise the Lord and every tongue confess unto him Upon which it was granted according to the Bishops desire But now they are not so kind at Rome and although the Fathers at Treâ—t confess'd in their Decree that the Mass contains in it great matter of erudition and edification of the people yet they did not think it fit that it should be said in the vulgar Tongue So that it is very good food but it must be lock'd up it is an excellent candle but it must be put under a bushel And now the Question is Whether it be fit that the people pray so as to be edified by it or is it better that they be at the prayers when they shall not be edified Whether it be not as good to have a dumb Priest to do Mass as one that hath a tongue to say it For he that hath no tongue and he that hath none to be understood is alike insignificant to me Quid prodest locutionum integritas quam non sequitur intellectus audientis cum loquendi nulla fit causa si quod loquimur non intelligunt propter quos ut intelligant loquimur said S. Austin What does it avail that man speaks all if the hearers understand none and there is no cause why â— man should speak at all if they for whose understanding you do speak understand it not God
understands the Priests thoughts when he speaks not as well as when he speaks he hears the prayer of the heart and sees the word of the mind and a dumb Priest can do all the ceremonies and make the signs and he that speaks aloud to them that understand him not does no more Now since there is no use of vocal prayer in publick but that all together may signifie their desires and stir up one another and joyn in the expression of them to God by this device a man who understands not what is said can onely pray with his lips for the heart cannot pray but by desiring and it cannot desire what it understands not So that in this case prayer cannot be an act of the soul There is neither affection nor understanding notice or desire The heart says nothing and asks for nothing and therefore receives nothing Solomon calls that the sacrifice of fools when men consider not and they who understand not what is said cannot take it into consideration But there needs no more to be said in so plain a case We end this with the words of the Civil and Canon Law Iustinian the Emperour made a Law in these words We will and command that all Bishops and Priests celebrate the sacred Oblation and the Prayers thereunto added in holy Baptism not in a low voice but with a loud and clear voice which may be heard by the faithful people that is be understood for so it follows that thereby the minds of the hearers may be raised up with greater devotion to set forth the praises of the Lord God for so the Apostle teacheth in the first to the Corinthians It is true that this Law was rased out of the Latine versions of Iustinian The fraud and design was too palpable but it prevail'd nothing for it is acknowledged by Cassander and Bellarmine and is in the Greek Copies of Holoander The Canon Law is also most express from an Authority of no less than a Pope and a General Council as themselves esteem Innocent III. in the great Council of Lateran above MCC years after Christ in these words Because in most parts within the same City and Diocess the people of divers Tongues are mixt together having under one and the same faith divers ceremonies and rites we straitly charge and command That the Bishops of such Cities and Dioceses provide men fit who may celebrate Divine Service according to the diversity of ceremonies and languages and administer the Sacraments of the Church instructing them both by word and by example Now if the words of the Apostle and the practise of the primitive Church the Sayings of the Fathers and the Confessions of wise men amongst themselves if the consent of Nations and the piety of our fore-fathers if right reason and the necessity of the thing if the needs of the ignorant and the very inseparable conditions of holy prayers if the Laws of Princes and the Laws of the Church which do require all our prayers to be said by them that understand what they say if all these cannot prevail with the Church of Rome to do so much good to the peoples souls as to consent they should understand what in particular they are to ask of God certainly there is a great pertinacy of opinion and but a little charity to those precious souls for whom Christ dyed and for whom they must give account Indeed the old Toscan Rites and the Sooth-sayings of the Salian Priests Vix Sacerdotibus suis intellecta sed quae mutari vetat Religio were scarce understood by their Priests themselves but their Religion forbad to change them Thus anciently did the Osseni Hereticks of whom Epiphanius tells and the Heracleonitae of whom S. Austin gives account they taught to pray with obscure words and some others in Clemens Alexandrinus suppos'd that words spoken in a barbarous or unknown tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are more powerful The Jews also in their Synagogues at this day read Hebrew which the people but rarely understand and the Turks in their Mosques read Arabick of which the people know nothing But Christians never did so till they of Rome resolved to refuse to do benefit to the souls of the people in this instance or to bring them from intolerable ignorance Sect. VIII THe Church of Rome hath to very bad purposes introduc'd and impos'd upon Christendom the worship and veneration of Images kissing them pulling off their hats kneeling falling down and praying before them which they call giving them due honor and veneration What external honor and veneration that is which they call due is express'd by the instances now reckon'd which the Council of Trent in their Decree enumerate and establish What the inward honor and worship is which they intend to them is intimated in the same Decree By the Images they worship Christ and his Saints and therefore by these Images they pass that honor to Christ and his Saints which is their due that is as their Doctors explain it Latria or Divine worship to God and Christ. Hyperdulia or more than service to the Blessed Virgin Mary and service or doulia to other canoniz'd persons So that upon the whole the case is this What ever worship they give to God and Christ and his Saints they give it first to the image and from the image they pass it unto Christ and Christs servants And therefore we need not to enquire what actions they suppose to be fit or due For whatsoever is due to God to Christ or his Saints that worship they give to their respective Images all the same in external semblance and ministery as appears in all their great Churches and publick actions and processions and Temples and Festivals and endowments and censings and pilgrimages and prayers and vows made to them Now besides that these things are so like Idolatry that they can no way be reasonably excused of which we shall in the next Chapter give some account besides that they are too like the religion of the Heathens and so plainly and frequently forbidden in the Old Testament and are so infinitely unlike the simple and wise the natural and holy the pure and the spiritual religion of the Gospel besides that they are so infinite a scandal to the Jews and Turks and reproach Christianity it self amongst all strangers that live in their communion and observe their rites besides that they cannot pretend to be lawfull but with the laborious artifices of many Metaphysical notions and distinctions which the people who most need them do least understand and that therefore the people worship them without these distinctioâ—s and directly put confidence in them and that it is impossible that ignorant persons who in all Christian countreys make up the biggest number should do otherwise when otherwise they cannot understand it and besides that the thing it self with or without distinctions is a superstitious and forbidden an unlawful and unnatural worship of
have thought fit to adde one Consideration more and that is That it is not fit that they should trust to this or any thing of this not onely because there is no foundation of truth in these new devices but because even the Roman Doctors themselves when they are pinch'd with an Objection let their hold go and to escape do in remarkable measures destroy their own new building The case is this To them who say that if there were truth in these pretensions then all these and the many millions of Indulgences more and the many other ways of releasing souls out of Purgatory the innumerable Masses said every day the power of the Keys so largely imploy'd would in a short time have emptied Purgatory of all her sad inhabitants or it may be very few would go thither and they that unfortunately do cannot stay long and consequently besides that this great softness and easiness of procedure would give confidence to the greatest sinners and the hopes of Purgatory would destroy the fears of Hell and the certainty of doing well enough in an imperfect life would make men careless of the more excellent besides these things there will need no continuation of Pensions to pray for persons dead many years ago To them I say who talk to them at this rate they have enough to answer Deceive not your selves there are more things to be reckon'd for than so For when you have deserved great punishments for great sins and the Guilt is taken off by Absolution and you suppose the Punishment by Indulgences or the Satisfaction of others it may be so and it may be not so For 1. it is according as your Indulgence is Suppose it for forty years or it may be an hundred or a thousand and that is a great matter yet peradventure according to the old penitential rate you have deserved the Penance of forty thousand years or at least you may have done so by the more severe account of God If the Penance of forty years be taken off by your Indulgence it does as much of the work as was promised or intended but you can feel little ease if still there remains due the Penance of threescore thousand years No man can tell the difference when what remains shall be so great as to surmount all the evils of this life and the abatement may be accounted by pen and ink but will signifie little in the perception it is like the casting out of a Devil out of a miserable Demoniack when there still remains fifty more as bad as he that went away the man will hardly find how much he is advanced in his câ—â—e But 2. you have with much labour and some charge purchased to your self so many Quadragenes or Lents of pardon that is you have bought off the Penances of so many times forty days It is well but were you well advis'd it may be your Quadragenes are not Carenes that is are not a quitting the severest Penances of fasting so long in bread and water for there is great difference in the manner of keeping a penitential Lent and it may be you have purchased but some lighter thing and then if your demerit arise to so many Carenes and you purchased but mere Quadragenes without a minute and table of particulars you may stay longer in Purgatory than you expected 3. But therefore your best way is to get a plenary Indulgence and that may be had on reasonable terms but take heed you do not think your self secure for a plenary Indulgence does not do all that it may be you require for there is an Indulgence more full and another most full and it is not agreed upon among the Doctors whether a plenary Indulgence is to be extended beyond the taking off those Penances which were actually enjoyned by the Confessor or how far they go further And they that read Turrecremata Navar Cordubensis Fabius Incarnatus Petrus de Soto Armilla aurea Aquinas Tolet Cajetan in their several accounts of Indulgences will soon perceive that all this is but a handful of Smoke when you hold it you hold it not 4. But further yet all Indulgences are granted upon some inducement and are not ex mero motu or acts of mere grace without cause and if the cause be not reasonable they are invalid and whether the cause be sufficient will be very hard to judge And if there be for the Indulgence yet if there be not a reasonable cause for the quantity of the Indulgence you cannot tell how much you get and the Preachers of Indulgences ought not to declare how valid they are assertivè that is by any confidence but opinativè or recitativè they can onely tell what is said or what is their own opinion 5. When this difficuly is passed over yet it may be the person is not capable of them for if he be not in the state of Grace all is nothing and if he be yet if he does not perform the condition of the Indulgence actually his mere endeavour or good desire is nothing And when the conditions are actually done it must be enquired whether in the time of doing them you were in charity whether you be so at least in the last day of finishing them it is good to be certain in this lest all evaporate and come to nothing But yet suppose this too though the work you are to do as the condition of the Indulgence be done so well that you lose not all the Indulgence yet for every degree of Imperfection in that work you will lose a part of the Indulgence and then it will be hard to tell whether you get half so much as you propounded to your self But here Pope Adrian troubles the whole affair again for if the Indulgence be onely given according to the worthiness of the work done then that will avail of it self without any Grant from the Church and then it is hugely questionable whether the Popes Authority be of any use in this whole matter 6. But there is yet a greater heap of dangers and uncertainties for you must be sure of the Authority of him that gives the Indulgence and in this there are many doubtful Questions but when they are over yet it is worth inquiry for some Doctors are fearful in this point whether the intromission of Venial sins without which no man lives does hinder the fruit of the Indulgence for if it does all the cost is lost 7. When an Indulgence is given put case to abide forty days on certain conditions whether these forty days are to be taken collectively or distributively for because it is confessed that the matter of Indulgences is res odibilis an hateful and an odious matter it is not to be understood in the sense of favour but of greatest severity and therefore it is good to know before-hand what to trust to to inquire how the Bull is penn'd and what sense of Law every word does bear for it may be any