things as Marks of Distinction only without any further Design of lessening their Natures and Qualities by them p. 31. 4. It does not follow that because the Name Catholick in that time when it was for the most part conjoined with the Catholick Faith was a sure Note of a true Church it must always be so even when the Name and the Thing are parted p. 32. The worst of Hereticks laid claim to it p. 33. The Rule to know the True Church by proved from Lactantius and St. Austin ibid. 5. It doth not follow that because the being called after the Names of particular Men in that Age when all so called were for the most part corrupt in the Faith was a sure Hand of Schismaticks and Hereticks that it must always be so p. 33 34. III. The Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the Catholick Faith or Religion neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church p. 34. This justified by comparing her Doctrine in several Points with that delivered by Christ and his Apostles p. 35. For Instance that Angels and Saints are to be prayed unto and worshipped this contrary to Scripture ibid. The worshipping of Images contrary to the second Commandment which they make the same with the first p. 36. The Scripture commands all Persons indifferently to read the Scriptures the Church of Rome allows not this Liberty to the Laity but upon License ibid The Scriptures forbid Prayers in an unknown Tongue and the Church of Rome enjoins such and no other p. 37. Purgatory contrary to Scripture ibid. The denying the Cup to the Laity contrary to the express Instistitution of our Saviour p. 38. The Scripture saith that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament even after Consecration is Bread and Wine the Church of Rome says the Bread and Wine is Transubstantiated into the natural Body and Blood of Christ. p. 39. The Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Scripture derogatory to Christ's own Priestly Oblation whereby he once offered himself a compleat Sacrifice of Expiation p. 40. In all these Particulars the Church of Rome a Corrupter of the Christian Faith and Doctrine and consequently deserves not the name of Catholick ibid The Second Note ANTIQUITY THis Mark and Character of a true Church is not proper to the Church of Rome alone nor in truth doth it belong to it To prove this three things are here offered I. That the Plea of bare Antiquity is not proper to the Church but common to it with other Societies of false Religion p. 41. The Notes of a thing must be proper to that of which they are a Note and not common to it with other things p. 42. 1. Because what is proper to a thing is inseparable from it and did ever belong to it since it had a being and can at no time be absent from it ibid. 2. Other Societies have laid claim to this Note and it could not be denied them and therefore no proper Note of a Church ibid. This shews that bare Antiquity cannot be a Note of Truth p. 44. Antiquity and Priority widely different p. 45. A twofold Antiquity one in respect of us the other absolute and in it self ibid. The Church of Rome will not be tried only by the Scriptures which is the true Antiquity p. 46. Error almost as ancient as Truth for which reason several wicked Doctrines running down to Posterity have made use of the plea of Antiquity to give them countenance and support p. 47. II. The present Church of Rome vainly pretends to true Antiquity i.e. to ancient Truth p. 48. Wherein true Antiquity doth consist ibid. The present Church of Rome not ancient by reason of that alteration they have made in the ancient Creed p. 49. Cardinal Bellarmin's Ratiocination against this charge consisting of 6 things to be observed in all Changes of Religion none of which he says can be shewn in the Church of Rome since the Apostles time ibid. His reasoning built upon very false grounds this considered and largely answered in four Particulars p. 50. 1. As being contrary to all History and Experience there having been great Changes in Religion the Authors and the beginnings c. of which cannot be known p. 50. 2. Neither do the Examples they alledg for this their reasoning serve to no other purpose but to shew the falseness of it as in the case of the Nestorian and Arrian Heresies p. 51. 3. Supposing them true they would uphold the greatest Impieties ibid. The Heathen Gods and their Oracles supported by this Argument p. 52. 4. The Roman Church it self an instance of this there being an acknowledg'd change in it and yet they cannot tell who first began it viz. Communion in one kind ibid. Two instances out of Polydore Virgil when and by whom they were brought into the Church of Rome p. 53. 1. Their grand Article of Faith the Papal Authority brought in by Victor and carried on by the following Bishops ibid. The present Definitions of the Catholick Church and the Power of the Pope to depose Kings not challenged till Gregory VII i.e. 1000 Years after Christ ibid. 2. It is known when Images crept into the Church p. 55. A little more than 100 Years since unwritten Traditions were decreed to be a part of the Rule of Faith i. e. of the Word of God. ibid. III. That the Religion of the Church of England by Law established is the true Primitive Christianity p. 56. The Third Note DURATION THree things are here considered I. What is to be understood by the term Duration p. 58. Duration includes 3 things 1. A Being of a Church from the beginning p. 58 2. The continuance of that Church to the end p. 58 3. The continuance of that Church from the beginning to the end without interruption p. 58 Bellarmine's Application of the first of these to the Church of Rome yet deficient in the latter Branches p. 59. II. How far Duration is a Note of the true Church p. 59. This is no Note by which a true Church is to be found out or distinguished from the false ib. For four Reasons 1. The nature of the thing will not permit that it should be a Note p. 60. 2. That cannot be a Note of the true Church which doth not inseparably belong to the Church in all seasons and cases p. 61. 3. That which is a Note must be proper to the thing which it is the Note of and not common to other things as well as that p. 61 62. Common to false Churches as well as true ibid. 4. If it be a Note of a true Church then those could not be true Churches which have not not had that Duration ib. This unchurches the 7 Churches of Asia p. 62 63. III. The Church of Rome hath no just and sufficient title to this Character p. 63. This proved as to 1. Place 2. Persons 3. Order 4. Doctrine these being the things by which a Church doth exist and is made
Reform'd They call us the Reformed therefore we are Reformed is as good an Argument as we call them Catholicks therefore they are Catholicks In this Sense are those Words of St. Austin cited by Bellarmine Contr. Epist Fundam c. 4. to be understood That should a Stranger happen in any City to enquire even of an Heretick where he might go to a Catholick Church the Heretick would not dare to send him to his own House or Oratory Not that that Heretick did believe that those that there were call'd Catholicks did hold the true Catholick Doctrine for then he could not have believ'd his own but looking upon it as a bare name of Distinction he directed him to that Assembly of Christians that were so called St. Austin seems here to suppose a Case as if a Traveller entring into a City where both Popish and Reform'd Churches were allowed and should chance to meet a Protestant and of him enquire the way to a Catholick Church and he direct him to a Popish one or a Papist and of him enquire the way to a Reform'd Church and he direct him to a Protestant one It would not therefore follow that either the one or the other did believe either Church to answer and correspond with its Name that the Popish was Catholick or the Protestant Reformed but that they were Words of vulgar use whereby they might be known from one another but not the true Church from the false IIII. It does not follow that because the Name of Catholick in that time when it was for the most part in conjunction with the Catholick Faith was a sure Note of a true Church it must always be so even when the Name and Thing are parted It was not long before the Christian Church became miserably torn and rent asunder divided into many and some very great Bodies all pretending to Catholicism By what Mark now is the Catholick Church to be known Not by the Name surely when all Parties laid claim to it and the grossest Hereticks such as the Manichaeans themselves as St. Austin tells us who had the least to shew for it coveted and gloried in it Have never any Hereticks or Scismaticks been styled Catholicks Nor ever any Orthodox styl'd Hereticks The Greek Church is call'd Catholick and yet the Church of Rome will have her an Heretical one The Donatists appropriated to themselves that ample Title and yet St. Austin thought them no better than Shcismaticks The Arrians call'd themselves Catholicks and the Orthodox Homousians and Athanasians but neither the one was the more nor the other the less Catholick for what they were call'd Truth is always the same and the Nature of things remains unalterable let Men fix on them what Names they please By this Rule then is the true Church to be known not because it bears the Name of Catholick for that a Church may do and yet be guilty of Schism and Heresie but because it professes the true Faith and then tho it be in name Heretick it is in reality Catholick This is Lactantius's Rule to discern the true Church by the true Religion That Church alone Instir lib. 4. c. ult Sola Catholica est quae verum cultum retinet says he is Catholick that retains the true Worship of God. And St. Austin in his Disputes with the Donatists where the true Church was appeals to the Scripture as the only Infallible Judg Non audiamus haec dico haec dicis sed audiamus haec dicit Dominus c. Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam Epist 166. de unit Eccl. c. 2. Amongst many others to this purpose he hath these Words I say this and thou sayest that but thus saith the Lord. 5. Again does it follow that because the being called after the Names of particular Men in that Age when all so call'd were for the most part corrupt in the Faith was a sure Brand of Schismaticks and Hereticks it must ever be so May not Names and Titles be unjustly and maliciously impos'd If the Churches of the Reformed must go for Hereticks and Scismaticks meerly because they are distinguish'd by the Names of those Men that were the first and most eminent Instruments in that blessed Work as of Lutherans Calvinists Zuinglians the like Is there not the same Reason that the several Orders in the Church of Rome that go under the Names of their particular Founders as the Benedictines Franciscans Dominicans Jansenists and Molinists and others be esteemed so too If there be any Difference the advantage of Reason is on our Side since the Reformed assume not those Names to themselves and tho they deservedly honour the Memories of those Men and with thankful Hearts embrace the Reformation God was pleas'd by their Ministry to make in the Church yet do they by no means affect to be call'd after their Names They own no Name but Christian or Catholick when it signifies Persons adhering to the true Catholick Faith The others are Nick-names fasten'd on them by their Adversaries out of Scorn or Malice to represent them to the World as far as they are able as so many Schismaticks from the Catholick Church and as having other Leaders than Christ and his Apostles But those in the Church of Rome that are denominated from their particular Founders give themselves those Appellations seem to prefer them before that truly Catholick one of Christian which while with some neglect they leave to the Common People they glory and pride themselves in the other so that if this Note of an Heretick is valid it turns with great Force against themselves who are really guilty of it and not against us whom they will make guilty of it but are not III. The Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the Catholick Faith or Religion neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church Whether she is guilty of this or no will be best seen by comparing her Doctrine in several Points with that delivered by Christ and left upon Record by his holy Apostles for tho the Church of Rome will not allow the Scriptures to be the whole and a perfect Rule of Faith and Manners yet they acknowledg them to be the Word of God and granting that they must acknowledg that all those Doctrines and Practices that are forbidden by them are Corruptions and Depravations of it Let us then bring their Faith to the Touchstone How readest thou The Scripture says See Discourse of the Object of Religious Worship 1685. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Mat. 4.10 Which Words evidently appropriate all kinds and all degrees of Religious Worship unto God they being an answer to the Devil's Temptation who requir'd but the lowest Degree the Devil acknowledging that the right he had of disposing of the Kingdoms of the World to be only derivative not natural they were delivered to me At the same time confessed himself not to be the Supream God and consequently cannot be suppos'd
consistent with the Pains and Fire of Purgatory which Bellarmin tells us is hotter than Hell it self is past my Apprehension The Chuch of Rome says that Souls are to continue in Purgatory till they have made full satisfaction for their Sins and are throughly purged from them and that whoever says that there is no Debt of temporal Punishment to be pay'd either in this World or in Purgatory before they can be admitted into Heaven is accursed Concil Trid. Sess 6. Can. 30. The Church of Rome says the Cup is not to be administred to the Laity and gives many reasons for it lest the Blood of Christ should be spilt lest the Wine kept for the Sick should fret lest Wine may not always be had or lest some may not be able to bear the smell or taste of it Whether these are sufficient Reasons or no the Council of Trent enjoyns all to believe them so under an Anathema Concil Trid. Sess 21. Can. 1. 2. The Council of Constance acknowledges that our Saviour instituted the Sacrament in both kinds and that it so continued in the Church of Rome many Centuries and yet with a Notwithstanding to both these it sacrilegiously robs the People of the Cup. Concil Const Sess 13. The Church of Rome says that the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist by the Priests pronouncing these Words Hoc est corpus meum is transubstantiated into the natural Body and Blood of Christ the Species or Accidents only of the Bread and Wine remaining and hath made it an Article to be believed by all under an Anathema Concil Trid. Sess 13. de Real Praes c. 1. Cornel. a Lapide tells us that it was the Opinion of some of their grave Divines that this Change is made after so powerful and effectual manner that if Christ had not been incarnated before the force of this Charm would have incarnated him and cloath'd him with Human Nature The Church of Rome says that in the Sacrifice of the Mass Christ is offered as often as that is celebrated and that tho' therein he be unbloodily offer'd yet is it a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins both of the Living and Dead Concil Trid. Sess 22. Cap. 1. And declares the Person accursed that denies any part of this Ibid. In all these Particulars you see and several other might be instanc'd in the Faith and Doctrine of the Church of Rome bears a manifest repugnance to the Gospel of Christ Now if the Holy Scripture may be allow'd so much as to be a Rule of Faith and Manners in those things it particularly treats of the Church of Rome contradicting that Rule in those things must be condemned for a Corrupter of the Christian Faith or Doctrine And having thus made it evident that she holds not the true Catholick Faith 't is as evident that she is not and consequently deserves not to be called a Catholick Church THE END LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard 1687. The Second Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ. ANTIQUITY Secunda Nota est ANTIQVITAS Bellar. L. iv c. v. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR Apr. 5. 1687. JO. BATTELY IT is a shrewd sign that a Church is in an ill Case when the most learned and witty Defenders of it commend it to the World by such Marks and Characters whereby they say it may be known as are neither proper to it alone nor in Truth belong to it But more truly and evidently belong to them whom they oppose That this is the Case of the present Church of Rome in that Famous Note of ANTIQUITY which Bellarmin and others make a Mark of the true Church I will clearly and distinctly demonstrate by shewing these three Things I. That the Plea of bare Antiquity is not proper to the Church but common to it with other Societies of false Religion II. That true Antiquity is not on the side of the present Roman Church But III. That it is truly on Ours I. It is confessed by all even by them who make Antiquity a Mark of the Church that the Notes of a Thing must be proper to that of which they are a Note and not common to it with other Things Which quite destroys this Note of Antiquity upon a double Account First Because that which is proper to a Thing is inseparable from it and did ever belong to it since it had a Being and can at no Time without the destruction of its Being be absent from it This every Fresh-Man in Learning knows and by that may know that Antiquity is not a Note proper to the Church because it did not always belong to the Church For there was a Time when the Church was New. Which was objected to it by the Adversaries of our Religion and the Defenders of the Church answered the very same to them then that we do to the Romanists now as will appear in the second Thing I have to observe Secondly That other Societies have laid claim to this Note and it could not be denied them and therefore 't is not a proper Note whereby the true Church may be certainly known being common to it with others that are not of the Church 1. For first the Samaritans claimed it against the Jews as appears from the Womans Discourse with our Saviour Joh. iv 20. Our Fathers worshipped in this Mountain c. They had done so for many Ages before they worshipped in Jerusalem For here God appeared unto Abraham who here also built an Altar when he came first out of Chaldea Gen. xii 6 7. Here Jacob likewise built an Altar when he came out of Mesopotamia Gen. xxxiii 20. Here there was a Sanctuary in the Days of Joshua who gave his last Charge to Israel and made a Covenant with them in this Place Chap. xxiv 25 26. Here the Patriarchs were buried v. 32. Nay here-abouts was Shiloh Judg. xxi 19. where by the order of Joshua the Tabernacle and the Ark of God were setled long before it was brought to Jerusalem Josh xviii 1 2. which was all this time in the Hands of the Jebusites To which Plea the Jews could not make an Answer but by maintaining this Principle That not the Antiquity of Place but the Authority of God's Precept was to be their direction in this Case And God it appeared by the Holy Books had chosen Jerusalem to place his Name there 2. Thus the Jews themselves argued against Christ that he did not follow the Tradition of the Elders which had been derived to them from ancient times Mark vii 1 c. and against Christians whom they called the Sect of the Nazarens Acts xxiv 5. as much as to say Hereticks newly sprung up from Jesus of Nazareth 3. And thus the Pagans argued against them both particularly against the Christians saying to St. Paul at Athens May we know what this New Doctrine whereof thou speakest is Acts xvii 19. And in after-times calling it a Novel Religion a
Doctrine Which I doubt not to make appear performs as little as either of the former In order to which I shall endeavour to shew I. What the Cardinal means by Sanctity of Doctrine II. That according to his Notion of it Sanctity of Doctrine is no certain Note of the true Church III. In what Sense it is a certain Note by which any honest Enquirer may distinguish a true Church from a false one IV. That neither in this nor the Cardinal's Notion of it the true Church can be found by any honest Enquirer according to the Principles of the Church of Rome I. What it is that the Cardinal here means by Sanctity of Doctrine To which in short I answer That which he means by it is the Profession of the true Religion both as to Doctrine of Faith and Doctrine of Manners without any mixture of Error For so he explains himself The true Church is not only Catholick and Apostolick and One but also Holy according to the Constantinopolitan Creed but its evident the Church is said to be Holy because its Profession is Holy containing nothing false as to Doctrine of Faith nothing unjust as to Doctrine of Manners And a little after By this Note saith he it 's evident that no Church but ours is a true Church because there is no Sect either of Pagans or Philosophers or Jews or Turks or Hereticks which doth not contain some Errors that have been exploded and are manifestly contrary to right Reason By which it 's evident that he excludes all sorts of Errors from that Profession of Religion which he here sets up as a Mark of the true Church And therefore after he had given a brief Enumeration of the Errors of all other Sects as well of Pagans and Jews and Mahometans as of Christians He thus concludes But as for our Catholick Church it teaches no Error no Turpitude nothing against Reason no not excepting Transubstantiation though many things above Reason therefore she alone is absolutely Holy and to her alone appertains what we say in our Creed I believe the Holy Church In which Words he expresly points and directs us to his Catholick Church by this Mark or Note That it teaches no Error c. By which it is evident that Sanctity of Doctrine in the Cardinal's Sense consists in an unerring profession of the true Religion without any so much as the least intermixture of Error Now tho it is certain that that is the best and purest Church which hath the least of Error and Corruption in its Doctrine and Discipline yet it is as certain that that which is the best Church is not the only true Church For the only true Church is the Catholick Church which consists of a great many particular Churches whereof some are more and some less pure from Error and Corruption and yet all of 'em true Churches For all particular Bodies and Societies of Christians that are true parts of the Catholick Church are true Churches as being Homogenious Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently partaking of the same common Nature with it But when we are discoursing of the Notes of the true Church that which we mean by 'em is such certain Marks and Characters by which an honest Enquirer may distinguish such Societies of Christians as are the true Churches of which the true Catholick Church consists from such as are not and therefore that can be no true Note of the true Church which doth not distinguish it from all false Churches and whose contrary is consistent with the being of a true Church I proceed therefore II. To shew that Sanctity of Doctrine according to Bellarmin's Sense of it that is a pure profession of true Religion without any intermixture of Error is no true Note or Mark or Character by which any honest Enquirer can certainly distinguish the true Church from all false Churches And this I doubt not will evidently appear if we consider what are the necessary Properties of all true Notes by which things are to be known and distinguished and they are these four 1. Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies 2. It ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of Thing of which it is a Note and not common to Things of another kind 3. It ought to be more known than the Thing which it notifies 4. It ought to be inseparable to it The three last of which Bellarmin himself owns to be necessary Properties of every true Note Cap. 2. though the first he did not think meet to take notice of for a Reason best known to himself if therefore this Note according to Bellarmine's sense of it hath neither of these Properties belonging to it it can be no true Note of the true Church and that none of 'em do belong to it I doubt not but I shall make it evidently appear 1. First Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies Thus every true Note of a true Man for instance ought to be common to all human kind and so every true Note of every wise Man ought to be common to all wise Men and by the same Rule every true Note of the true Church ought to be common to all true Churches For seeing the true Church is nothing else but only a Collection of all true Churches whatsoever is a certain Note of the true Church must necessarily belong to all true Churches in the World. And indeed since the end of our enquiry after the true Church is that we may communicate with it and since we can no otherwise communicate with the true Church but by communicating with some particular Church that is a true part of it the proper use of the Notes of the true Church is to direct our Enquirers whether this or that Church be a true part of it or which is the same thing whether by communicating with this or that particular Church we do communicate with the true Catholick Church And therefore unless the Notes of the true Catholick Church are such as do appertain to all true Churches they can never give us any certain direction in what Church we may communicate with the true Catholick Church for seeing we can communicate with the true Catholick Church in none but a true Church no Note can give us any certain direction where to communicate with the Catholick Church but what directs us to a true Church and no Note can certainly direct us to a true Church but what belongs to all true Churches If therefore not to err in its Profession be a certain Note whereby to find the true Catholick Church it must necessarily belong to all true Churches and consequently that can be no true Church which in any instance whatsoever errs in its Profession and indeed seeing all the true Churches in the World are only so many simular parts of the true Catholick Church and the
true Catholick Church is only the whole of all those simuular parts or all true Churches together whatsoever the Catholick Church is besides its being the whole all the true Churches must be of which it doth consist and consequently if that be unerring these must be so also for how is it possible that the whole which consists of all the parts should be unerring unless all the parts are unerring if therefore not to err in its Profession be a true Note of the true Church all true Churches must necessarily partake of it and consequently all those must be false Churches which profess any Error than which there is scarce any Proposition in Religion more notoriously false 'T is true whatsoever Church errs in any Fundamental Article of Religion doth thereby cease from being a true Church because those Articles are the very Foundations upon which every true Church stands and therefore when any Church removes them or any of them it must necessarily sink from the very being of a true Church into a false and heretical Communion but there are many Errors which do not at all touch or in the least affect the Fundamentals of Religion and these a true Church may possibly profess and yet maintain her Foundations firm and unshaken and so long as a Church professes all those Truths which are necessary to the being of a true Church it is so far a true Church tho together with that it should profess contrary to some other Truths which are not necessary to the being of a true Church for how can its professing any Error which doth not contradict any Truth which is necessary to the being of a true Church make it cease to be a true Church or how can that be a false Church upon the account of its Profession which professes all those Truths which are necessary to the founding and constituting a true Church If the profession of every Error in Religion be sufficient to destroy the verity of a Church then the profession of every Truth must be necessary to found it because every true Church being founded upon Truth there is no Error can destroy it but what takes away the Truth which founds and therefore unless it be founded upon the Profession of every Truth it cannot be destroyed by the Profession of every Error and consequently none can be true Churches but such as profess every true Proposition in Religion which being admitted the Profession of every true Church must contain almost as many Articles as it self doth contain Communicants And indeed if none can be true Churches but such as profess no Errors no two Churches whatsoever can differ in any Opinion tho never so inconsiderable but one of the two must be a false Church because where-ever there is a difference in Opinion there must be an Error on one side or other as for instance There was a very early difference in Opinion between the Eastern and Western Churches about the time of the Celebration of Easter in which if either of them were in the right to be sure the other must be erroneous and if neither both Did then the erring Church continue a true Church or no notwithstanding its Error if it did then a true Church may err in its Profession and yet be a true Church still if it did not then both were false Churches because tho each believed that the other err'd yet for a great while they mutually owned each other for true Churches in which if every Error destroys the verity of a Church they both of 'em err'd and thereupon both cease to be true Churches And if we enquire into the Church of Rome which now pretends to be the only true Church in the World we shall find that in several instances it professes now quite contrary to what it profest heretofore Vid. Note 3d p. 65. Either therefore the Profession of some Errors is consistent with the being of a true Church or the Roman Church must either have been a false Church heretofore or be a false Church now and seeing the Roman Church now consists of several Churches some of which profess contrary to one another as particularly in that celebrated Question Whether the Pope be Superiour to a General Council or a General Council to the Pope it 's certain that if either of 'em are in the right there must be an erroneous Profession on one side or other And if the Roman Church err in any of its parts how can it be unerring in the whole which is nothing but all the parts together for if she allow any Church to be a true Church or part of the true Church which professes any Error she errs herself supposing an unerring Profession to be a true Note of the true Church and consequently is herself a false Church if she doth not then in receiving Churches which differ in their Profession she receives into her Communion some that are no true Churches which I doubt will go as far towards the unchurching her as the Profession of most Errors whatsoever In short therefore if not to err in its Profession in any matter be a Note of the true Church all true Churches must necessarily partake of it and consequently none can be true Churches which in any point whatsoever profess erroneously which as I have proved is utterly false and which if it were true would perhaps as much damnify the Church of Rome in the Opinion of any sober and honest Enquirer as any one Church now extant in the World. 2. Secondly Every true Note ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of things of which it is a Note and not common to things of another kind otherwise it is impossible that it should truly distinguish the one from the other But this Note of not erring in its Profession is not peculiar to true Churches for seeing there may be a Schism without any Error in Faith or Heresy we must either allow Schismatical Societies of Christians to be true Churches which the Church of Rome to be sure will never admit or that it is by no means peculiar to true Churches not to err in their Faith. That which may be common to Schismatical Communions with the true Church cannot be peculiar to the true Church supposing Schismatical Communions not to be the true Church or the true parts of the true Church but the Cardinal himself owns that there have been Schisms which did not err in their Faith and yet were without the true Church for so in his forecited Cap. 2. There may be Doctrine pure saith he from all Error in a false Church for so pure Schismaticks as heretofore the Luciferians and Donatists had in the beginning very sound Doctrine among 'em and yet were without the true Church Where by the way it 's evident the good Man had quite forgot that Sanctity of Doctrine was hereafter to be one of his Notes of the true Church for if as he tells us in this very Chapter the Notes of
others has to pretend that it is the Character of its being a true Church I desire in the second place that these following Particulars may be considered 1. That altho we charge the Church of Rome with many Errors and Mistakes yet we allow it to contain in it a mixture of Truth Now this very mixture of Truth may perhaps be of sufficient force to make Proselytes but then it does not follow but that such Proselytes may likewise have embraced the Errors which are mixed with it as well as the Truth it self The Indians whose Conversion to the Romish Faith I shall speak of afterwards were not so void of Reason but that if they compared the Religion of their Conquerors with their own Worship they might be perswaded to embrace the former rather than adhere still to the latter And altho by this means they were but half converted to the Truth yet it was better that it should be thus than that they should not have been converted at all for by this means they were much nearer the reception of the whole Truth than they were formerly which was a great advantage and therefore we reckon those but an ill sort of Protestants who would rather have Men Turks and Infidels than of the Romish Church But at the same time the Conversion of never so many to Church of Rome is no Argument of its not being a corrupted Church as long as we can prove it to maintain such gross Errors as it does altho accompanied with such a mixture of Truth as may be of great force to bring over such as had before little or no knowledg thereof 2. That the Prevalency of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome can be no Note of its being a true Church because it is so much alter'd from what it formerly was The Doctrine of the Church of Rome was in the beginning of Christianity the same with that which was deliver'd by Christ and his Apostles to the Saints Afterwards new Doctrines insensibly crept into and were received by that Church and at last Matters came to be settled as we now find them in the Council of Trent This has been often cleared by Learned Men and in some of those Discourses which have of late been writ Barrow of the Pope's Suprem Discourse of Transubst Disc concerning the Worship of the blessed Virgin and the Saints Disc of Commun in one kind Vindicat. of the Answ to some late Papers c. some of the new Doctrines have been traced step by step and the manner now they came to be receiv'd set down and in others the Church of Rome has been compared with her self and what was determin'd by the Council of Trent has been shown to be quite another thing from what was held some Ages ago Now it is impossible that things that are different should be the distinguishing Character of that which is always the same Since then I suppose it will be readily granted that the Church of Rome has always been the true Church the Efficacy of its Doctrine can be no Note thereof since in some Ages those Doctrines have prevailed in it which are directly contrary to those which have prevailed in other 3. That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church where those who embrace it are hindred from thoroughly examining it For without a thorough Examination it never can be rightly understood and what Efficacy can it have upon his Mind who does not rightly understand it Now the Church of Rome exacts of the Members of her Communion a tame Submission to and Compliance with whatever she proposeth to their Belief and Practice and by forbidding them the use of the Scriptures she takes from them the use of that Rule whereby they are to judg of the Reasonableness of her Proposals How then can the reception of her Doctrine be a Note of her being a true Church when perhaps not one amongst a thousand of her Members who receeive it is capable of understanding what he is bound to believe 4. That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church where Art and Force are made use of to make it prevail For it is no difficult matter for cunning Deceivers to impose upon unstable Souls and it must be a great courage and constancy of Mind which can make Men for-go Father and Mother Houses and Land c. for the sake of Truth Now that the Church of Rome has taken this course to propagate her Doctrines we may be assured by some of her own Members There are saith Erasmus Erasmus in Annot. in Mat. 23. those who after a new Example make Christians by force but whilst they pretend the Propagation of Religion they do in reality study the Inlargement of Riches and Power Not unlike these are those Monks who inveigle others to take upon them their Order and do use a great deal of cunning to insnare such as are young and unskilful and who neither understand Themselves nor the Nature of true Religion And Stapleton declares very freely Stapleton Epist Dedic de oper Justific Edit Paris 1582. Eo sane loco haereses sunt c. Heresies are come to that pass that their Gordian Knots are not to be dissolved by Art and Industry but by the Sword of Alexander and the Club of Hercules is more fit to subdue them than the Harp of Apollo I might quote several others to the same purpose but the constant Practices of the Inquisition in those places where it is received and the extraordinary Methods which have of late been made use of in a Neighbouring Nation to gain Proselytes do sufficiently shew that the Church of Rome does more depend upon something else than upon the Efficacy of her Doctrine for the making of Converts Which will more fully appear if in the third place we consider the insufficiency of the Cardinal's Arguments which are fetched First From the Scriptures Secondly From what happened in the beginning of the Christian Church Thirdly From the particular Instances which he gives of Conversions wrought by those of the Church of Rome First As to the Scriptures which are quoted Ps 19.7 The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the Soul and Heb. 4.12 For the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged Sword piercing even to the dividing asunder of Soul and Spirit and of the Joynts and Marrow and is a discerner of the Thoughts and Intents of the Heart It may be answer'd 1. That the latter of these is by several Expositors interpreted of the Son of God and not of his Doctrine 2. That if they are both interpreted of the Efficacy of any Doctrine yet that the Efficacy which is spoken of is wholly internal as we before observ'd and consequently such as cannot be accounted a Note of the true Church For the Note of a Church must be what any one can come to the knowledg of 3. Suppose by these words
the receiving of Apocryphal Books into the Canon of Scripture and other Opinions and Practices in the Christian Church And for the Doctrine of Transubstantiation as it is against the common Sense of Mankind and destroys the certainty of every thing else so the Jews upon all occasions object against it We have a Witness beyond Exception even of the Roman Church who brings in the Jews objecting against this Doctrine Fortalitium Fidei Lugd. Anno 1525. and representing the unreasonableness and absurdity of it from fourteen several Heads of Argument which I may not here represent to the Reader because it would be too great a Digression Nor do I find this Learned Author who writes in Defence of the Roman Church and attempts to answer these Objections alledging that this was the Doctrine which was taught by the Hebrew Doctors The Jews have so far abhorred this Doctrine Decret Gregor l. v. Tit. vi cap. 13. Accepimus autem c. and so far detested Christians upon this account that they were wont when they made use of Christian Nurses to force them to throw away their Milk for three Days together before they gave suck when it happened that at Easter these Nurses had received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ This Pope Gregory complains of and decrees upon it that Christians should not for the future be Servants to the Jews J. Albo Ikkarim And Josephus Albo disputes against this Doctrine of Transubstantiation very vigorously And so do many others V. Nizach vet p. 255. in their Books against Christians And many more Testimonies might be produced Lipman Nizachon p. 11. were not most of their Books printed in Italy where it is not safe for them to be too plain And Learned Men do very well know that the Passage in Joseph Albo against this Doctrine of the Roman Church hath been expunged in one Edition of that Author 'T is very well known that all the later Jews are against this Doctrine And that Trypho the Jew and the most ancient Writers have not objected it against Christians is only an Argument that this Doctrine was not so old as that time in which they lived This Doctrine the Jews are certain cannot be true because if they are not certain of the Falsity of this they have no Certainty of their own Religion nor can ever be convinced of the Truth of ours The Truth is this is one great occasion of hardening them against Christianity and we are never like to see them come into the Christian Church till this Doctrine of Transubstantiation and the Worship of Images be removed out of it But then the Practice annexed to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation of worshipping a Creature is so dangerous that even they who own the Doctrine confess if that be not true they cannot be excused from Idolatry God give us a just Sence of these things that we may not hereafter have besides our own Sins which will be load great enough the Obstinacy of the Jews in great measure to answer for THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Fourteenth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The unhappy End of the Church's Enemies Decima quarta Nota est Infelix exitus seu finis eorm qui Ecclesiam oppugnant Bellarm. L. iv c. 17. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR July 27. 1687. Guil. Needham IF he be an unwise Builder who pulls down what he intends to build up then Cardinal Bellarmin tho one of the Master-Builders of the Church of Rome deserves not to be reckon'd one of the wisest For he must shut his Eyes close who does not plainly see that he frequently defeats his own Design by giving Notes which conclude that Church to be false which he design'd to prove was the only true one Such for instance is that which is now to be consider'd as shall in the Sequel of this Discourse be made appear The Confutation of which cannot be difficult since I find nothing in the whole Chapter that hath so much as the shew of an Argument Whereas some of his Notes are guarded with a pretence at least of Scripture Reason and Antiquity this is exposed naked to the Assaults of its Adversaries without so much as a Paper Shield to protect it He tells us indeed many Tragical Stories of unhappy Deaths some of which are true some doubtful and others false some of Persons who were deadly Enemies other of Persons who were zealous Defenders of the true Church But had the Stories been all certainly true and had the Persons who thus died been all of them implacable Enemies of the Church of Rome yet what does it signify unless he had also proved That when a Person dies an unnatural Death the meaning of it is That that Church of which he professed himself a Member is false and the Church he opposed the only true one But how unwise soever he was in the choice of his Note he was so wise as not to attempt the proof of this unless the Citation of this Scripture may pass for a Proof Praise his People O ye Nations for he will avenge the Blood of his Servants and will render Vengeance to his Enemies (a) Deut. 32.43 God will avenge the Blood of his Servants therefore if a Protestant die an uphappy Death the Church of Rome is the only true Church But why did the Cardinal send out this Note so forlorn For a good Reason because no Defence could be found for it But why did he then bring it into the Field Because he knew it was Popular and might serve the Cause better than another that was never so well fenc'd For will not he dread to oppose the Church of Rome who is persuaded that God will set a Note of Vengeance upon those that do so Will not he stedfastly adhere to it who believes that that is a certain way to an happy Death In short whosoever can be persuaded to believe that the Church of Rome is by this Note distinguish'd from all other Churches he will as much dread to turn Protestant as he does to die the most prodigious sort of Death But the Mischief is That however serviceable this pretended Note may be to them among weak and undiscerning Persons it will do there as much disservice among those who are judicious and able to examine it For when they shall once see what a palpable Cheat it is and in case that it were a Note of the true Church that the Church of Rome hath the least Reason of any Church in the World to pretend to it they will be thereby disposed to break off from the Communion of that Church which contradicts its own Marks and betake themselves to some other Church which hath a better Title to them For the effecting of which I shall proceed in this Method I. I shall premise some Things as preparatory to what follows II. Shew that this can