in the Communion of the Church But although for the reasonableness of the thing we have thought fit to take notice of it yet we shall have no need to make use of it since not onely in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubitably more than Conquerors but even in the succeeding Ages we have the advantage both numero pondere men surâ in number weight and measure We do easily acknowledge that to dispute these questions from the sayings of the Fathers is not the readiest way to make an end of them but therefore we do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the foundation and final resort of all our perswasions and from thence can never be confuted but we also admit the Fathers as admirable helps for the understanding of the Scriptures and as good testimony of the Doctrine deliver'd from their forefathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation and therefore if we find any Doctrine now taught which was not plac'd in their way of Salvation we reject it as being no part of the Christian faith and which ought not to be impos'd upon consciences They were wise unto salvation and fully instructed to every good work and therefore the faith which they profess'd and deriv'd from Scripture we profess also and in the same faith we hope to be sav'd even as they But for the new Doctors we understand them not we know them not Our faith is the same from the beginning and cannot become new But because we shall make it to appear that they do greatly innovate in al their points of controversie with us and shew nothing but shadows instead of substances and little images oâ— things instead of solid arguments we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted and choose this sword of Goliath to combat their errors for non est alter talis It is noâ— easie to find a better than the word of God expounded by the prime and best Antiquity The first thing therefore we are to advertise is that the Emissaries of the Roman Church endeavour to perswade the good People of our Dioceses from a Religion that is truly Primitive and Apostolick and divert them to Propositions of their own new and unheard-of in the first ages oâ— the Christian Church For the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of faith and therefore unless there can be new Scriptures we can have no new matters of belief no new articles of faith Whatsoever we cannot prove from thence we disclaim it as not deriving from the Fountains of our Saviour We also do believe the Apostles Creed the Nicene with the additions of Constantinople and that which is commonly called the Symbol of Saint Athanasius and the four first General Councils are so intirely admitted by us that they together with the plain words of Scripture are made the rule and measure of judging Heresies amongst us and in pursuance of these it is commanded by our Church that the Clergy shall never teach any thing as matter of Faith religiously to be observed but that which is agreeable to the Old and New Testament and collected out of the same Doctrine by the Ancient Fathers and Catholick Bishops of the Church This was undoubtedly the Faith of the Primitive Church they admitted all into their Communion that were of this faith they condemned no Man that did not condemn these they gave letters communicatory by no otheâ— cognisance and all were Brethren who spake this voice Hanc legenâ— sequentes Christianorum Catholicorumâ— nomen jubemus amplecti reliquos verâ— dementes vesanosque judicantes haeretici dogmatis infamiam sustinere said the Emperors Gratian Valentiniaâ— and Theodosius in their Proclamation to the People of C. P. All that believ'd this Doctrine were Christianâ— and Catholicks viz. all they who believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity which indeeâ— was the summ of what was decreeâ— in explication of the Apostles Creed in the four first General Councils And what faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace the surer ligaments of Catholick Communion or the firmer basis of a holy life and of the hopes of Heaven hereafter than the measures which the Holy Primitive Church did hold and we after them That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did acknowledge to be the adaequate foundation of their hopes in the matters of belief The way which they thought sufficient to go to Heaven in is the way which we walk what they did not teach we do not publish and impose into this faith entirely and into no other as they did theirs so we baptize our Catechumens The Discriminations of Heresie from Catholick Doctrine which they us'd we use also and we use no other and in short we believe all that Doctrine which the Church of Rome believes except those things which they have superinduc'd upon â—he Old Religion and in which we shall prove that they have innovated So that by their confession all the Doctrine which we teach the people as matter of Faith must be confessed to be Ancient Primitive and Apostolick or else theirs is not so for ours is the same and â—â— both have received this faith from the fountains of Scripture and Universaâ— Tradition not they from us or we from them but both of us from Christ and his Apostles And therefore there can be no question whetheâ— the Faith of the Church of Englanâ— be Apostolick or Primitive it is so confessedly But the Question is concerning many other particulars whicâ— were unknown to the Holy Doctor of the first ages which were no part â—â— their faith which were never put intâ— their Creeds which were not determin'd in any of the four first Generâ—â— Councils rever'd in all Christendom and entertain'd every where with greâ—â— Religion and veneration even next 〈◊〉 the four Gospels and the Apostolicâ— writings Of this sort because the Church of Rome hath introduc'd many anâ— hath adopted them into their lanâ— Creed and imposes them upon thâ— People not only without but again the Scriptures and the Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God laying heavy burdens on Mens consciences and making the narrow way to Heaven yet narrower by their own inventions arrogating to themselves a dominion over our faith and prescribing a method of Salvation which Christ and his Apostles never taught corrupting the faith of the â—hurch of God and teaching for Doctrines the Commandements of Men and lastly having derogated from the Prerogative of Christ who alone is the Author and Finisher of our faith and hath perfected it in the revelations consign'd in the Holy Scriptures therefore it â—s that we esteem our selves oblig'd to warn the People of their danger and to depart from it and call upon them â—o stand
usurps the rights of God and does not pursue the interests of true Religion whose very essence and formality is to glorifie God in all his attributes and to do good to man and to advance the honour and Kingdom of Christ. Now how greatly the Church of Rome prevaricates in this great Soul of Religion appears by too evident and notorious demonstration For she hath invented Sacramentals of her own without a Divine warrant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Cyril Concerning the holy and Divine mysteries of Faith or Religion we ought to do nothing by chance or of our own heads nothing without the Authority of the Divine Scriptures But the Church of Rome does otherwise invents things of her own and imputes spiritual effects to these Sacramentals and promises not onely temporal blessings and immunities and benedictions but the collation or increment of Spiritual graces and remission of venial sins and alleviation of pains due to mortal sins to them who shall use these Sacramentals Which because God did not institute and did not sanctifie they use them without faith and rely upon them without a promise and make themselves the fountains of these graces and produce confidences whose last resort is not upon God who neither was the Author nor is an Approver of them Of this nature are Holy Water the Paschal Wax Oyl Palm-boughs Holy Bread not Eucharistical Hats Agnus Dei's Meddals Swords Bells and Roses hallowed upon the Sunday called Laetare Ierusalem such as P. Pius the second sent to Iames the II. of Scotland and Sixtus Quintus to the Prince of Parma Concerning which their Doctrine is this That the blood of Christ is by these applied unto us that they do not onely signifie but produce spiritual effects that they blot out venial sins that they drive away Devils that they cure diseases and that though these things do not operate infallibly as do the Sacraments and that God hath made no express Covenant concerning them yet by the devotion of them that use them and the prayers of the Church they do prevail Now though it be easie to say and it is notoriously true in Theology that the prayers of the Church can never prevail but according to the grace which God hath promis'd and either can onely procure a blessing upon natural things in order to their natural effects or else an extraordinary supernatural effect by vertue of a Divine promise and that these things are pretended to work beyond their natural force and yet God hath not promis'd to them a supernatural blessing as themselves confess yet besides the falseness of the Doctrine on which these superstitions do rely it is lso as evident that these instrumentalities produce an affiance and confidence in the Creature and estrange mens hearts from the true Religion and trust in God while they think themselves blessed in their own inventions and in digging to themselves Cisterns of their own and leaving the Fountain of Blessing and Eternal Life To this porpose the Roman Priests abuse the people with Romantick stories out of the Dialogues of S. Gregory and venerable Bede making them believe that S. Fortunatus cur'd a mans broken thigh with Holy Water and that S. Malachias the Bishop of Down and Conor cur'd a mad-man with the same medicine and that Saint Hilarion cur'd many sick persons with Holy Bread and Oyl which indeed is the most likely of them all as being good food and good medicine and although not so much as a Chicken is now a days cur'd of the Pip by Holy Water yet upon all occasions they use it and the common people throw it upon Childrens Cradles and sick Cows Horns and upon them that are blasted and if they recover by any means it is imputed to the Holy Water And so the Simplicity of Christian Religion the Glory of our Dependence on God the Wise Order and Oeconomy of Blessings in the Gospel the Sacredness and Mysteriousness of Sacraments and Divine Institutions are disorder'd and dishonour'd The Bishops and Priests inventing both the Word and the Element institute a kind of Sacrament in great derogation to the Supreme Prerogative of Christ and men are taught to go in ways which Superstition hath invented and Interest does support But there is yet one great instance more of this irreligion Upon the Sacraments themselves they are taught to rely with so little of Moral and Vertuous Dispositions that the efficacy of one is made to lessen the necessity of the other and the Sacraments are taught to be so effectual by an inherent vertue that they are not so much made the instruments of Vertue as the Suppletory not so much to increase as to make amends for the want of Grace On which we shall not now insist because it is sufficiently remark'd in our reproof of the Roman Doctrines in the matter of Repentance Sect. XII AFter all this if their Doctrines as they are explicated by their practice and the Commentaries of their greatest Doctors do make their Disciples guilty of Idolatry there is not any thing greater to deter men from them than that danger to their Souls which is imminent over them upon that account Their worshipping of Images we have already reprov'd upon the account of its novelty and innovation in Christian Religion But that it is against good life a direct breach of the second Commandment an Act of Idolatry as much as the Heathens themselves were guilty of in relation to the second Commandment is but too evident by the Doctrines of their own Leaders For if to give Divine honour to a Creature be Idolatry then the Doctors of the Church of Rome teach their people to commit Idolatry For they affirm That the same worship which is given to the Prototyp or Principal the same is to be given to the Image of it As we worship the Holy â—rinity and Christ so we may worship the Images of the Trinity of Christ that is with Latria or Divine honour This is the constant sentence of the Divines The Image is to be worshipped with the same honour and worship with which we worship those whose image it is said Azorius their great Master of Casuistical Theology And this is the Doctrine of their great St. Thomas of Alexander of Ales Bonaventure Albertus Richardus Capreolus Cajetan Coster Valentia Vasquez the Jesuists of Colein Triers and Mentz approving Coster's opinion Neither can this be eluded by saying that though the same worship be given to the Image of Christ as to Christ himself yet it is not done in the same way for it is terminatively to Christ or God but relatively to the image that is to the image for God's or Christs sake For this is that we complain of that they give the â—ame worship to an image which is due to God for what cause soever it be done it matters not save onely that the excuse makes it in some sense the worse for the Apology For to do a thing which
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
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
into the body of Christ Whether a Church mouse does eat her Maker Whether a man by eating the consecrated symbols does break his fast For if it be not bread and wine he does not and if it be Christs body and bloud naturally and properly it is not bread and wine Whether it may be said the Priest is in some sense the Creator of God himself Whether his power be greater than the power of Angels and Archangels For that it is so is expresly affirmed by Cassenaeus Whether as a Bohemian Priest said that a Priest before he say his first Mass be the Son of God but afterward he is the Father of God and the Creator of his body But against this blasphemy a book was written by Iohn Huss about the time of the Council of Constance But these things are too bad and therefore we love not to rake in so filthy chanels but give onely a general warning to all our Charges to take heed of such persons who from the proper consequences of their Articles grow too bold and extravagant and of such doctrines from whence these and many other evil Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently do issue As the tree is such must be the fruit But we hope it may be sufficient to say That what the Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation is absolutely impossible and implies contradictions very many to the belief of which no faith can oblige us and no reason can endure For Christs body being in heaven glorious spiritual and impassible cannot be broken And since by the Roman doctrine nothing is broken but that which cannot be broken that is the colour the taste and other accidents of the elements yet if they could be broken since the accidents of bread and wine are not the substance of Christs body and bloud it is certain that on the Altar Christs body naturally and properly cannot be broken And since they say that every consecrated Wafer is Christs whole body and yet this Wafer is not that Wafer therefore either this or that is not Christs body or else Christ hath two bodies for there are two Wafers But when Christ instituted the Sacrament and said This is my body which is broken because at that time Christs body was not broken naturally and properly the very words of Institution do force us to understand the Sacrament in a sense not natural but spiritual that is truly sacramental And all this is besides the plain demonstrations of sense which tells us it is bread and it is wine naturally as much after as before consecration And after all the natural sense is such as our blessed Saviour reprov'd in the men of Capernaum and called them to a spiritual understanding the natural sense being not onely unreasonable and impossible but also to no purpose of the spirit or any ways perfective of the soul as hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in this Article Sect. VI. OUr next instance of the novelty of the Roman Religion in their Articles of division from us is that of the half Communion For they deprive the people of the chalice and dismember the institution of Christ and praevaricate his express law in this particular and recede from the practise of the Apostles and though they confess it was the practise of the primitive Church yet they lay it aside and curse all them that say they do amiss in it that is they curse them who follow Christ and his Apostles and his Church while themselves deny to follow them Now for this we need no other testimony but their own words in the Council of Constance Whereas in certain parts of the world some temerariously presume to affirm that the Christian people ought to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine and do every where communicate the Laity not onely in bread but in wine also Hence it is that the Council decrees and defines against this error that although Christ instituted after supper and administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread aud wine yet this notwithstanding And although in the primitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds Here is the acknowledgment both of Christs institution in both kinds and Christs ministring it in both kinds and the practise of the primitive Church to give it in both kinds yet the conclusion from these premises is We command under the pain of Excommunication that no Priest communicate the people under both kinds of bread and wine The opposition is plain Christs Testament ordains it The Church of Rome forbids it It was the primitive custom to obey Christ in this a later custom is by the Church of Rome introduc'd to the contrary To say that the first practise and institution is necessary to be followed is called Heretical to refuse the later subintroduc'd custom incurrs the sentence of Excommunication and this they have pass'd not onely into a law but into an Article of Faith and if this be not teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and worshipping God in vain with mens traditions then there is and there was and there can be no such thing in the world So that now the question is not whether this doctrine and practise be an INNOVATION but whether it be not better it should be so Whether it be not better to drink new wine than old Whether it be not better to obey man than Christ who is God blessed for ever Whether a late custom be not to be preferr'd before the ancient a custom dissonant from the institution of Christ before that which is wholly consonant to what Christ did and taught This is such a bold affirmative of the Church of Rome that nothing can suffice to rescue us from an amazement in the consideration of it especially since although the Institution it self being the onely warranty and authority for what we do is of it self our rule and precept according to that of the Lawyer Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituuntur docentur homines yet besides this Christ added preceptive words Drink ye all of this he spake it to all that receiv'd who then also represented all them who for ever after were to remember Christs death But concerning the doctrine of Antiquity in this point although the Council of Constance confess the Question yet since that time they have taken on them a new confidence and affirm that the half Communion was always more or less the practise of the most Ancient times We therefore think it fit to produce testimonies concurrent with the saying of the Council of Constance such as are irrefragable and of persons beyond exception Cassander affirms That in the Latine Church for aboue a thousand years the body of Christ and the blood of Christ were separately giuen◠the body apart and the blood apart after the consecration
God who will not be worshipped by an Image we say that besides all this This whole Doctrine and practise is an innovation in the Christian Church not practis'd not endured in the primitive ages but expresly condemned by them and this is our present undertaking to evince The first notice we find of Images brought into Christian Religion was by Simon Magus indeed that was very Ancient but very heretical and abominable but that he brought some in to be worshipped we find in Theodoret and S. Austin S. Irenaeus tells That the Gnosticks or Carpocrations did make images and said that the form of Christ as he was in the flesh was made by Pilate and these Images they worshipped as did the Gentiles These things they did but against these things the Christians did zealously and piously declare We have no Image in the world said S. Clemens of Alexandria It is apparently forbidden to us to exercise that deceitful art For it is written Thou shalt not make any similitude of any thing in Heaven above c. And Origen wrote a just Treatise against Celsus in which he not onely affirms That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion but that they ought not and were by God forbidden to do so To the same purpose also Lactantius discourses to the Emperor and confutes the pretences and little answers of the Heathen in that manner that he leaves no pretence for Christians under another cover to introduce the like abomination We are not ignorant that those who were converted from Gentilism and those who lov'd to imitate the customs of the Roman Princes and people did soon introduce the Historical use of Images and according to the manner of the world did think it honourable to depict or make Images of those whom they had in great esteem and that this being done by an esteem relying on Religion did by the weakness of men and the importunity of the Tempter quickly pass into inconvenience and superstition yet even in the time of Iulian the Emperor S. Cyril denies that the Christians did give veneration and worship to the Image even of the Cross it self which was one of the earliest temptations and S. Epiphanius it is a known story tells that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture as it were of Christ or some Saint in the Church against the Authority of Scripture He cut it in pieces and advis'd that some poor man should be buried in it affirming that such Pictures are against Religion and unworthy of the Church of Christ. The Epistle was translated into Latine by S. Hierome by which we may guess at his opinion in the question The Council of Eliberis is very ancient and of great fame in which iâ— is expresly forbidden that what is worshipped should be depicted on the walls and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches S. Austin complaining that he knew oâ— many in the Church who were Worshippers of Pictures calls them Superstitious and addes that the Church condemns such customs and strives to correct them and S. Gregory writing to Serenus Bishop of Massilia says he would not have had him to break the Pictures and Images which were there set for an historical use but commends him for prohibiting any one to worship them and enjoyns him still to forbid it But Superstition by degrees creeping in the Worship of Images was decreed in the seventh Synod or the second Nicene But the decrees of this Synod being by Pope Adrian sent to Charls the Great he convocated a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francfurt who discussed the Acts pass'd at Nice and condemn'd them And the Acts of this Synod although they were diligently suppressed by the Popes arts yet Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus Blondus Adon Aymonius â—and Regino famons Historians tell us That the Bishops of Francfurt condemn'd the Synod of Nice and commanded it should not be called a General Council and published a Book under the name of the Emperor confuting that unchristian Assembly and not long since this Bookâ— and the Acts of Francfurt â— were published by Bishop Tillius by which not onely the infinite fraud of the Roman Doctors is discover'd but the worship of Images is declar'd against and condemned A while after this Ludovicus the son of Charlemain sent Claudius a famous Preacher to Taurinum in Italy where he preach'd against the worshipping of Images and wrote an excellent book to that purpose Against this book Ionas Bishop of Orleans after the death of Ludovicus and Claudius did write In which he yet durst not assert the worship of them but confuted it out of Origen whose words he thus cites Images are neither to be esteemed by inward affection nor worshipped with outward shew and out of Lactantius these Nothing is to be worshipped that is seen with mortal eyes Let us adore let us worship nothing but the name alone of our onely Parent who is to be sought for in the Regions above not here below And to the same purpose he also alleges excellent words out of Fulgentius and S. Hierom and though he would have Images retain'd and therefore was angry at Claudius who caus'd them to be taken down yet he himself expresly affirms that they ought not to be worshipped and withall adds that though they kept the Images in their Churches for history and ornament yet that in France the worshipping of them was had in great detestation And though it is not to be denied but that in the sequel of Ionas his book he does something prevaricate in this question yet it is evident that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for almost nine hundred years after Christ and in Germany it was condemned for almost MCC years as we find in Nicetas We are not unskill'd in the devices of the Roman Writers and with how much artifice they would excuse this whole matter and palliate the crime imputed to them and elude the Scriptures expresly condemning this Superstition But we know also that the arts of Sophistry are not the ways of Salvation And therefore we exhort our people to follow the plain words of Scripture and the express Law of God in the second Commandment and add also the exhortation of S. Iohn Little children keep your selves from Idols To conclude it is impossible but that it must be confessed that the worship of Images was a thing unknown to the primitive Church in the purest times of which they would not allow the making of them as amongst divers others appears in the Writings of Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen Sect. IX AS an Appendage to this we greatly reprove the custom of the Church of Rome in picturing God the Father and the most holy and undivided Trinity which besides that iâ— ministers infinite scandal to all sober minded men and gives the new Arrians in Polonia and Antitrinitarians great and ridiculous entertainment
first of all Apostles not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles but all the Apostles were first It is also evident that S Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence but he was as St. Chrysostom truly says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did all things with the common consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by special authority or principality and if he had any such it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him had succeeded him in it rather than the Bishop of Rome and it being certain as the Bishop of Canaries confesses That there is in Scripture no revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it and we being there told that S. Peter was at Antioch but never that he was at Rome it being confessed by some of their own parties by Cardinal Cusanus Soto Driedo Canus and Segovius that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church nor that Christs institution of this does any other way appear that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the primitive Church but that the holy Fathers both of Africa and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen when they began to interpose with a presumptive Authority in the affairs of other Churches and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Roman Bishop as with a brother not as their superiour and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preeminence with the Bishops of Rome and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome and after all this since it is certain that Christ who foreknows all things did also know that tâ—ere would be great disputes and challenges of this preeminence did indeed suppress it in his Apostles and said not it should be otherwise in succession and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vicars more than what he commanded concerning all Bishops it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so but that it is more than probable tha◠〈◊〉 never intended any such thing and 〈◊〉 the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great schism and usurped a title which is not their due and challenged an authority to which they have no right and have set themselves above others who are their equals and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving and have made great preparation for Antichrist if he ever get into that Seat or be in already and made it necessary for all of the Roman Communion to believe and obey him in all things Sect. XIâ— THere are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture and the practise of the Catholick Apostolick and primitive Church Such are these The Invocâ—â—â—n of Saints the Insufficiencie of Sâ—â—â—â—ures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation their absolving sinners before they have by canonical penances and the fruits of a good life testified their repentance their giving leave to simple Presbyters by Papal dispensation to give confirmation or chrism selling Masses for Ninepences Circumgestation of the Eucharist to be ador'd The dangerous Doctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in collating Sacraments by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he please of his own parish their affirming that the Mass is a proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead Private Masses or the Lords Supper without Communion which is against the doctrine and practise of the ancient Church of Rome it self and contrary to the tradition of the Apostles if we may believe Pope Calixtus and is also forbidden under pain of Excommunication Peractâ consecratione omnes communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia When the consecration is finished let all communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church for so the Apostles appointed and so the Holy Church of Rome does hold The same also was decreed by P. Soter and P. Martin in a Council of Bishops and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Canon Law There are divers others but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted may be sufficient to verifie this charge of Novelty But we have done this the rather because the Roman Emissaries endeavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity and calling their Religion the Old Religion and the Catholick so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth their Religion as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland being neither the Old nor the Catholick Religion but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences But they have taught every Priest that can scarse understand his Breviary of which in Ireland there are but too many and very many of the people to ask where our Religion was before Luther Whereas it appears by the premises that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther than for them to shew theirs before Trent And although they can shew too much practise of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the purest and first ages and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded and where polished and where furnished But when the Keepers of the field slept and the Enemy had sown tares and they had choak'd the wheat and almost destroyed it when the world complain'd of the infinite errors in the Church and being oppressed by a violent power durst not complain so much as they had cause and when they who had cause to complain were yet themselves very much abused and did not complain in all they might when divers excellent persons S. Bernard Clemangis Grosthead Marsilius Ocham Alvarus Abbat Ioachim Petrarch Savanarola Valla Erasmus Mantuan Gerson Ferus Cassander Andre as Fricius Modrevius Hermannus Coloniensis Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun Paulus Langius Staphilus Telesphorus de Cusentiâ Doctor Talheymius Francis Zabarel the Cardinal and Pope Adrian himself with many others not to reckon Wiclef Hus Hierom of Prague the Bohemians and the poor men of Lions whom they call'd Hereticks and confuted with fire and sword when almost all Christian Princes did complain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church and of Religion and
upon Creatures and devices of their own * They greatly sin against Charity by damning all that are not of their opinion in things false or uncertain right or wrong * They break in pieces the salutary Doctrine of Repentance making it to be consistent with a wicked life and little or no amendment * They worship they know not what and pray to them that hear them not and trust on that which helps them not * And as for thâ—â—ommandments they leave one of them out of their Catechisms and Manuals and while they contend earnestly against some Opponents for the possibility of keeping them all they do not insist upon the necessity of keeping any in the course of their lives till the danger or article of their death * And concerning the Sacraments they have egregiously prevaricated in two points For not to mention their reckoning of seven Sacraments which we onely reckon to be an unnecessary and unscholastical error they take the one half of the principal away from the Laity and they institute little sacraments of their own they invent Rites and annex spiritual graces to them what they please themselves of their own heads without a Divine Warrant or Institution and * At last persuade their people to that which can never be excus'd at least from Material Idolatry If these things can consist with the duty of Christians not onely to eat what they worship but to adore those things with Divine Worship which are not God To reconcile a wicked life with certain hopes and expectations of Heaven at last and to place these hopes upon other things than God and to damn all the World that are not Christians at this raâ—e then we hâ—ve lost the true measures of Christianity and the Doctrine and Discipline of Christ is not a Natural and Rational Religion not a Religion that makes men holy but a confederacy under the conduct of a Sect and it must rest in Forms and Ceremonies and Devices of Mans Invention And although we do not doubt but that the goodness of God does so prevail over all the follies and malice of mankind that there are in the Roman communion many very good Christians yet they are not such as they are Papists but by some thing that is higher and before that something that is of an abstract and more sublime consideration And though the good people amongst them are what they are by the grace and goodnâ—ss of God yet by all or any or these opinions they are not so But the very best suffer diminution and allay by these things and very many more are wholly subverted and destroyed CHAP. III. The Church of Rome teaches Doctrines which in many things are destructive of Christian Society in general and of Monarchy in special Both which the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland does by her Doctrines greatly and Christianly support Sect. I. THat in the Church of Rome it is publikely taught by their greatest Doctors That it is lawful to lye or dâ—ceive the question of the Magistrate to conceal their name and to tell a false one to elude all examinations and make them insignificant and toothless cannot be doubted by any man that knows how the Engliâ—h Priests have behav'd themselves in the times of Queen Elizabeth King Iames and the Blessed Martyr King Charles I. Emonerius wrote in defence of it and Father Barnes who wrote a Book against Lying and Equivocating was suspected for a Heretick and smarted severely under their hands To him that asks you again for what you have paid him already you may safely say you never had any thing of him meaning so as to owe it him now It is the Doctrine of Emanuel Sà and Sanchez which we understand to be a great lye and a great sin it being at the best a deceiving of the Law that you be not deceiv'd by your Creditor that is a doing evil to prevent one a sin to prevent the losing of your money If a man asks his wife if she be an Adulteress though she be yet she may say she is not if in her mind secretly she say not with a purpose to tell you so Cardinal Tolet teaches And if a man swears he will take such a one to his wife being compelled to swear he may secretly mean if hereafter she do please me And if a man swears to a Thief that he will give him Twenty Crowns he may secretly say If I please to do so and then he is not bound And of this Doctrine Vasquez brags as of a rare though new invention saying it is gathered out of St. Austin and Thomas Aquinas who only found out the way of saying nothing in such cases and questions ask'd by Judges but this invention was drawn out by assiduous disputations * He that promises to say an Ave Mary and swears he will or vows to do it yet sins not mortally though he does not do it said the great Navar and others whom he follows * There is yet a further degree of this iniquity not onely in words but in real actions it is lawful to deceive or rob your Brother when to do so is necessary for the preservation of your fame For no man is bound to restore stollen goods that is to cease from doing injury with the peril of his credit So Navar and Cardinal Cajetan and Tolet teaches who adds also Hoc multi dicun quoram sententiam potest quis tutâ conscientiâ— sequi Many say the same thing whose Doctrine any man man may follow with a safe Conscience Nay to save a mans credit an honest man that is ashamâ—d to beg may steal what is necessary for him says Diana Now by these Doctrines a man is taught how to be an honest Thief and to keep what he is bound to restore and by these we may not onely deceive our Brother but the Law and not the Law onely but God also even with an Oath if the matter be but small It never makes God angry with you or puts you out of the state of grace But if the matter be great yet to prevent a great trouble to your self you may conceal a truth by saying that which is false according to the general Doctrine of the late Casuists So that a man is bound to keep truth and honesty when it is for his turn but not if it be to his own hinderance and therefore David was not in the right but was something too nice in the resolution of the like case in the fifteenth Psalm Now although we do not affirm that these particulars are the Doctrine of the whole Church of Rome because little things and of this nature never are considered in their publick Articles of Conâ—ession yet a man may do these vile things for so weâ— understand them to be and find justifications and warranty and shall not be affrighted with the terrors of damnation nor the imposition of penances he may for all these things be a good
Catholick though it may be not a very good Christian. But since these things are affirm'd by so many the opinion is probable and the practice safe saith Cardinal Tolet. But we shall instance in things of more publike concern and Catholick Authority No Contâ—acts Leagues Sociâ—ties Promises Vows or Oaths are a suâ—ficient security to him that deals with one of the â—hurch of Rome if he shall please to make use of that liberty which may and many times is and always can be granted to him For first it is affirmed and was practis'd by a whole Council of Bishops at Constance that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks and Iohn Hus and Hierom of Prague and Savanarola felt the mischief of violarion of publick faith and the same thing was disputed fiercely at Worms in the case of Luther to whom Caesar had given a safe conduct and very many would have had it to be broken but Caesar was a better Christian than the Ecclesiasticks and their party and more a Gentleman But that no scrupulous Princes may keep their words any more in such cases or think themselves tied to perform their safe conducts given to Hereticks there is a way found out by a new Catholick Doctrine Becanus shall speak this point instead of the rest There are two distinct Tribunals and the Ecclesiastical is the Superior and therefore if a Secular Prince gives his Subjects a safe conduct he cannot extend it to the Superior Tribunal nor by any security given hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their jurisdiction And upon the account of this or the like Doctrine the Pope and the other Ecclesiasticks did prevail at Constance for the burning of their Prisoners to whom safe conduct had been granted But these things are sufficiently known by the complaints of the injur'd persons But not only to Hereticks but to our friends also we may break our promises if the Pope give us leave It is a publick and an avowed Doctrine That if a man have taken an Oath of a thing lawful and honest and in his power yet if it hinders him from doing a greater good the Pope can dispense with his oath and take off the Obligation This is expresly affirm'd by one of the most moderate of them Canus Bishop of the Canaries But beyond dispute and even without a dispensation they all of them own it That if a man have promised to a woman to marry her and is betrothed to her and hath sworn it yet if he will before the consummation enter inâ—o a Monastery his Oath shall not bind him his promise is null but his second promise that shall stand And he that denies this is accursed by the Council of Trent Not onely husbands and wives espoused may break their vows and mutual obligation against the will of one another but in the Church of Rome children have leave given them to disobey their Parents so they will but turn Friers And this they might do Girls at twelve and Boys at the age of fourteen years but the Council of Trent enlarged it to sixteen But the thing was taught and decreed by Pope Clement the III. and Thomas Aquinas did so and then it was made lawful by him and his Scholars though it was expresly against the Doctrine and Laws of the preceding ages of the Church as appears in the Capitulars of Charls the Great But thus did the Pharisees teach their Children to Cry Corban and neglect their Parents to pretend Religion in prejudice of filial piety In this particular AErodius a French Lawyer an excellently learned man suffered sadly by the loss and forcing of a hopeful son from him and he complain'd most excellently in a book written on purpose upon this subject But these mischiefs are Doctrinal and accounted lawful But in the matter of Marriages and Contracts Promises and Vows where a Doctrine fails it can be supplied by the Popes power Which thing is avowed and own'd without a cover For when Pope Clement the V. condemn'd the Order of Knights Templers he disown'd any justice or right in doing it but stuck to his power Quanquam de jure non possumus tamen ex plenitudine potestatis dictum ordinem reprobamus that is though by right we cannot do it yet by the fulness of power we condemn the said Order For he can dispense always and in all things where there is cause and in many things where there is no cause sed sub majori pretio under a greater price said the tax of the Datary where the price of the several dispensations even in causâ turpi in base and filthy causes are set down Intranti nummo quasi quodam Principe summo Exiliunt valvae nihil auditur nisi salve Nay the Pope can dispense suprà jus contra jus above Law and against Law and right said Mosconius in his books of the Majesty of the Militant Church For the Popes Tribunal and Gods is but one and therefore every reasonable creature is subject to the Popes Empire said the same Authoâ— And what Dispensations he usually gives we are best inform'd by a gloss of their own upon the Canon Law Nota mirabile quod cum eo qui peccat Dispensatur cum illo autem qui non peccat non Dispensatur It is a wonderful thing that they should dispense with a Fornicator but not with him who marries after the death of his first wife * They give Divorces for Marriages in the fourth degree and give Dispensation to marry in the second These things are a sufficient charge and yet evidently so and publikely owned We need not aggravate this matter by what Panormitan and others do say that the Pope hath power to dispense in all the Laws of God except the Articles of Faith and how much of this they own and practise needs no greater instance than that which Volaterran tells of Pope Innocent the VIII that he gave the Norvegians a Dispensation not only to communicate but to consecrate in bread onely As the Pope by his Dispensations undertakes to dissolve the Ordinances of God so also the most solemn Contracts of men Of which a very great instance was given by Pope Clement the VII who dispensed with the Oath which Francis the I. of France solemnly swore to Charls the V. Emperor after the Battel of Pavy and gave him leave to be perjur'd And one of the late Popes dispens'd with the Bastard Son of the Conde D' Olivarez or rather plainly dissolv'd his marriage which he made and consummated with Isabella D' Azueta whom he had publikely married when he was but a mean person the son of Donna Marguerita Spinola and under the name of Iulian Valeasar But when the Conde had declar'd him his son and heir the Pope dissolv'd the first marriage and gave him leave under the name of Henry Philip de Guzman to marry D. Iuana de Valesco Daughter to the Constable of Castile