ROME'S CONVICTION OR A VINDICATION OF THE Original Institution OF Christianity In Opposition to the Many USURPATIONS OF THE CHVRCH of ROME And their frequent VIOLATION of DIVINE RIGHT Cleerly Evinced By Arguments Drawn from their Own PRINCIPLES And Undeniable Matter of Fact By John Savage Gent. London Printed by T. N. for Gabriel Kunholt at the King's Head over against the Mews near Charing-Cross MDCLXXXIII TO THE MOST RENOWNED MONARCH Charles the II. OF England Scotland France and Ireland KING Defender of the Faith c. Most Dread Soveraign WHither should This TREATISE of Religion Fly for Protection but under the Wings of Your Most Sacred Majesty Duely Intituled to the Glorious Prerogative of Defender of the FAITH Hither therefore it Connaturally tends but makes its Approach in an Humble Posture Dazled as it were with the Glory of so much Majesty It s Author likewise Falls Prostrate at Your Royal Feet earnestly Imploring Your PRINCELY Protection of these his weak Endeavors He comes Full Fraught with a Confident Hope that where such Power and Goodness Reigns he cannot suffer a Repulse And being sway'd by the Memory of Your Past Favors the sense of Gratitude as well as Duty hath Immutably Fixt him in this Resolve That a Deep-Rooted Loyalty Animated with a Fervent Zeal for Your Majesties Royal Person Government and Prerogatives shall ever be the Indeleble Character of Your Majesties Most Loyal Most Submissive and Most Addicted Subject John Savage TO THE Reader HAving had a more then ordinary inspection into the Doctrine and PRINCIPLES of the Church of Rome I have upon this Account been earnestly mov'd by some Persons of Honor and Worth to Write something in Opposition to that Church and at length I was wrought to a Compliance In the pursuit whereof I have had no consideration of the Unkindness and Ingratitude of some of the Church of Rome towards me but have proceeded with all imaginable Candor and Sincerity wholly devested of all Ranker Spleen and Animosity against their Persons But I deem'd it no way repugnant to Christian Charity to use my best endeavors to open a way to Truth And if sometimes my Pen seems to be Dipt in Gall yet this only is a product of Zeal for the Doctrine I have undertaken to defend in opposition to theirs without the least intending to infringe the Laws of Morality The Heads of Doctrine contained in each Disputation of this Treatise I have several times Proposed to the Learnedst Doctors of the Church of Rome that I could meet with of several Religious Orders quasi tentando by way of Discourse P. Worsleus Soc. Jesu Leodii One tells me That these Difficulties were indeed insuperable if scann'd by the Light of Reason but yet we were all oblig'd to captivare intellectum in obsequium fidei to captivate our Vnderstanding in Obedience to Faith P. Haseur Recollecta Namurci Another Answers by way of Admonition That it was not safe but on the contrary very dangerous to penetrate too deep into the Mysteries of Faith A Third Alleadgeth P. Derkennis Soc. Jesu Lovanii That I had as good Question the Verity of Scripture as submit the Definitions of Councils to the Scrutiny of Reason because the Scripture also contains very great Difficulties and seeming Contradictions To all these I Reply That Divine Faith consists of Two parts the Material Object which is the thing we Believe and the Formal Object which is the Motive why we Believe and that is dictio Dei God's saying or revealing it Wherefore when a Mystery is proposed to be Believed as an Article of Faith though I have no Evidence in attestato in the thing Revealed because I cannot demonstrate the Truth of it by Human Reason yet if I have Evidence or Certainty in attestante that is I am sure God says it then with a Blind Obedience and with a firm Adhesion I assent to it But if it be Doubtful and Ambiguous whether it be a Divine Revelation or no then to Institute a strict Inquiry Whether it be truly and really attested by Divine Autority or no is an act of Prudence and therefore not dangerous but secure and laudable But how shall we know assuredly whether it be a Divine Revelation or not First I Answer That no New Revelations are to be admitted but such as are contained in Holy Writ in the Canonical Scripture Secondly I Answer That if the Mystery proposed drive us to such Extremities that no Assent can be given to it without denying some one of the Prima Principia Lumine Naturae nota First Principles known by the Light of Nature which the Wit of Man cannot avoid then we may certainly conclude that if it be a new Doctrine not contained in Scripture or if it be evidently inconsistent with the Light of Nature in both cases it comes not from God but is a meer Human Invention And we ought not to Believe by Divine Faith that which is backt only by Human Authority As for the Difficulties of Scripture those which are Seeming Contradictions are most Historical and are Solved by those Authors who ex professo have Written so many Large Tomes of the Interpretation of Scripture Other Mysteries which are Speculative and Doctrinal as a Virgin to Conceive the Incarnation of the Divine Word and the Hypostatical Union the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity c. there is no one of all these that is destructive of the Light of Human Reason or that will reduce us to a necessity of denying the Truth of any of the First Principles Since therefore we admit of all Canonical Scripture as the Word of God we ought to Believe it by Divine Faith For certain it is that as God's Infinite Veracity is uncapable of asserting such things as are impossible so likewise by the same Rule God who is the Author of Human Reason is uncapable of Imposing upon Man's Understanding a necessity of Believing that which is false or impossible for if false it is destructive of his Veracity which would un-God him if Impossible it is inconsistent with Human Reason And yet all things are to be granted to the Divine Omnipotence that involve not a manifest Contradiction And this may serve as a Reply to the Answers of the aforementioned Doctors I shall therefore proceed in order to examine the Controverted Difficulties which this Treatise contains as they are digested under their respective Heads whereof each hath his Peculiar Disputation and the Disputations I Subdivide into Sections In the Second Disputation of this Treatise I have Inserted most of the Antient Rituals and Liturgies of the Latine Greek and the Eastern Churches which Morinus Translated out of the Greek and Syrian into Latine And as this Translator was tyed to give the Literal Sense of the Originals without Mutation so also I deem'd it Illegal to make any change or alteration in the Latin Version which in some places is obscure and obsolete but I have rendered the true and genuine sense
shun Evil. Wherefore this being the end intended by Christ it follows that apt and fit means were also appointed that had proportion with the obtaining of this end but one necessary means to accomplish what Christ designed is the Gift of Infallibility without which the Church might fall into Error and from one Error into another and hereby deviate and swerve from its original institution and at length utterly fall away and instead of conducting Souls to Heaven it would lead them to the precipice of eternal ruine and destruction and so evacuate the Fruit of Christs Passion and put an obstacle to the obtaining of that end which he efficaciously intended And yet we must all suppose that the incarnate word was endu'd with an illimited Power his Knowledge and Wisdom was infinite so that he perfectly knew what means were necessary to accomplish his design and wanted no Power to effect it which notwithstanding could never be efficaciously attained without this Infallibility whence it necessarily follows that Christ communicated to his Church this special Preservative of always teaching truth without being subject to Error This briefly is the full strength of their second Proof Thus you see the grounds of this Doctrin are seemingly convincing and plausible enough to induce such to an assent who either cannot or will not by a studious consideration penetrate into the depth of them but will rather acquiesce than stretch their understanding by a rigid scrutiny and inquisition to detect the fallacy thereof But certainly in a matter of such moment we are not to take up all this upon trust nor blindly to give our assent till we have industriously waighed and ponder'd the whole matter that so we may be the better able to give an account of our belief which is the drift of the subsequent Section SECT III. The Decision of the present Controversie THe Assertion is That the Church of Rome enjoys not this Infallibility which they so much pretend to The first Proof Such a previous necessity to Truth would destroy Liberty and take away the laudability and merit of human actions Note That in the progress of this Discourse I shall argue ad Hominem that is I shall take along with me their own Principles and for the most part ground my Refutation upon them They all grant Liberty and Merit in such human actions as have conformity to the dictamen of Conscience for in this consists the morality of our Actions that they are consonant or dissonant to the synderesis of the Agent but if an action be extorted by an antecedent necessity there can be no exercise of Free-will nor Merit in it nor Liberty because that Power only hath liberty which after all prae-requisites and causes are put hath a power to work and not to work whereas if there be a prae-ordination by Gods Decree that the Members of a General-Council shall be determined to Truth then their decisions are wholly destitute of Liberty and Free-will because Gods efficatious Decree that hath a previous influence upon the action draws with it an indispensable necessity which destroys Free-will neither can it be meritorious because Merit supposeth Liberty and consists in the laudability of the action and how can that action be laudable which a fatal necessity forces from the Will Can any one deserve Praise for doing that which he cannot avoid Hence I conclude that Merit and Free-will are not compatible with that Infallibility which the Church of Rome pretends to which is inconsistent with Gods Providence in order to Mankind who was Created and Born free in full possession of the liberty of his will and therefore shall be Judged according to his own Actions which could not be were there any necessity or restraint put upon them Thus we see how this doctrine inverts the order of Divine Providence and imposes a necessity either of contrariety or contradiction upon Humane actions A confirmation of this Proof may be drawn from the practical proceeding of Councils who seldom or never determine any thing till after a long and serious Debate and sometimes with great fervor and animosity of Parties in opposition to each other as it hapned in the Council of Trent upon contradictory Points one Party Affirming what another Deny'd All which supposeth a liberty in their debates and determinations for if by an Inspiration of the Holy Ghost they were all fixt in Truth What need any Debate or Consultation for this can only have place in such Resolutions as depend upon Humane Prudence alone And if each Member of a General Council hath the immediate Assistance of the Holy Ghost How comes it to pass that when two are of different Opinions the one Denies what the other Affirms and though they may both speak as they think yet in reality they cannot both speak Truth for two contradictories cannot be both true Must then the Spirit of God be made the Author of both as though he suggested Truth to the one and Falsity to the other if not then he that contends for the Erroneous part is deserted by the Holy Ghost and agitated by some other Spirit of the Prince of Darkness which allways opposeth truth but hence it would follow that Satan acts in General Councils and that some of the Members of Councils are not inspired by the Holy Ghost and consequently not Infallible The Second Proof is a Refutation of the Grounds of the Adverse Party A Negative Tenet as this is cannot be better prov'd than by shewing the falsity of the Affirmative Contradictory First then as to their Argument drawn from Christ's Promises exprest in Scripture I demand Whence they have an Assured Infallibility that Scripture contains the True Word of God They Answer That this Infallible Church of Rome hath Defined it so to be and proposed it to the People to be so believed I demand again how they make out the Infallibility of their Church They Answer By Christ's Promises in Scripture A special Argument no better than a plain vitious Circle for they prove the Infallibility of the Scripture by the Church and the Infallibility of the Church by Scripture and prove neither Independent of each other By this way of Arguing Mahomet and his Alchoran may be prov'd Infallible For the Alchoran saith That Mahomet was inspired by God who spoke in his eare in the forme of a Dove and Mahomet saith That the Alchoran is the Word of God manifested by Divine Inspiration therefore both Mahomet and the Alchoran are Infallible This is the same Argument apply'd to another subject The Protestant Church of England hath as great a Veneration for Scripture and as strong and firm adherence to it as any can have yet are not so highly presumptuous as to arrogate to themselves a degree of Evidence or Infallibility exceeding that which the Motives Inductive to their Beliefe bring with them But I shall not need to insist upon the Invalidity of this Argument because it hath lately been so Learnedly handled by that
the regulating of their Consciences yet these Men though never so Heterogeneal in Dialect and National differences make but one complex or collection of the Popes Negotiators whose main scope and design is to maintain and improve the Prerogatives of their great Master by all the subtle arts and sedulous industry they are capable of What plausible Arguments do they use to persuade people that their Church cannot Err and the illiterate Vulgar greedily swallow this Bait which confirms them in their servitude and slavery and makes them prompt to submit to all the Prescripts of the See of Rome not regarding the arduity thereof And among other marks of the Popes greatness this of Infallibility is chief for upon this Link hangs immediately his Supremacy his Temporal pretended Power over Kings and Princes c. because these Titles are deduced from his being universal Pastor which the non-erring Councils have declared him to be so that the Councils Infallibility is the Root of those Prerogatives it is the main Pillar which supports the Magnificence and Greatness of the Church and Court of Rome and if this should fail that Superstructure would fall to utter Ruine and Desolation This therefore is the great Bulwark which dreads no opposition this is the main Fort that still remains immoveable against all attempts this is the Ship of St. Peter which though tossed and agitated upon the swelling Billows by Raging and Tempestuous Storms yet never sinks Well may there be some attempts upon the out-works by light Skirmishes and Velitations in Controversies of less moment which if by immediate Arguments they cannot repel recourse may still be had to the main Fort and if that begins to open upon the Enemy by Thundring Infallibility in his Ears Lord who can withstand it This will soon defeat him and dissipate all his attempts But upon what grounds doth the Church of Rome arrogate to it self this high Character First Proof in exclusion of all others Why this is drawn from an irrefragable Testimony it being grounded on the Promises of Christ himself for this is the Church to whom Christ hath promised That the Gates of Hell should never prevail against it This is the Church to whom Christ's word is engaged to send it another Paraclite the Spirit of Truth that should lead it into all Truth This is the Church to whom Christ said I will be with you till the end of the World And finally this is the Church committed to the care of St. Peter first Pope thereof to whom Christ said Thy Faith shall never fail which is meant of all other Popes that by a lineal descent succeed him And who dare attempt to evacuate Christ's Promises Hence it comes to pass that the Bishops and Fathers assembled in a general Council though of themselves weak and subject to Error yet being the chief Members of the Church for Doctrine and Dignity and being the Representative of the whole are render'd Infallible as being backt by Divine Authority by virtue of Christ's Promise they do not now determine matters of Faith and dogmatical points as meer Men but are as it were Deifi'd in order to this Function by a supernatural quality infused into them and inherent in their Intellects or else by a previous disposition and concomitant operation of the Holy Ghost which determines them to Truth and protects them from Error They are but the Organ to deliver Truth but the Divine Oracle is the Dictator they are but the instruments which convey those Mysteries to the knowledge of Mankind but the Spirit of God is the principal Agent so that thâ—â— Canons and Decrees come from them full fraught with the Divinity which renders them Infallibly certain for the Holy Ghost every Session attends the motion of those great Men to regulate all their Proceedings by the never erring Rule of his infinite Veracity whence it ensues that to pick quarrels with their Definitions is a high Temerity it is to wage War with Heaven or by the weak scrutiny of humane discourse to examine the truth of such Mysteries as Heaven hath revealed which if they should contain any seeming Error or Contradiction yet our understanding must adhere to them as infallibly true because our Reason is guided only by obscure Notions and abstractive Acts which draws in foreign Species by the mediation of the Senses which give but a glimmering light to the Understanding and often suggest Falsity for Truth but the Decrees of Councils are sacred and carry the Seal of the Holy Spirit enstampt upon them by whose directions they are framed wherefore it is no less than a Sacrilegious Presumption to Question the Truth of them for this is to oppose Human Reason against Divine Authority This is the substance of their first Proof drawn from the Authority of Scripture which at first appearance seems great and glorious a specious pretence to work upon the credulity of the ignorant Vulgar The second Proof is grounded in Reason but before we propose it we must open the way by putting the Reader in mind that the Divine Word the Second Person of the Sacred Trinity considering the deplorable condition of Mankind by the Fall of Adam resolved upon an efficacious Remedy to assume Human Nature and by an Hypostatical Union to be Phisically United and become on with Flesh and Bloud and in that Nature to suffer death and thereby to offer to his Eternal Father an infinite Treasure of Merits and Satisfaction to make an attonement between God and Man and to satisfie for Mans transgressions even to the rigor of Justice because the satisfaction was made in the same specifical nature that offended and it was made to the full equality of the Crime because the Meritorious Cause thereof was a Divine Person of infinite Dignity and therefore his Actions were of infinite Worth But because it was not permitted to every individual Person to draw from that infinite Mass of Satisfaction and Merit in what measure he pleased this priviledge being reserved for the Pope alone to grant out of this stock by his Indulgences what quantity and to whom he deemed expedient therefore a Church must be ordained and a method prescribed how to apply the benefit of Christ's Passion to each one in particular To this end our great Redeemer instituted Sacraments to be the organs and vehicles to convey the Fruit of his Passion to the Receiver and this is secunda post naufragium tabula whence the Church of Rome saith in her Publick Office O felix culpa quae talem meruit Redemptorem This being supposed The second Proof is grounded on this consideration that the principal design of our Redeemer was to draw Souls to Heaven notwithstanding the loss sustained by Original Sin for to this end he offered his satisfaction to this end he merited habitual and sanctifying Grace transient and actual Graces prevenient concomitant and subsequent Graces to illuminate the Understanding to move and incline the Will to embrace Good and
Worthy and Profound Dr. Edw. Stillingfleet Dean of Pauls and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty against Mr. Edw. Worsley a Learned Jesuite then residing at Antwerp who had formerly for many years together been a Reader of Divinity in the Jesuits Colledge at Liege where he Taught the whole Body of Divinity yet could never extricate himself out of this Labyrinth wherein Dr. Stillingfleet had involved him by this Argument to which I refer the Reader This Circle being therefore laid aside let us examine if the Scripture Independent of the Churches Definition bring with it this Infallibility or no. The Scripture is questionless of it self Infallible but it is not so to us for we have but a Moral certainty of the Infallibility of Scripture and that it is truly and à parte rei the Word of God The reason is because though we admit that what the Prophets and Apostles have left Written was truly dictated by the Holy Ghost yet they who drew Copies from those Originals wanted that support they were meer Men and carried their Humane Infirmities about them and in after ages as the Scripture was handed down to Posterity the Amanuenses by Ignorance Malice or Neglect might commit some Error either by excess by defect or by alteration whereby their Copies might disagree with the Originals of the first Hagiographers at least we have no Demonstration nor Revelation to assure us of the contrary and when Printing came in the same difficulty occurs in relation to them that Corrected the Print But when it was Translated into several Languages the difficulty is yet greater for beside the former casualties admit the Translator to be an exquisite Linguist yet the Sense of Scripture is so very nice that in his Translation he might innocently express what the Holy Ghost by the Original never meant Besides that only part of Scripture is admitted by both Churches as the Word of God which is Canonical And what Infallible Rule have we to know what part is Canonical what Apocryphal Again in that part that is received as Canonical there are so many high Mysteries some seeming contradictions not pervious to the Natural capacity of Mans understanding to reconcile the several senses thereof are so various some passages are to be understood Literally some Morally others Allegorically some others Tropologically or Figuratively How many Volumes have been Written by the Learned in both Churches to interpret the meaning and true sense of Scripture and in some places with Contradictions and Oppositions to each other yet after all we fall short of any Infallible Certainty herein for instance there have been above Fifty several Senses given by Interpreters of that short Sentence Hoc est corpus meum This is my Body And one Verse in the Psalms hath puzled the Learnedst of them all viz. Increpa feras arundinis Psal 68. v. 30. congregatio taurorum in vaccis populorum ut excludant eos qui probati sunt argento in English thus Rebuke the wilde beasts of a Reed the congregation of Bulls in the Cowes of the people that they may exclude those that are tryed with silver Instances of this nature are frequent in Scripture Humane Tradition hath brought the Scripture down to these our times yet Humane Authority is not Infallible wherefore all these particulars being duly ponder'd Where will the Romanists find that assured Infallibility which they pretend to As for the Second Proof from the strength of Reason we admit Christ's Omnipotence Omniscience his infinite Prudence and Wisdom with all other his Divine Attributes we also grant that our Redeemers Intention of being Incarnate Suffering Death c. was to save the Souls of Men but this was to be consistent with and subordinate to that state wherein the Almighty by his infinite Wisdom and Providence had placed Man in his first Creation that is with a full possession and use of his Liberty and Free-will which our Redeemer never intended to infringe for that would subvert the Order of Gods former Providence So that by the Fruit of Christ's Passion we are furnished with all necessaries to live a godly and a righteous Life which without the Grace of Christ would not be in our power to do for bare Nature hath no proportion of it self to Merit ne quidem de congruo nor to any Supernatural Reward as St. Augustine Teacheth against the Pelagians and Massilienses so that the Supernatural Graces that we receive by Christ's Merits give us a power to do good and shun evil but impose no necessity upon us to lay hold of them and improve them to our own good for this depends upon our own free election therefore when we transgress against Gods Precepts it is not for want of all necessary means to observe them but it proceeds from the Pravity of our own Wills which chuse rather to follow the suggestion of the sensual appetite than submit to the conduct of Reason and therefore are blameworthy for we had the power to do good and avoid evil and would not So that although of our selves we can do nothing in order to heaven yet every individual Member of the Church by the Grace obtained by Christ's Passion is enabled but not necessitated to save his Soul Non ego sed gratia Dei mecum It is not I but the Grace of God with me And if the Church should fall into an Error as the Church of Rome hath done the members thereof are not thereby deprived of the usual Means of Salvation neither doth that Error prejudice them as long as they remain in an invincible Ignorance of the Truth But if the Church by multiplying error upon error should fall from being a Church which could not be but that the wisest and most learned should take notice thereof and detect the errors then these are bound in conscience to desert it and detest their errors who consequently would remain constant and faithful to truth and so would continue the True Church And indeed the Second Proof proposed in the Second Section proves too much and is to be solved by the Romanists themselves for they Assert that the end of Christ's Suffering was to save all Mankind that is every single person of Humane Nature and therefore apt and proportionable means ought to be instituted without which this end could not be efficaciously obtained whence it ensues that every individual person must have this Infallibility yea and impeccability also lest Christ's design should be frustrated which is the same way of Arguing as is contained in that Proof and the illation as evidently ensues which notwithstanding we all grant false and erroneous for then none could be damned Thus you see the grounds of the Romans Infallibility how specious and convincing soever they appear yet thoroughly examined and the fallacies detected they vanish to smoak The Third Proof That Church which hath committed Errors and still perseveres in them is not Infallible But the Church of Rome hath committed errors and still
persists in them as I shall prove in the following Disputations of this Treatise ergo The Church of Rome is not Infallible for that Church that actually doth erre hath a power to erre because bene valet ab actu ad potentiam and it is evident that that Church which hath power or capacity to erre is not Infallible for Infallibility excludes a power of failing There yet remains to solve such Objections as may be proposed against our Assertion contained in the beginning of this Section SECT IV. An Answer to the Objections proposed against the nullity of the Church of Rome's Infallibility THe first Objection None can Question but that such Promises as our Redeemer hath truly made to his Church shall be fulfilled but we have a Moral certainty that the Promises specifyed in the Second Section were truly made by Christ for we admit a Moral certainty That the Holy Scripture is truly the Word of God Whence it ensues that we are Morally certain that the Church of Rome is Infallible First I Answer That this Objection destroys it self for it contends for an Infallibility and proves it by a Reflex act of Moral certainty whereas Infallibility excludes a power of Erring and Moral certainty includes that power so that the result of both would be a Fallible Infallibility which involves a Contradiction This is much of the nature of a Sillogisme wherein the conclusion semper sequitur debiliorem partem so that if one of the premises be scientifical the other only probable the conclusion will be only probable the reason is because in the conclusion the two extreams are therefore identifi'd between themselves because they were in the premises identifi'd with a third wherefore if one extream be certainly identifi'd with a third the other only probably they can but be probably identifi'd with each other for this identity is destroyed by separating either of the extreams from the third For application The Infallibility of the Church depends upon these two Principles First That we are Infallibly certain that Christ's Promises are performed Secondly That we are Infallibly certain of the thing of fact that Christ did Promise if either of these fail the Infallibility faileth and if either of these be only probable the Infallibility is reduced to a probability only now though Moral certainty be the highest degree of Probability yet it comes as far short of Infallibility as this Argument doth of proving it Secondly I Answer That the Church of Rome is too forward in arrogating to themselves alone such Promises as Christ made to his Church for to say nothing of the Church of Rome in Primitive times yet since their manifold Innovations and Superstructures the Protestant Church is the purer and freer from Error and consequently hath more right to lay hold of those Promises then the Church of Rome The Second Objection Though the Church taken barely by it self and without the support of that Testimony from Holy Writ should not be Infallible yet backt by the Motives of Credibility it will be rendred absolutely unerrable for these Motives do so peculiarly affect it and as it were point it out to be the True Church of Christ that it dissipates all the Clouds of Ambiguity which blind the incredulous For who can consider the lineal descent and succession of Chief Pastors the austerity and holiness of life exercised in Monasteries of both Sexes the Miracles wrought by the Members of this Church with the Blood of so many Martyrs the effusion whereof doth daily irrigate the same and renders it more fertile with other Motives of this nature which all are the Badges of this Church Who I say can seriously ponder this without framing an Infallible Judgment that the Church of Rome is the True Church of Christ There is certainly a strict and Metaphysical connexion between these Motives and the True Church for it is not consistent with the Divine Goodness and veracity of God to co-operate to such a Delusion as this would be if these Motives should indicate a False Church subject to Error which would make God himself the Author of this Error We may therefore hence conclude the Church of Rome in which such great Wonders are so frequently wrought to be the True and Infallible Church of Christ The First Answer Among all the Doctors and Divines of the Church of Rome I never knew of any that asserted this strict and metaphysical connexion of the Motives of Credibility with the True Church but only Cardinal Lugo Yet I have seen a whole Torrent of Autority of other Doctors of the same Church of the contrary opinion who all affirm that the collection of these Motives may possibly affect a false Church wherefore let these Authors solve this Objection The Second Answer All these Motives of credibility are fallacious as depending upon Humane Autority and being subject to many casualties and deceits and first for the succession of Chief Pastors whose Jurisdiction by an Illegal Usurpation extends it self de facto over the whole Body but is limited de jure to the Diocess of Rome only and how long together hath the Body been without a head as if it had been defunct and then Monster-like it appeared with two heads it being hard to decide which of them had most right And what is to be said of Liberius Pope who subscribed the Arians Heresie and joyned with them and of Vigilius who approved and condemned the same Doctrine in the three Chapters Must these also be links of continuation in the Succession Surely they were not Infallible Consider the manner of their Election when there occurs a vacancy there will not be wanting those in the Colledge of Cardinals who have ambition enough to aspire to such a dignity whereto is annexed a Temporal Principality a Triple Crown with many splendid Titles which makes the Succession sure But how few are there in the Consistory who are swayed by Piety and Religion to give their Suffrage only for such a Person as is duely qualified for so high a Prelacy But when they have entred the Conclave What a Bundle of Ambition is there shut up together How many are there that take their Measures from By and Sinister ends some from Ambition others from Humane Policy others again from Self-interest some give their Votes for such a Cardinal because he is of the Spanish Faction they having a Pension to uphold that Faction Others chuse another because he is of the French Faction whose Pensioners they are Others chuse one who is most addicted to themselves hoping that by his Promotion they shall become great and powerful another again who conceives himself fit to be elected casts away his own Vote upon one that is most unlike to be chosen lest his Suffrage by making access to the Party of his Competitor should promote him and deprive himself of so high a Dignity What stuff is this to have an influence upon the Electors of a Chief Pastor nay How remote is all
Intrenchments of the Church of Rome upon Divine Right by changing the Essentials of their pretended Sacraments The Preface MAny Censures of the highest strain hath the Church of Rome thundered out against the Protestants for Separating from her Communion and deserting her Tenets in that Latitude as she professeth them whereas notwithstanding the Protestant Church did most Religiously imbrace all the Doctrine and Practise instituted by Christ and exprest in Holy Writ and rejected only the Corruptions and Innovations which had no Autority but Humane she separated the pure Gold from the Dross and the Wheat from the Cockle and by this means continued the true Church of Christ pure and undefiled But what Censure doth the Church of Rome deserve who by a bold and a high attempt endeavoureth to incroach upon Divine Right by making a change and reformation in the Original Institutions of Christ himself as shall appear by the several Sections of this Disputation SECT I. Of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome relating to this present Controversie THere are various Principles and Dogmatical Decisions of the Church of Rome much conducing to this present Discourse whereof some are defined by their General Councils others are promiscuously Taught and Asserted by their Divines And because I here intend to argue ad hominem that is out of their own Doctrine I shall therefore do them no wrong by drawing such illations from thence as shall clearly evince their violating of Divine Right by endeavouring as much as in them lyeth to make an Essential change in their Sacraments which they acknowledge Instituted by Christ himself First therefore They admit Seven Sacraments to wit Baptisme Confirmation Eucharist Pennance Extreme Vnction Order and Matrimony And though they ground themselves upon several Texts of Scripture misunderstood for the practice of them yet it is a business of greater arduity to prove them all Sacraments but to satisfie their Sectators they need no more then to tell them that these are all defined to be Sacraments by the Council of Trent in these words Si quis dixerit Sacramenta novae legis non fuisse omnia à Jesu Christo Domino Nostro instituta Trid. Sess Can. 1. aut esse plura vel pauciora quam septem videlicet Baptismum Confirmationem Eucharistiam Poenitentiam Extremam Vnctionem Ordinem Matrimonium aut etiam aliquod horum septem non esse verè propriè Sacramentum Anathema sit If any one shall say That the Sacraments of the New Law were not all Instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord Or that they are more or fewer then Seven namely Baptisme Confirmation Eucharist Pennance Extreame Vnction Order and Matrimony or also that any one of these is not truly and properly a Sacrament let him be Accursed But because it is not the drift of my present design to examin the truth hereof I shall therefore wave it and only suppose it to be their Doctrine Secondly They admit that all Sacraments were Instituted by Christ himself for as much as concerns the Essence and Substance of them and consequently it exceeds the limits of any Humane Power either to abrogate or to alter any thing of that which is by Divine Right established and that they were all Instituted by Christ is also defined by the Council of Trent as above and Asserted by their Divines Thirdly In every Sacrament they distinguish between the Essential and Accidental parts of it the Essential parts they place in the matter and forme the Accidental parts are the Ceremonies Prayers Unctions and Actions which are used in the Administration of them which they call not Sacramenta but Sacramentalia And whensoever the Essential parts are daily applyed to the Receiver though the Accidental parts are omitted yet the Sacrament is valid But if either of the Essential parts be wanting that is if either the true matter or the true forme which Christ instituted be not applyed then the Sacrament is void as their Divines Teach For example in the Sacrament of Baptisme there is materia proxima and materia remota a remote and an immediate matter the remote is the natural Element of Water the immediate is the Lotion or the action whereby the Baptiser applyes the Water to the Baptised during which action the Essential Form is to be pronounced by the Baptiser in these words I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost In this matter and forme consists the whole Substance and Essence of this Sacrament and therefore if by reason of the weakness of the Child or by any other incident casualty the other Ceremonies cannot be performed yet the Child is Truly Baptized though performed by the Midwife or any other person because all the essential parts of Baptism instituted by Christ are duly applyed to the Child though the Unctions Prayers and other Ceremonies be omitted and they insist so earnestly upon these essential parts that in case no other Water could be had but Rose-water or some other Liquor that hath affinity with Water they hold the Sacrament not valid because the Matter instituted by Christ is wanting which is the natural Element of Water Fourthly They hold that though the Matter and Form be the whole Essence of the Sacrament yet if they be not conjoined so as to make up one thing the Sacrament is nul and of no effect for the form must be applied to the matter and have a moral concomitance with it or else it cannot have a moral union with the same if therefore the Water in Baptism be applyed to day to the Baptised and the form pronounced to morrow there will be no Baptism nor Sacrament for the words would be false which signifie a present Lotion Fifthly Of all the seven Sacramentss which they admit they assert that only three to wit Baptism Confirmation and Order do imprint upon the Soul of the Receiver an indelible spiritual Character never to be blotted out so as those Souls which receive any of these three Sacraments after separation from the Body will appear in the next World with these characteristical Notes instampt upon them some with one some with two others with all three according to their respective differences they having an essential discrepation from one another each of them denoting the Sacrament from whence they proceeded Hence they infer that none of these three Sacraments when once validly conferr'd can be reiterated or received twice by the same Person and that it would be a Sacriledge to attempt it because they frustrate the effect of the Sacrament yet if there arise any doubt of the validity of the former collation then a strict inquiry is to be made how grounded that doubt is and if it be still found ambiguous then that Sacrament is to be again conferr'd sub conditione But if it be evident that there was wanting either the true matter or the true forme which are all the essentials or the right intention of the Administrer
piece of Bread and not the least access made to their inherent and sanctifying nor to their actual and transient Graces Neither is it for once or twice that they are so treated but constantly and toties quoties which certainly is an unworthy abuse and a Spiritual Cheat did not the Authors thereof proceed bonâ fide as not hgving detected the Error Their Power of Relaxing and Retaining sins participates much of the nature of Episcopacy in this respect that neither the one nor the other is a distinct Order from Priesthood but both of them necessarily and essentially presuppose Priesthood already Confer'd as the ground-work and foundation on which they depend so that the Power of Absolving is a superinduction to Priesthood or rather a consequent faculty that issues from it and if this Order be wanting that power can never be validly conferr'd wherefore the Penitents presuming upon the validity of this Power and their easie access to Absolution hence take occasion to be less circumspect and to let the reins loose to such sins as their sensual appetite prompts them to but when they come to make their Confession and receive Absolution though they have discover'd their Sore and the nature of the Spiritual Distemper of their Souls yet no Soveraign Medicine can be apply'd in order to their Cure for want of Ability in their Spiritual Physitian for where the Radical Power is wanting the Desired Effect cannot be produced so they return with the clogg of their sins as burthensome to them as before they came And not to insist upon any more particulars I shall conclude with this General Maxime that the Invalidity of all other Functions peculiar to Priesthood alone is an inseparable companion to the Invalidity of their Ordination But it may be pretended that Consocration Communion Absolution c. may be validly performed by one that hath titulum coloratum bonam fidem a colourable title a good Conscience c. though he should want the power of Order according to the rule above given in the Eighth Section First I Answer That it is not likely nor probable that the Incarnate Word would imploy his Omnipotency to grant such extraordinary favors to the Church of Rome because he can have no valuable motive to do it For Why should Christ bestow such singular Graces on his Enemies who have deserted his Doctrine changed his Ordinances and Institutions rob'd him as much as in them lyeth of his Prerogatives and usurp'd to themselves a Power which is peculiar to himself alone and these favors to be constantly conferr'd upon them and to be continued without intermission till the World's end for there is little hope of their Retractation And I dare aver that if any indifferent judgment should seriously ponder their manifold Errors whereof some are proposed and proved in this Treatise which I am ready to maintain against any legal opposition it would plainly appear that the Church of Rome is but a corrupted branch of the Universal Church of Christ and consequently sequester'd from the True Church And though I cannot deny but that our benign Lord grants to all out of the Treasure of his Merits Grace sufficient for their Salvation yet I fear they will scarce render this Grace efficacious by their cooperation with it for it must be an extraordinary a potent Grace that must incline them to a Recantation Secondly I Answer that this Case proposed in the Objection is far different from the Rule given above in the Eighth Section for there the Question was of the preservation or utter ruine of a True Church of Christ which cannot subsist without true Ordination but here the case only concerns particular persons and they likewise by the pravity of their own wills long since cut off from the True Church of Christ neither would these favors if granted revive their Church so as to render its Doctrine Orthodox or any way to reduce the Members or Heads thereof to a better sense Wherefore in this Case there is no ground nor motive to induce Christ to grant such an extraordinary concurse but in the former case it was strictly necessary for the preservation of a considerable part of the True Church of Christ Besides in the Case here proposed our Omnipotent Redeemer must have recourse to his Illimited Power daily to make so many Thousands of Miracles and this constantly to be continued without interruption but in the former case we only Assert that upon just and congruous grounds our Gratious Redeemer only for once supplyed the defect of Order when no Essential nor Necessary condition or Requisite was wanting SECT X. Of Clandestine Marriage THe Church of Rome that Sancta mater Ecclesia pretends to so much Power and Autority in ordering and disposing of all things belonging to Sacraments that it not only prescribes the Manner and Method of their Administration but also penetrates into the very Essence and Substance of them Subtracting Adding and Changing what she pleaseth and indeed in five of them there might be some seeming pretence for it they having received the honor of being called Sacraments from that Churches Institution without sufficient ground in Scripture for it whereof this of Matrimony is one of which we shall here Treate Marriage is a Contract between Man and Woman containing a Mutual Tradition to each other by proper words de presenti the last words de presenti distinguish Marriage from Sponsalia or Betrothing which is no Marriage nor Actual Tradition but a Promise of Marriage for the future The Council of Trent hath defin'd Matrimony to be a Sacrament and Anathematiz'd those that shall deny it Si quis dixerit Matrimonium Tril Sess 24. Can. 1. non esse propriè verè unum exseptem legis Evangelicae Sacramentis à Christo Domino Institutum sed ab hominibus in Ecclesiam invectum neque gratiam conferre Anathema sit By the Constitutions of the Church of Rome there are several Impediments of Marriage which are distinguisht into two Classis The First are such as render Matrimony Invalid which they call impedimenta dirimentia They of the Second Classis are only impedientia which render the persons inhabiles to Contract lawfully yet having Contracted the Marriage is valid To Contract clandestinely without such Witnesses as can give sufficient proofe and evidence of the Contract in foro externo hath been alwayes prohibited and therefore held unlawful but yet valid though now since the Council of Trent it is rendred invalid The words of the Council are these Trid Sess 24. C. 1. Reforan Matrim Qui aliter quam praesenti Parocho vel alio Sacerdote de ipsius Parochi seu Ordinarii licentia duobus vel tribus testibus Matrimonium contrahere attentabunt eos Sancta Synodus ad sic contrahendum omnino inhabiles reddit hujusmodi contractus irritos nullos esse decernit prout eos praesenti decreto irritos facit annullat By which Decree Clandestine Marriage which
common accidents and consequently the Argument proceeds in its full strength against all these The Third Proof Insisting upon the Principles of Transubstantiation an irreconcileable difficulty will occur when that complex of first and second qualities and other accidents is so altered and changed that it becomes an apt disposition to a new specifical Forme As for example A Communicant receives a consecrated Hoaste which is log'd in the Stomach of the Receiver and by the natural activity of the Stomach is fitly disposed to receive the Forme of Chyle then there is a strict exigence in nature that the Forme of Chyle be introduced What is to be done in this case Nature may spend it self in clamoring to have this Forme introduced but alass here is no subject nor receptacle to receive it Some expedient must here be found you will say that in this case the Author of Nature must create new Matter to receive this Forme and to relieve the Accidents from that violent state wherein they have been detained Most excellent Philosophy How absurd would this seem to any of the Antients but meanly verst in this Science Aristotle never dreamt of such anxieties and distresses of Nature And the Divinity is yet worse which makes God subject to submit to the extravagant exigences of his creatures no way grounded in his own Providence and Disposition for the great Author of Nature Created the whole Mass of first Matter independant of any thing else and since that original creation no Matter hath been destroyed none produced but the same succeeds indifferently to all the variety of Formes that are produced and destroyed But now here comes a strict exigence of a substantial Forme to be produced dependant on the Matter and yet there is no matter to receive it but the Supreme Creator must be summoned by his creatures to supply this defect by Creating new Matter as though he had been ignorant in the Beginning what quantity of Matter was sufficient who created all things by his Infinite Wisdom and Providence in pondere mensura out of his own Free-will without any exigence or determination of his creatures Must then the Order of this Systeme be inverted and God as it were necessitated to exercise his Omnipotence in a New creation not grounded in his former Instituon But here it may be Alleg'd That the drift of all these Proofes is no other then to make it appear that the whole business of Transubstantiation is Supernatural and Miraculous which the Church of Rome freely acknowledgeth and are induced to this belief by the Autority of Christ himself who holding Bread in his hand in the Last Supper plainly told his Apostles Hoc est corpus meum This is my Body If Christ affirms it Who dares gainsay it We all know that the Substance of Bread cannot by Natural Means be converted into the Body of Christ but by the illimited power of God it may be done and Christ tells us That it is done Why therefore should we not believe it First I Answer That what is possible though Miraculous and Supernatural may be believed yet not slightly and without sufficient reason but if by an urgent and indispensable necessity or an irrefragable autority which brings with it a perfect assurance of the true sense and meaning thereof we are pressed to an assent this is a sufficient Motive to induce us to believe But in the next Proofe I shall make it appear that here is no such inductive no necessity of yielding our assent to such a prodigious number of Miracles not once only but daily and hourly repeated and constantly continued and so to last till the Worlds end Secondly I Answer That in the Second Proofe of this Assertion it appeareth that from this Doctrine of Transubstantiation it unavoidably follows That all Natural Causes both can and do actually create and annihilate who promiscuously have their insluences when duly applyed upon a consecrated Hoaste as much as they have upon one that is not consecrated which plain experience maketh manifest and to have such a power to create and annihilate or to produce something out of nothing is so peculiar to God alone as wholly depending on an Omnipotent Power that it is absolutely impossible that it should be communicated to any pure creature The Fourth Proofe There is no necessity neither from Scripture nor Reason nor from any other Revelation to admit Transubstantiation The greatest necessity that hath been hitherto alledged is drawn from those words of Christ Hoc est corpus meum but from hence no necessity can be derived for they that hold Consubstantiation and assert That Christ's Body exists in the Sacrament together with the Substance of Bread these I say as rigorously stand to the literal sense of Christ's words and as properly verify them as they who hold Transubstantiation for the words of themselves imply no conversion or change of one substance into another but if taken in a literal sense they only signifie Christ's Body there present wherefore there is no necessity from these words to multiply so many Miracles yea and Impossibilities as are inferr'd from Transubstantiation because the literal sense of the words may be saved without them But in reality there is no more necessity of understanding those words of Christ in a literal sense then when he saith I am a Door I am a Vine c. For since the Scripture is capable of so many Senses and Interpretations there is no Reason nor Necessity of wresting it to that sense alone which brings with it the greatest difficulties of any especially when by congruities and other places of Scripture it may be connaturally understood in another sense and since it was usual with our Great Redeemer to speak by Allegories Parables by Tropes and Figures it is most likely he spoke so here which is sufficiently intimated by Christ himself telling his Disciples John 6. vers 63. that It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you are Spirit and Life and yet the words that he then spoke were concerning his Body Hence I Conclude That the words of Christ above rehersed can ground no necessary inference of Transubstantiation SECT III. Of the Possibility of Transubstantiation as held by the Church of Rome IN order to the determination of this difficulty I must first premise That according to the Rules of Logick no affirmative proposition or enunciation can be true except it have a conformity with its Object that is the Object must be in its self as the act represents it All Enunciations consist of two parts the subject and the predicate the subject is that of which it enunciates the predicate is that which it enunciates of the subject if the proposition be negative it separates the predicate from the subject but if it be affirmative it intentionally identisies the one with the other as in this Proposition Angelus est Spiritus Angelus is the subject and Spiritus is the
and in many other cases of like nature then are Councils both profitable and necessary as a Physitian is to a sick Patient then ought they by their opportune Remedies to salve the Sores to make up the breaches to reforme the abuses and to redintegrate the whole body of the Church and purge the Wheate from the Cockle and Darnel which by the depraved will of Man and the suggestion of Sathan began to take root But if Councils should spend their endeavors in debating certain abstruse and hidden Mysteries and frame Articles of Divine Faith upon them without any warrant in Scripture or Antiquity nay against the Original Belief of the Church and by their annexed Anathema's drive Men to confusion and desperation and yet reap no benefit thereby for it neither promotes Vertue nor curbs Vice nor any way conduceth to the institution of a Moral and Christian Life but on the contrary it puts Mens Consciences upon the Rack it disturbs the peace and quiet of their Minds it hinders their due application to Vertue and Morality it perplexes their Souls with Scruples and disposeth them to despair In this case I appeal to the Judgment of the whole World Whether the multiplying of such decisions be not fruitless and pernicious To what is added in the Objection I grant that Councils have been always in use not to decide such speculative points of Divinity and reduce them to Articles of Faith but to solve practical doubts which may arise among the vulgar concerning their practise and manners c. which may be instrumental to facilitate their progress towards Heaven but as for Divine Faith it ought to be said to them as St. Paul said to the Galatians That if an Angel should come from Heaven and Teach them otherwise then they had been Taught by Christ and his Apostles they ought not to believe him but let him be Accursed saith the Apostle Gal. 1.8 9. The Second Objection We are Taught by experience that several Heresiarchs have often attempted to make a breach in the Church by their new Heterodox Doctrine and the most efficacious remedy in the Church to prevent such inconveniences is to Anathematize the Authors and condemn their Errors as Heretical which hath been alwayes practised in the Church with good success for the extirpating of Heresie and establishing Orthodox Doctrine To this Objection I Answer First That when the Definitions of Councils are grounded in Scripture in the Doctrine and Practise of Christ and his Apostles or otherwise by true Revelations made manifest to be of Divine Autority such definitions are warrantable and useful to extinguish Heresie but nothing of all this will quadrate with the forecited definitions of the Church of Rome which are no way proved by Autority nor Reason nay rather they are repugnant to both yet are obtruded to the Credulous Believers under a Curse to be by them received by a blind assent without examining the truth of them Secondly I Answer That the most apposite and efficacious way to suppress Heresie is to evince the Error of it by solid and convincing Arguments drawn from Divine Autority or evident Principles of Reason These are the Armes with which the Antient Fathers wag'd War against the respective Heresies of their times So St. Ambrose with his Preaching and solid Principles drew the great St. Augustine from his Heresie to imbrace the Orthodox Doctrine of Christianity and the same Augustine being fully convinced thereof with no less industry and zeal then learning efficaciously refelled the Errors of the Manichaeans the Pellagians the Massilienses the Donatists c. he alledged not the Autority of Councils but convinced the Broachers and Abetters of those Errors with solid Arguments whereby he detected the Fallacy of their irregular Tenets And so by Divine Autority and strength of Reason refelled their illegal Assertions The Reason of this proceeding is manifest for the first Authors of such Erroneous Doctrines and they who greedily give their assent to them make it their business to maintain them against all opposition and glory in their undertakings hugging their Errors as the happy products of their own understanding whence they so tenaciously adhere to them that no Curse nor Censure can make any impression upon them If you cite the Definitions of Councils against them they alledge their Reasons against you and Challenge you to Solve them How earnestly did Nestorius insist upon the Force of his Argument to prove two Persons in Christ And the whole stress of his Proofe he reduced to this one Sillogisme Omnis Natura Rationalis Completa est Persona sed in Christo sunt duae Rationales Naturae completae ergo duae Personae In English thus All Compleat Rational Natures are Persons but in Christ there are two compleat Rational Natures ergo in Christ there are two Persons With this Argument Nestorius perplext the Fathers whereof none durst deny either of the Premises and yet the Conclusion was Erroneous And certainly Nestorius would have slighted any definition of a Council against his Assertion without solving his Argument Wherefore the most efficacious way to Refute an Heretick is to Instruct his Reason and Convince his Judgment that his Principles are Erroneous to this end Arguments are to be drawn from Scripture and Divine Autority seconded by cleer and evident Reason and from these two Premises you may infer a conclusion contradictory to the Error And hereby you encrease the Authors Adhesion to his Error for there are none so obstinate as to deny that which is establisht by known Divine Autority and Evident Reason SECT V. When and from whom this Doctrine of the Real Presence took its first rise ALl Dogmatical Assertions which are pretended to be matters of Divine Faith if they be so it s rigorously necessary that they be backt by Divine Autority and therefore must be traced immediately from Christ himself or else attested by those Hagyographers the old Prophets Apostles c. who were immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost and so could not erre by whose Mediation it must ultimate be resolved into Divine Autority The reason hereof is because all acts of Divine Faith consist essentially of two parts the Material and the Formal Object the Material Object is the thing believed the Formal Object is dictio Dei Gods saying it which is the only motive that induceth us to believe it as Divine Faith And herein Faith differs from Science and Opinion because Science though invested with certainty yet derives it from the evidence of Human Reason which is inductive to the assent Opinion hath neither certainty nor evidence but a meer probability grounded on a weak foundation of Reason cum formidine partis oppositae it is always accompanyed with an ambiguity either formal or virtual that the contrary may be true But Faith if it be Divine relyes upon Divine Autority if Human on Human Authority For instance we believe that the Divine Word is Incarnate because God hath assured it this is an
c. What other thing is superficially looked upon but the substance of Wine VVhere he affirms the substance of Bread and VVine to remain in the Sacrament after Consesecration To this he subjoyns For notwithstanding that after the Mystical Consecration Bread is not called Bread nor the Wine Wine but the Body and Blood of Christ yet after that which is seen neither is any kind of Flesh known in the Bread nor in the Wine any drop of Blood Before he told us that the Bread and VVine remained in the Sacrament after Consecration as they were before now he tells us That after Consecration there is not any kind of Flesh nor one drop of Blood though the Bread be not called Bread nor the Wine Wine but the Body and Blood of Christ where he granteth the denomination of the Body and Blood of Christ but denyeth the verity and substance thereof for he acknowledgeth nothing but the Bread and VVine though they be not called so This in substance he often repeateth for after the verity saith he the kind of creature which was before is known still to remain VVhat more conspicuous Then addressing his Discourse to his Adversaries he tells them That under the veile of Corporeal Bread and Wine is the Spiritual Body and Blood of Christ. So that the Bread and VVine remain Corporeally but the Body and Blood of Christ Spiritually by their vertue of Sanctification And then presently compares this Sacrament to Holy Baptisme wherein the natural Element of VVater which of it self hath only power to wash and cleanse the Body yet by Christ's Institution is impowered to cleanse and sanctifie the Soul and yet still remains the Natural Element of VVater subject to corruption and then applyes the VVater in Baptisme to the Bread and VVine in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist Hence he proceeds to another similitude telling them That the Fathers of the Old Testament were Baptised in the Cloud and in the Sea which produced a Spiritual effect and yet suffered no Mutation This again he parallelleth to the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Then he tells them Likewise Manna given to the People from Heaven and the Water flowing out of the Rock were Corporeal and Corporeally they fed the People and gave them drink yet the Apostle nameth that Manna and that Water Spiritual Meat and Spiritual Drink and then he applyeth it to the Bread and Wine as before which takes off all ambiguity of his meaning for he drives at this that the Bread and VVine which remain in the Sacrament though Natural and Corporeal things yet by the powerful operation of Christ they are enabled to produce in the Souls of the worthy Receivers the same Spiritual Grace and Sanctification as if the Body and Blood of Christ were there really present and therefore the Bread and Wine are called the Body and Blood of Christ. He proceeds farther saying Here also we ought to consider what is meant by these words except you shall eate the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink his Blood you shall have no life in you He said not That his Flesh which hanged on the Cross should be eaten in pieces and eaten of the Apostles nor that his Blood which he shed for the Redemption of the World should be given his Disciples to drink for it were a wicked thing if his Flesh should be eaten and his Blood drunk as the Infidels took it And to confirm this he cites St. Augustine upon the same Text of Scripture Aug. de Dodr. Christ L. 3. of Christ's commands in these words He seemeth to command a wicked thing therefore it is a Figure c. Thus St. Augustine affirmeth the Mystery of the Body and Blood of Christ to be celebrated of the Faithful under a Figure for he saith It is no point of Religion but rather of Iniquity to take his Flesh and his Blood as they did which understood not Christ 's words Spiritually but Carnally and went back Then he gives many examples in other like cases to shew Why the Bread and Wine are called the Body and Blood of Christ because of the Similitude they have with the things Signified and so concludeth Wherefore the Mysteries be named the Body and Blood of Christ because they take the appellation of things whereof they be Sacraments Then he cites several passages out of St. Isidore to confirm the same Opinion of whom he saith Afterwards he declareth what Sacraments are to be Celebrated among the Faithful that is the Sacrament of Baptisme and of the Body and Blood of Christ And here I desire the Reader to take notice by the way that for above Eight hundred years after Christ there were but these Two Sacraments acknowledged in the Church of Christ and consequently no more were Instituted by Christ himself Yet the Church of Rome hath introduced Five more which Antiquity never heard of under the notion of Sacraments Is it credible that Christ should Institute for his Church Seven Sacraments and yet communicate to the first Professors of Christianity and their Successors for Eight Centuries the knowledge only of Two of them This cannot be The other Five were therefore Instituted by the Church of Rome for the Council of Trent names Seven and makes it an Article of Faith to believe them all Sacraments and layes its Curse upon the Disbelievers Si quis dixerit Sacramenta novae legis Trident. Sess 7. Can. 1. non fuisse omnia à Jesu Christo Domino Nostro Instituta aut esse plura vel paucior a quam septem videlicet Baptismum Consirmationem Eucharistiam Poenitentiam extremam Vnctionem Ordinem Matrimonium aut etiam aliquod horum septem non esse vere propriè Sacramentum Anathema sit Which was formerly defin'd by the Council of Florence Florent Decr. Eugenii a Arm. under the same circumstances What judgment can we here frame Examine Antiquity for Eight or Nine hundred years after Christ that can give us no Intelligence of any more then Two Sacraments and yet the Church of Rome strictly commands the belief of Seven Certainly the Subjects of that Church must have recourse to their blind obedience to submit to such Canons and Decrees as these For if Christ did not Institute those Five pretended Sacraments as it is plain he did not then the Church of Rome must have attempted to institute them not by appointing the matter but by giving them the vertue of Sacraments which is highly presumptive and a manifest violation of Divine Right for none but Christ can ordain the means and the vehicles whereby he intended to convey his Spiritual Graces which were the fruits of his Passion to the Souls of the Faithful this is his peculiar Prerogative But this being a digression from the matter in hand I desist and leave it to the consideration of the Judicious Reader Bertram now draws to the close of his First Question Whether the Body and Blood of Christ