mischief to Christianity as this one And under a vain pretence of preventing farther inconveniences endeavours to deprive all of this Spiritual comfort of this Divine Food of this Heavenly Light that so being kept in darkness they may be also preserv'd in ignorance and Damn'd Eternally HE believes it damnable in any one to think speak or do any thing irreverently towards the Scripture or by any means whatsoever to bring it into dis-repute or disgrace He holds it in the highest Veneration of all men living he professes it to be the Dew of Heaven Oracles of God Fountain of Eternal Life that to profane it is to incur the guilt of Damnation And that we are rather bound to lose our lives than concur any way to its profanation 'T is true he does not think it fit to be read generally by all without Licence or in the Vulgar Tongues Not for any disrespect to it But I. Because he understands that private Interpretation is not proper for the Scripture 2 Pet. 1.20 II. Because that in the Epistles of St. Paul are certain things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own perdition III. Because God hath given only some to be Apostles some Prophets other-some Evaâ—gelists and other-some Pastors and Doctors Eph. 4.11 For these Reasons he is taught That 't is not convenient for the Scripture to be read indifferently to all men but only such as have express Licence and good testimony from their Curates that they are humble discreet and devout persons and such as are willing to observe directions in the perusing this Sacred Volume That is take notice of all Godly Histories and imitable examples of Humility Chastity Obedience Mercy to the Poor c. and all such places as are apt to provoke and stir up the hatred of Sin fear of God's Judgments love of Virtue c. and in all Hard Obscure and Disputable Points to refer all to the Arbitrement of the Church to the judgment of those whom God hath appointed Pastors and Doctors Never presuming to contend controul teach or talk of their own Sense and Phansie in deep Questions of Divinity and high Mysteries of Faith but expecting the sense of these from the Lips of the Priest who shall keep knowledge and from whose mouth they shall require the Law Mal. 2.7 And this caution is used lest that the Scripture coming into the hands of a presuming sort of proud curious and contentious people be abused and perverted who make it their business to enquire into Dogmatical Mystical High and Hidden secrets of God's Counsels into Predestination Reprobation Election Pre-science and other such incomprehensible Mysteries and upon the presumption of I know not what Spirit immediately become Teachers Controllors and Iudges of Doctors Church Scripture and all and acknowledging no Authority left by Christ to which they are to submit under pretence of Scripture and God's Word make way for all sorts of Profaneness Irreligion and Atheism So that 't is not for the preserving Ignorance he allows a restraint upon the reading the Scriptures but for the preventing a blind ignorant Presumption And that it may be done to edification and not to destruction and without casting the holy to dogs or pearls to swine X. Of Reading the Holy Scripture 1. HE believes it damnable in any one to think speak or do any thing irreverently towards the Scripture or by any means whatsoever to bring it into disrepute or disgrace but not being contented with this he adds That he holds it in the highest Veneration of all Men living Now here we must desire a little better Representation of this Matter For certainly those who derive its Authority from the Church who set Traditions in equal esteem with it who complain so much of its Obscurity can never be said to hold in equal Veneration with those who maintain its independent Authority its Sufficiency and Perspicuity And these are known and material Points in Controversy between us and them therefore let them not say they hold it in the highest Veneration of all men living tho those thought themselves thorough Catholicks who have compared it to a Nose of Wax to a Lesbian Rule to a dead Letter unsensed Characters and to other things not fit to be repeated But we are well pleased to find them express such Veneration for it Wherefore then are the people to be kept from reading it 2. He saith It is not out of disrespect to it But why then 1. Because private Interpretation is not proper for the Scripture 2 Pet. 1.20 One would think the Scripture were not kept oâ—ly from the people by such a Sense being put upon it for any one that would but consider that place will find it must relate to the Prophets themselves and doth he think the Prophets were to be debarred from reading the Scriptures But this is playing with Scripture and not reasoning from it 2 Because in the Epistles of S. Paul are certain things hard to be â—nderstood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own Perdition 2 Pet. 3.16 Now in my Opinion such men deserve more to be debarred from medling with the Scripture who make such perverse Inferences from it than ordinary Readers And if they use all other places as they do this they cannot be excused from depraving it It is granted there were then unlearned and unstable men who misunderstood or misapplied the Writings of St. Paul and other Scriptures And what then There are men of all Ages who abuse the best things in the World even the Gospel it self and the Grace of God Doth it hence follow that the Gospel must not be preached to them or the grace of God made known to them for fear of mens making ill use of it If this had been the just consequence would not St. Peter himself have thought of this But he was so far from making it that he adviseth those persons he writes to to have a mighty regard to the Scriptures even to the Prophetical Writings as to a Light shiâ—ing in a dark place 1 Pet. 1.19 According to this way of deducing Consequences St. Peter should have argued just contrary The Prophetical Writings are dark and obscure therefâ—râ— meddle not with them but trust your Guides Whereas the Apostle after he had told them what the Apostles saw and heard he adds That they have a more sure Prophetical Word as the Rhemists translate it How could that be more sure to them unless they were allowed to read consider and make use of it 3. Because God hath given only some to be Apostles some Prophets other some Evangelists and other some Pastors and Doctors Ephes. 4.11 Doth it hence follow that the People are not to read the Scriptures In the Universities Tutors are appointed to interpret Aristotle to their Pupils doth it hence follow that they are not to read Aristotle themselves It is no
doubt a mighty Advantage to have such infallible Interpreters as the Apostles and Prophets and all Christians are bound to follow their Sense where they have delivered it But suppose the Question be about the Sense of these Interpreters must their Books not be looked into because of the danger of Error This Reason will still hold against those who go about to deliver their Sense and so on till by this Method of Reasoning all sort of Books and Interpretations be rejected unless any such can be found out which is not liable to be abused or misunderstood And if there be any such to be had they are much to blame who do not discover it But as yet we see no Remedy for two things in Mankind a proneness to Sin and to Mistake But of all things we ought not to take away from them one of the best Means to prevent both viz. a diligent and careful and humble reading the Holy Scriptures But 3. He denies that all persons are forbid to read the Scriptures but only such as have License and good Testimony from their Curats and therefore their design is not to preserve Ignorance in the people but to prevent a blind ignorant presumption These are plausible pretences to such as search no farther but the Mystery of this matter lies much deeper It was no doubt the Design of the Church of Rome to keep the Bible wholly out of the hands of the people But upon the Reformation they found it impossible so many Translations being made into vulgar Languages and therefore care was taken to have Translations made by some of their own Body and since the people of better inclinations to Piety were not to be satisfied without the Bible therefore they thought it the better way to permit certain persons whom they could trust to have a License to read it And this was the true Reason of the fourth Rule of the Index Liber prohibit made in pursuance of the Order of the Council of Trent and published by Pius IV. by which any one may see it was not an Original Permission out of any good Will to the Thing but an Aftergame to get the Bible out of the hands of the People again And therefore Absolution was to be denied to those who would not deliver them to their Ordinaries when they were called for And the Regulars themselves were not to be permitted to have Bibles without a License And as far as I can understand the Addition of Clement VIII to that fourth Rule he withdraws any new Power of granting such Licenses and saith they are contrary to the Command and Vsage of that Church which he saith is to be inviolably observed Wherein I think he declares himself fully against such Licenses And that inferior Guides should grant them against the Command of the Head of the Church is a thing not very agreeable to the Unity and Subordination they boast of XI Of Apocryphal Books HE believes it lawful to make what Additions to Scripture his Party thinks good and therefore takes no notice of the ancient Canon approved by the Apostles and primitive Christians but allows equal Authority to the Books of Toby Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and the Macchabees as to the other part of the Scripture altho' these were always rejected by the Jews never exant in the Hebrew Copy and expresly condemn'd by St. Jerome as not Canonical and never admitted by the Church but only of late years in some of their Synods which made these Innovations contrary to the Sense of their Ancestors HE believes it damnable to add any thing to the Scripture And yet allows the Books of Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Macchabees to be Canonical because the Church of Christ has declar'd them such not only in these later ages but even in the primitive times S. Gregory Nazianzen Orat. de S S. Macc. who lived in the year 354. Also S. Ambrose lib. de Iacob vit beat An. 370. Innocent I. Ep. ad Exup They were also received by the third Council of Carthage An. 419. which approv'd all these Books as Canonical Can. 47. and was subscrib'd by S. Augustine and confirm'd in the 6 th General Synod August lib. 2. Doct. Christ. cap. 8. So that to him 't is of little concern whether they were ever in the Hebrew Copy the Canon of the Church of Christ being of much more Authority with him than the Canon of the Iews He having no other assurance that the Books of Moses and the four Gospels are the true Word of God but by the Authority and Canon of the Church And this he has learn'd from that great Doctor S. Augustine who declares his mind plainly in this case saying That he would not believe the Gospel except the Authority of the Catholick Church mov'd him threunto Contra Ep. Fundam c. 4. Now he is well satisfied that many doubted whether these Books were Canonical or no and amongst others S. Ierom because the Church had not declar'd them so But since the Church's Declaration no Catholick ever doubted no more than of other Books viz. of the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of St. James the second of St. Peter the second and third of St. John St. Jude 's Epistle and the Apocalyps All which were for many years after the Apostles time doubted of but afterwards declar'd and receiv'd as Canonical This he finds S. Ierome expresly confessing of himself viz. That for some time the Book of Judith seemed to him Apocryphal to wit till the Council of Nice declar'd it otherwise Praef. in Iudith The like he affirms of S. Iames's Epistle that it was doubted of by many for several years Paulatim tempore procedente meruit authoritatem By little and little in process of time it gain'd Authority De viris illus verb. Iacob For this reason he matters not what Books have been reputed Apocryphal by some and for some years But only what Books are receiv'd and declar'd by the Church Canonical in what year and at what time soever For believing the same spirit of Truth assists her in all Ages he looks upon himself equally oblig'd to receive her Definitions of the Year 419. as of any of the precedent years It not being possible for Christ to fail of his Promise or the Holy Ghost to err or misguide the Church in that year more than in any other XI Of Apocryphal Books 1. WE do not charge the Church of Rome with making what Additions to Scripture they think good as the Misrepresenter saith but we charge them with taking into the Canon of Scripture such Books as were not received for Canonical by the Christian Church as those Books himself mentions viz. Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and Maccabees 2. We do not only charge them with this but with Anathematizing all those who do not upon this Declaration believe them to be Canonical since they cannot but know that these Books never were in the Iewish Canon and were left
which of all those Senses is that intended by the Holy Ghost and leading to Truth and which are Erroneous and Antichristian He is taught to believe that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular person not that there is any thing wanting on the Scripture-side but because no private person can be certain whether amongst all the several meanings every Text is obnoxious to that which he understands it in is the Right or no. And without this certainty of Truth and security from Error he knows there 's nothing capable of being a Rule XIII Of the Scriptures as a Rule of Faith THE only thing insisted on here is That it is not the Words but the Sense of Scripture is the Rule and that this Sense is not to be taken from Mens private Fancies which are various and uncertain and therefore where there is no security from Errors there is nothing capable of being a Rule To clear this we must consider 1. That it is not necessary to the making of a Rule to prevent any possibility of mistake but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault For Certainty in it self and Sufficiency for the use of others are all the necessary Properties of a Rule but after all it 's possible for Men not to apply the Rule aright and then they are to be blamed and not the Rule 2. If no Men can be certain of the right Sense of Scripture then it is not plain in necessary things which is contrary to the design of it and to the clearest Testimonies of Antiquity and to the common Sense of all Christians who never doubted or disputed the Sense of some things revealed therein as the Unity of the Godhead the making of the World by him the Deluge the History of the Patriarchs the Captivity of the Jews the coming of the Messias his sending his Apostles his coming again to Judgment c. No Man who reads such things in Scripture can have any doubt about the Sense and Meaning of the Words 3. Where the Sense is dubious we do not allow any Man to put what Sense he pleases upon them but we say there are certain means whereby he may either attain to the true Sense or not be damned if he do not And the first thing every man is to regard is not his security from being deceived but from being damned For Truth is made known in order to Salvation If therefore I am sure to attain the chief end I am not so much concerned as to the possibility of Errors as that I be not deceived by my own fault We do not therefore leave Men either to follow their own fancy or to interpret Scripture by it but we say They are bound upon pain of Damnation to seek the Truth sincerely and to use the best means in order to it and if they do this they either will not err or their Errors will not be their Crime XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture HE believes that his Church which he calls Catholick is above the Scripture and profanely allows to her an uncontrollable Authority of being Judge of the Word of God And being fondly abus'd into a distrust of the Scriptures and that he can be certain of nothing even of the Fundamentals of Christianity from what is deliver'd in them though they speak never so plainly he is taught to rely wholly upon this Church and not to believe one word the Scripture says unless his Church says it too HE believes that the Church is not above the Scripture but only allows that Order between them as is between the Iudge and the Law And is no other than what generally every private Member of the Reformation challenges to himself as often as he pretends to decide any doubt of his own or his Neighbours in Religion by interpreting the Scripture Neither is he taught at all to distrust the Scripture or not to rely on it but only to distrust his own private Interpretation of it and not to rely on his own Iudgment in the Resâ—lution of any doubt concerning Faith or Religion though he can produce several Texts in favour of his Opinion But all such cases he is commanded to re-cur to the Church and having learnt from her the sense of all such Texts how they have been understood by the whole Community of Christians in all Ages since the Apostles and what has been their Receiv'd Doctrine in such doubtful and difficult Points he is oblig'd to submit to this and never presume on his own private Sentiments however seemingly grounded on Reason and Scripture to believe or preach any New Doctrine opposite to the Belief of the Church But as he receives from her the Book so also to receive from her the Sense of the Book With a Holy Confidence that she that did not cheat him in delivering a False Book for the True one will not cheat him in delivering a False and Erroneus Sense for the True one her Authority which is sufficient in the one being not less in the other And his own private Iudgment which was insufficient in the one that is in finding out the True Scripture and discerning it from all other Books being as incapable and insucffiient in the other that is in certainly discovering the meaning of the Holy Ghost and avoiding all other Heterodox and mistaken Interpretations XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture 1. THE Question is not Whether Men are not bound to make use of the best means for the right Interpretation of Scripture by Reading Meditation Prayer Advice a humble and teachable Temper c. i. e. all the proper means fit for such an end but whether after all these there be a necessity of submitting to some infallible Judge in order to the attaining the certain Sense of Scripture 2. The Question is not Whether we ought not to have a mighty regard to the Sense of the whole Christian Church in all Ages since the Apostles which we profess to have but Whether the present Roman Church as it stands divided from other Communions hath such a Right and Authority to interpret Scripture that we are bound to believe that to be the infallible Sense of Scripture which she delivers And here I cannot but take notice how strangely this matter is here misrepresented for the Case is put 1. As if every one who rejects their pretence of Infallibility had nothing to guide him but his own private Fancy in the Interpretation of Scripture 2. As if we rejected the Sense put upon Scripture by the whole Community of Christians in all ages since the Apostles times Whereas we appeal in the matters in difference between us to this universal Sense of the Christian Church and are verily perswaded they cannot make it out in any one Point wherein we differ from them And themselves cannot deny that in several we have plainly the Consent of the first Ages as far as appears by the Books remaining
on our side as in the Worship of Images Invocation of Saints Papal Supremacy Communion in both kinds Prayer and Scripture in known Tongues and I may safely add the Sufficiency of the Scripture Transubstantiation Auricular Confession Publick Communions Solitary Masses to name no more But here lies the Artifice We must not pretend to be capable of judging either of Scripture or Tradition but we must trust their Judgment what is the Sense of Scripture and what hath been the Practice of the Church in all Ages although their own Writers confess the contrary which is very hard But he seems to argue for such a Submission to the Church 1. Because we receive the Book of Scripture from her therefore from her we are to receive the Sense of the Book An admirable Argument We receive the Old Testament from the Iews therefore from them we are to receive the Sense of the Old Testament and so we are to reject the true Messias But this is not all If by the Church they mean the Church of Rome in distinction from others we deny it if they mean the whole Christian Church we grant it but then the force of it is quite lost But why is it not possible for the Church of Rome to keep these Writings and deliver them to others which make against her self Do not Persons in Law-Suits often produce Deeds which make against them But there is yet a further Reason it was not possible for the Church of Rome to make away these Writings being so universally spread 2. Because the Church puts the difference between true and false Books therefore that must be trusted for the true Sense of them Which is just as one should argue The Clerks of the Rolls are to give an account to the Court of true Records therefore they are to sit on the Bench and to give Judgment in all Causes The Church is only to declare what it finds as to Canonical Books but hath no Power to make any Book Canonical which was not before received for such But I confess Stapleton saith the Church if it please may make Hermes his Pastor and Clemens his Constitutions Canonical but I do not think our Author will therein follow him XV. of Tradition HE believes the Scripture to be imperfect And for the supplying of what he thinks Defective in it he admits Humane Ordinations and Traditions of Men allowing equal Authority to these as to the Scriptures themselves thinking himself as much oblig'd to submit to these and believe them with Divine Faith as he does whatsoever is written in the Bible and confessedly spoken by the Author of all Truth God himself Neither will he admit of any one to be a Member of his Communion although he undoubtedly believes every Word that 's written in the Scripture unless he also assents to these Traditions and gives as great credit to them as to the Word of God although in that there is not the least footstep of them to be found HE believes the Scripture not to be imperfect nor to want Humane Ordinations or Traditions of Men for the supplying any defects in it Neither does he allow the same Authority to these as to the Word of God or give them equal credit or exact it of others that desire to be admitted into the communion of his Church He believes no Divine Faith ought to be given to any thing but what is of Divine Revelation and that nothing is to have place in his Creed but what was taught by Christ and his Apostles and has been believ'd and taught in all Ages by the Church of God the Congregation of all True Believers and has been so deliver'd down to him through all Ages But now whether that which has been so deliver'd down to him as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles has been by Word of Mouth or Writing is altogether indifferent to him he being ready to follow in this point as in all others the command of St. Paul that is To stand fast and hold the Traditions he has learn'd whether by Word or by Epistle 2 Thess. 2.15 And to look upon any one as Anathema That shall preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd Gal. 1.9 So that as he undoubtedly holds the Scripture to be the Word of God penn'd by Prophets and Apostles and inspir'd by the Holy Ghost because in all Ages from Moses to Christ and from Christ to this time it has been so Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd successively by the Faithful and never scruples the least of the truth of it nor sticks to assent to it with a stedfast and Divine Faith altho' they are not nor have not at any time been able to prove what they have thus taught and deliver'd with one Text of Scripture In the like manner he is ready to receive and believe all that this same Congregation has together with the Bible in all Ages successively without interruption Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assent to it with Divine Faith just as he does to the Bible and esteems any one Anathema that shall Preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd And although some may seriously endeavour to convince him that several Points of Faith and other Religious Practices which he has thus receiv'd and believes are not the Doctrine of Christ nor Apostolical Institutions but rather Inventions of Men and Lessons of Antichrist and should produce several Texts of Scripture for the proving it He is not any thing surpriz'd at it As well knowing that he that follows not this Rule of Believing all to be of Christ that has been universally taught and believ'd as such by the Church of Christ and of understanding the Scripture in the same sense in which it has in all Ages been understood by the same Church may very easily frame as many Creeds as he pleases and make Christ and his Apostles speak what shall be most agreeable to his Humour and suit best with his Interest and find plain proofs for all And make no more difficulty in producing Scripture against Christ's Doctrine than the Iews and the Devil did against Christ's Person who never wanted their Scriptum est It is written when 't was necessary to carry on their designs And if there were any thing in these sort of Arguments to make him doubt of the truth of any Point of Doctrine thus receiv'd he thinks it might make him call in question the Truth of the Scripture and the Bible it self as soon as any thing else They all standing upon the same foundation of the Church's Tradition which if it fail in one leaves no security in any XV. Of Tradition 1. THE Question is not about Human Traditions supplying the Defects of Scripture as he misrepresents it but whether there be an Unwritten word which we are equally bound to receive with the Written word Altho these things which pass under that Name are really but Humaâ—e Traditions yet we do not
And what then Must therefore S. Francis or S. Dominic or S. Rosa do as great as the Apostles had done What Consequence can be drawn from the Apostles times to latter Ages We do not dispute God's Omnipotency or say his hand is shortned but we must not from thence infer that every thing which is called a Miracle is truly so or make use of God's Power to justify the most incredible stories Which is a way will serve as well for a false as a true Religion and Mahomet might run to Gods Omnipotency for cleaving the Moon in two pieces as well as others for removing a House over the Seas or any thing of a like nature But he saith their Miracles are not more ridiculous and absurd than some in the Old Testament Which I utterly deny but I shall not run out into the examination of this Parallel by shewing how very different the Nature Design and Authority of the Miracles he mentions is from those which are believed in the Roman Church And it had been but fitting as he set down the Miracles of the Old Testament so to have mentioned those of the Roman Church which were to vye with them but this he was willing to forbear for certain good Reasons If most of poor Man's impossibles be none to God as he concludes yet every thing is not presently true which is not impossible and by this way of Arguing there can be nothing objected against the most absurd and idle Fictions of the Golden Legend which all Men of Understanding among themselves not only reject for want of Authority but of Credibility XXXIII Of Holy Water HE highly approves the Superstitius use of many inanimate things and attributes wonderful effects to such Creatures which are but in a very inferiour rank and able to do no such things Holy Water is in great esteem with him so are Blessed Candles Holy Oyl and Holy Bread in which he puts so much conâ—idence that by the Power of these he thinks himself secure from all Witchcraft Inchantment and all the power of the Devil nay that by the help of these seâ—seless Medators he may obtain remission of his Venial or lighter sins And in the use of these things he is taught by his Church to so obstinatley positive as if he had the Authority of Fathers and Scripture to back it when-as there is not the least grain of Reason no hint of Antiquity no Text throughout the Word of God for the defence command or even permission of it HE utterly disapproves all sorts of Superstition And yet is taught to have an esteem for Holy-Water Blessed Candles Holy Oyl and Holy Bread not doubting but that as such Men who have Consecrated themselves to the Service of God in the Preaching the Gospel and Admâ—nistration of the Sacraments have a particular respect due to them above the Laity As Churches Dedâ—cated to God are otherwise to be look'd on than other dwelling Houses So likewise these other Creatures which are particularly deputed by the Prayers and Blessing of the Priest to certain uses for God's own Glory and the Spiritual and Corporeal good of Christians ought to be respected in a degree above other things And what superstitions in the use of them Has not God himself prescrib'd such inanimate things and Holy Men made use of them for an intent above their natural Power and this without any Superstition Was there Superstition in the Waters of Iealousy Numb 5.17 In the Shew-Bread in the Tables of Stone in the Salt us'd by Elijah for sweet'ning the infected Waters in the Liver of the Fish taken by the Angel Raphael for expelling the Devil Was it Superstition in Christ to use Clay for the opening the eyes of the Blind or in the Apostles to impose hands for the bringing down the Holy Ghost upon Christians or to make use of Oyl for the curing of the Sick Mark 6.13 And thô there be no express Command in Scripture for Blessing Water Bread c. yet there is this assurance that every Creature is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer 1 Tim. 4.5 and frequent Promises That God would hear the Prayers of the Faithful Why therefore should he doubt but that these Creatures on which the Blessing of God is solemnly implor'd by the Word of God and the Prayers of the Priest and People for their sanctification are really sanctified according to the assurance of the Apostle and the Promises of God St. Cyril of Ierusalem who liv'd in the Third Century made no question but that as these things whâ—ch are offer'd to Idols tho pure in their own nature are made impure by the Invocation of Devils so on the contrary simple Water is made holy and gets a Sanctity by virtue receiv'd from the Invocation of the Holy Ghost Christ our Lord and his eternal Father Cyr. Catech. 3. St. Augustine was of the same Judgment toucâ—ing the Benediction of Bread affirming that the Bread which the Catechumens did take tho it was not Christ's Body yet it was holy yes and more holy than the Meat wherewith we are nourish'd Aug. Tom. 7. l. 2. de Pecc Mer. Remisâ—c 26. The like is to be seen in the Epistle of St. Alexander who govern'd the Church but fifty years after St. Peter where he declares the Custom even at that time of blessing Water and confirms the Practice of it by his Command And that Water thus bless'd was capable by virtue receiv'd from Heaven of working effâ—cts above its own nature was the Sentiment of Christians in the Primitive times Epiphanius makes early mention Tom. 2. l. 1. cont haer 30. where he relates a passage at length how that Water being blessed in the Name of Iesus and sprinkled upon Fire which by Witchcraft was made unactive and hindred from burning immediately the Enchantment ceas'd and the Fire burn'd as also that a possess'd Person being besprinkled with bless'd Water the Party was immediately cured Theodoret has the like Narration of the Devil hindring fire from burning and how that he was chased away and the Charm dissolv'd by blessed Water being thrown on it lib. 5. Eccles. hist. c. 21. And does not St. Hierom in vit Hilarion p. 323. Paris print make this relation how that Italicus took Water from blessed Hilarion and cast it on his bewitched Horses on his Chariot and the Barriers from whence he us'd to run and that the Charm or Witchery did cease upon the sprinkling this Water so that all cryed out Marnas victis est à Christo Christ hath conquered Marnas the Idol And now there 's no jeering and ridiculing these things will ever make them look like idle Superstitions to one that considers seriously how much they are grounded upon Reason the Word of God Antiquity and the Authority and Practice of the Catholick Church which tho it approves the use of them yet it teaches plainly that there is no Confidence to be put in any thing but only in Iesus Christ and
Word whensoever any receiv'd Doctrine of Christianity was to be outed and may to be made for a Novelty And he does not doubt but that if the noise of Novelty continue long so unhappily successful as of late and the liberty be permitted to every presuming Spirit to fix this scandal upon whatsoever Doctrine or Institution they shall think fit that all Christianity is in a faiâ— way of being thrown out of doors And the Bible Preaching Catechising Christ's Incarnation and Passion c. is as likely to bâ— cast off for a Novelty as all the rest have been Those that will but shew to the People that even these things have been all receiv'd from Rome and that the Papists by their Missionaries spread these Doctrines over the World may soon perswade them they are nothing but Popish Inventions meer Novelties that those that began the Reformation did their business by halves and that the World will never be throughly Reform'd till all these Romish Superstitions are laid by with the rest they being of the same date He takes no notice thereof of all the clamours rais'd against several points of the receiv'd Doctrine of his Church his Faith is founded on better Principles than to be shaken with such a Vulgar Engine Novelty Novelty is a cry that may fright unthinking Men from their Religion but every serious Man will require better Motives than a Noise before he forsake any point of his Faith and 't is impossible he should joyn with any in condemning such things for Novelties which he finds the Profession of all Antiquity XXXVII Of Innovation in matters of Faith THE Substance of his Discourse on this Head may be reduced to these things 1. That the Church in every Age hath Power to declare what is necessary to be believed with Anathema to those who Preach the Contrary and so the Council of Trent in declaring Transubstantiation Purgatory c. to be necessary Articles did no more than the Church had done before on like Occasions 2. That if the Doctrines then defined had been Innovations they must have met with great Opposition when they were introduced 3. That those who charged those points to be Innovations might as well have laid the scandal on any other Article of Faith which they retained These are things necessary to be examined in order to the making good the charge of Innovation in matters of Faith which we believe doth stand on very good Grounds 1. We are to consider Whether the Council of Trent had equal Reason to define the necessity of these points as the Council of Nice and Constantinople had to determin the point of the Trinity or those of Ephesus and Chalcedon the Truth of Christ's Incarnation He doth not assert it to be in the Churches Power to make new Articles of Faith as they do imply new Doctrines reveal'd but he contends earnestly That the Church hath a Power to declare the necessity of believing some points which were not so declared before And if the Necessity of believing doth depend upon the Churches Declaration then he must assert that it is in the Churches Power to make points necessary to be believed which were not so and consequently to make common Opinions to become Articles of Faith But I hope we may have leave to enquire in this Case since the Church pretends to no new Revelation of matters of Doctrine therefore it can declare no more than it receives and no otherwise than it receives And so nothing can be made necessary to Salvation but what God himself hath made so by his Revelation So that they must go in their Declaration either upon Scripture or Universal Tradition but if they define any Doctrine to be necessary without these Grounds they exceed their Commission and there is no Reason to submit to their Decrees or to believe their Declarations To make this more plain by a known Instance It is most certain that several Popes and Councils have declared the Desposing Doctrine and yet our Author saith It is no Article of Faith with him Why not since the Popes and Councils have as evidently delivered it as the Council of Trent hath done Purgatory or Transubstantiation But he may say There is no Anathema joined to it Suppose there be not But why may it not be as well as in the other Cases And if it were I wouâ—d know whether in his Conscience he would then believe it to be a necessary Article of Faith thô he believed that it wanted Scripture and Tradition If not then he seees what this matter is brought to viz. That althô the Council of Trent declare these new Doctrines to be necessary to be believed yet if their Declaration be not built on Scripture and Universal Tradition we are not bound to receive it 2. As to the impossibility of Innovations coming in without notorious opposition I see no ground at all for it where the alteration is not made at once but proceeds gradually He may as well prove it impossible for a Man to fall into a Dropsy or a Hectick-Fever unless he can tell the punctual time when it begun And he may as well argue thus Such a Man fell into a Fever upon a great Debauch and the Physicians were presently sent for to advise about him therefore the other Man hath no Chronical Distemper because he had no Physicians when he was first sick as because Councils were called against some Heresies and great Opposition made to them therefore where there is not the like there can be no Innovation But I see no Reason why we should decline giving an Account by what Dâ—grees and Steps and upon what Occasions and with what Opposition several of the Doctrines defined at Trent were brought in For the matter is not so obscure as you would make it as to most of the Points in difference between us But that is too large a Task to be here undertaken 3. There is no colour for calling in Question the Articles of Faith received by us on the same Grounds that we reject those defined by the Council of Trent for we have the Universal Consent of the Christian World for the Apostles Creed of the 4 General Councils for the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation who never pretended to determine any Point to be necessary which was not reveaâ—ed in Scripture whose sense was delivered down by the Testimony of the Christian Church from the Apostles times But the Council of Trent proceeded by a very different Rule for it first set up an Unwritten Word to be a Rule of Faith as well as the Written which althô it were necessary in order to their Decrees was one of the greatest Innovations in the World and the Foundation of all the rest as they were there established The CONCLUSION THese are the Characters of the Papist as he is Mis-represented and as Represented And as different as the One is from the Other so different is the Pâ—pist as reputed by his Maligners
Permissu Superiorum and we thank them for the seasonableness of it in helping us in true Representing what their allowed Doctrines and Practices are 2. That this is published in English that our People as well as theirs may be convinced how far we have been from unjust charging them as to such things as these 3. That at the same time they plead for keeping the Bible out of the hands of the People wherein their Discretion is so far to be commended since the Scripture and this new Scheme of Devotion can never stand together There being not one word in the Bible towards it but very much against it and the Psalms and Hymns must be burlesq'd to found that way But what saith our Author to their Rosaries wherein there are ten Ave Maries to one Pater noster which is accounted a special piece of Devotion and great things are said of the Effects of it by Alanus de Rupe and many others 1. As to the Ave Maries he saith there is no more Dishonour to God in reciting the Angelical Salutation than in the first pronouncing it by the Angel Gabriel and Elizabeth But it may not be altogether so pertinent But doth he really think they said the whole Ave Maria as it is used among them Did the Angel and Elizabeth say Sancta Maria Mater Dei ora pro nobis peccatoribus nunc in hora mortis nostrae If not to what purpose are they mentioned here 2. As to the Repetition that he saith is no more an idle Superstition than David 's repeating the same words 26 times in the 136. Psalm But what is this to the Question why more Supplications to the blessed Virgin than to Christ And not one word of Answer is given to it But Alanus de Rupe answers it roundly Because the blessed Virgin is our Mediatrix to Christ the Mother of Mercy and the special Patroness of Sinners This is indeed true representing IV. Of paying Divine Worship to Relicks HE believes a kind of Divinity to remain in the Relicks of his reputed Saints and therefore adores their roâ—ten Bones their corrupted flesh their old Rags with Divine Honour kneeling down to them kissing them and going in Pilgrimage to their Shrines and Sepulchres And he is so far possess'd with a conceited Deity lying hid in those senseless Remains that he foolishly believes they work greater Miracles and raise more to life than ever Christ Himself did HE believes it damnable to think there 's any Divinity in the Relicks of Saints or to adore them with Divine Honour or to pray to their rotten Bones old Rags or Shrines or that they can work any strange Cures or Miracles by any hidden Power of their own But he believes it good and lawful to keep them with a Veneration and give them a Religious honour and respect And this he thinks due to them in as much as knowing himself oblig'd to respect and honour God Almighty from his heart he looks upon himself also oblig'd to respect and honour every thing that has any particular Relation to him But this with an inferiour Honour as the Iews did to the Ark to the Tables of the Law to Moses's Rod to the Temple to the Priests So we generally allow to the Bible because it contains Gods Word to the Church because it is Gods House to Holy Men and Priests because they are Gods Servants And so he does to Relicks because they appertain to Gods Favourites and being insensible things are yet very sensible Pledges and lively Memorials of Christ's Servants dead indeed to us but alive with him in Glory And more especially because God himself has been pleas'd to hnour them by making them Instruments of many evident Miracles he has visibly work'd by them as is manifest upon undeniable Record And this he believes as easie for God Almighty now and as much redounding to the honour of his holy Name as it was in the Old Law to work such miraculous effects by Moses's Rod by Gideon's Trumpets by Elia's Mantle after he was taken up into Heaven 2 Kings 2.14 Eliseus's Bones 2 Kings 13.21 and infinite other such like insensible Things And also in the New Law by the Hem of his own Garment Mat. 9.21 by the Shadow of St. Peter Acts 5.15 by the Napkins and Handkerchiefs that had but touch'd the Body of S. Paul casting out Devils and curing Diseases Acts 19.12 and such like And thus by having a Veneration and Respect for these he honours God And does not doubt but that they that contemn and profane these do the like to God as much as they did who profan'd the Bread of Proposition the Temple and Vessels that belong'd to it IV. Of paying Divine Worship to Reliques FOR the right understanding this Controversie we are to consider 1. That there is a due Veneration to the Bodies of Saints and Martyrs allowed on both sides and there is an undue Worship of them which is disowned on both sides The due Veneration is a Religious Decency to be observed towards them which lies in avoiding any thing like Contempt or Dishonour to them and using all such Testimonies of Respect and Decency which becomes the Remains of Excellent Persons provided we are satisfied of their Sincerity without having recourse to Divine Omnipotency to prove them which Ferrandus the Jesuit runs so much to to prove the Truth of many Reliques worshipped in the Church of Rome in many places at once But that it is possible to exceed in the Worship of true Reliques even Bellarmine confesseth who says that God took away the Body of Moses lest the People should give Divine Worship to it And S. Ierom as hot as he was against Vigilantius yet he utterly denied giving any Adoration to the Reliques of Martyrs It seems then it is very possible to exceed that way 2. The Question then is Whether those Acts of Worship which are allowed in the Church of Rome do not go beyond due Veneration For it is unreasonable to suppose those who give it to believe those Reliques to be Gods and therefore it must be such a Worship as is given to them supposing them to be only Reliques of such Persons The Council of Trent decrees Honour and Veneration to be given to them but never determines what is due and what not it forbids all Excesses in drinking and eating in the visiting of Reliques but not a word of Excesses in worshipping of them unless it be comprehended under the name of Superstition But Superstition lies in something forbidden according to their notion of it therefore if there be no Prohibition by the Church there can be no Superstition in the Worship of them And if they had thought there had been any in the known Practices of the Church they would certainly have mentioned them and because they did not we ought in reason to look on them as allowed And yet not only Cassander complains of the great Superstition about them
the Testimony or Evidence of Sense or Reason in this Case from some parallel Instances as he thinks 1. He believes Iesus Christ made his Words good pronounced at his last Supper really giving his Body and Blood to his Apostles the Substance of Bread and Wine being by his powerful Words changed into his own Body and Blood the Species only or Accidents of the Bread and Wine remaining as before The same he believes of the Eucharist consecrated now by Priests This is a very easie way of taking it for granted that the words are clear for Transubstantiation And from no better Ground to fly to God's Omnipotency to make it good is as if one should suppose Christ really to be turned into a Rock a Vine a Door because the words are every jot as clear and then call in Gods Omnipotency which is as effectual to make them good I confess these words are so far from being clear to me for Transubstantiation that if I had never heard of it I should never have thought of it from these or any other words of Scripture i.e. not barely considering the sound of words but the Eastern Idioms of speaking the Circumstances of our Saviour's real Body at that time when he spake them the uncouth way of feeding on Christ's real Body without any Objection made against it by his Disciples the Key our Saviour elsewhere gives for understanding the manner of eating his Flesh and withal if these words be literally and strictly understood they must make the Substance of Bread to be Christ's Body for that is unavoidably the literal sense of the words For can any Men take This to be any thing but this Bread who attend to the common sense and meaning of Words and the strict Rules of Interpretation Yet this sense will by no means be allow'd for then all that can be infer'd from these words is that when Christ spake these words The Bread was his Body But either Christ meant the Bread by This or he did not if he did the former Proposition is unavoidable in the literal sense if he did not then by vertue of these words the Bread could never be turned into the Body of Christ. For that only could be made the Body of Christ which was meant when Christ said This is my Body This seems to me to be as plain and convincing as any Demonstration in Euclid Which hath often made me wonder at those who talk so confidently of the plain Letter of Scripture being for this Doctrine of Transubstantiation But several Divines of the Church of Rome understood themselves better and have confessed that this Doctrine could not be drawn out of the literal sense of these words as it were easie to shew if it had not been lately done already It is enough here to observe that Vasquez confesseth it of Scotus Durandus Paludanus Ockam Cameracensis and himself yields that they do not and cannot signifie expresly the Change of the Bread and Wine into the Body of Christ. For how can This is my Body literally signifie this is changed into my Body If that Proposition were literally true This is my Body it overthrows the Change For how can a thing be changed into that which it is already 2. He believes Christ being equal to his Father in Truth and Omnipotency can make his words good We do not in the least dispute Christ's Omnipotency but we may their familiar way of making use of it to help them out when Sense and Reason fail them And therefore Cajetan well said We ought not to dispute about Gods Absolute Power in the Doctrine of the Sacraments being things of such constant use and that it is a foolish thing to attribute to the Sacrament all that God can do But we must consider what he saith against Sense and Reason For the believing this Mystery he does not at all think it meet for any Christian to appeal from Christs Words to his own Senses or Reason for the examining the Truth of what he hath said but rather to submit his Senses and Reason to Christ's Words in the obsequiousness of Faith What! whether we know this to be the meaning of Christ's Words or not And thus we shall be bound to submit to every absurd Interpretation of Scripture because we must not use our Senses or Reason for examining the Truth of what is said there Can any thing be plainer said in Scripture than that God hath Eyes and Ears and Hands Must now every Man yield to this in the obsequiousness of Faith without examining it by Principles of common Reason And we think we are therefore bound to put another Sense upon those Expressions because they imply a Repugnancy to the Divine Perfections Why not then where something is implied which is repugnant to the Nature of Christ's Body as well as to our Senses But the Question about judging in this matter by our Senses is not as our Author is willing to suppose viz. Whether our Senses are to be believed against a clear and express Divine Revelation but whether the Judgment of our Senses and Reason is not to be made use of for finding out the true sense of this Revelation And we think there is great reason for it 1. Because we have no more certain way of judging the Substance of a Body than by our Senses We do not say our Senses go beyond the Accidents but we say our Senses by those Accidents do assure us of the bodily Substance or else it were impossible for us to know there is any such thing in the world 2. Because Christ did himself appeal to the Judgment of his Disciples Senses concerning the Truth of his own Body after the Resurrection Behold my Hands and my Feet that it is I my self handle and see for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see me have Now we think we have reason to allow the same Criterion which Christ himself did about the very same Body Unless he had then told his Disciples that there was to be another supernatural manner of Existence of the same Body concerning which their Senses were not to be Judges 3. Some of the most important Articles of the Christian Faith do suppose the Judgment of our Senses to be true As about the Truth of Christ's Body whether he had really a Body or only the outward Accidents and Appearance of a Body if he had not he did not really suffer upon the Cross and so the Sacrifice of Propitiation there offered up to the Father for the sins of mankind is lost There was a great Controversy in St. Iohn's time and afterwards Whether Christ had any real Body Those who denied it brought Revelation for it those who asserted it proved it by their Senses as S. Iohn himself That which we have seen and heard and our hands have handled c. He doth not tell men they must submit their Sense and Reason to the pretence of Revelation but they ought to
firm purpose of amendment and an hearty resolution of turning from his evil ways may from them receive Absolution by the Authority given them from Heaven and not doubt but God ratifies above the sentence pronounced in that Tribunal Loosing in Heaven whatsoever is thus loosed by them on Earth And that whosoever comes without the due preparation without a Repentance from the bottom of his heart and real intension of forsaking his sins receives no benefit by the Absolution but adds sin to sin by an high contempt of God's Mercy and abuse of his Sacraments VII Of Confession WE do not charge the Church of Rome that in the power of Absolving they make Gods of Men as our Misrepresenter pretends 2. We do not deny That Christ gave to the Bishops and Priests of the Catholick Church Authority to absolve any truly penitent Sinner from his Sins which he therefore needlesly proves out of Scripture and that such Absolution is ratified in Heaven 3. We are glad to find that our Author declares That no Man receives benefit by Absolution without Repentance from the bottom of his Heart and real intention of forsaking his Sins by which we hope he means more than Attrition But yet there are some things which stick with us as to the Doctrine and Practicee of the Church of Rome in this matter which he takes no notice of 1. That Secret Confession of Sins to a Priest is made so necessary to Salvation that an Anathema is denounced against all that deny it when they cannot deny that God doth forgive Sins upon true Contrition For the Council of Trent doth say That Contrition with Charity doth reconcile a Man to God before the Sacrament of Penance be actually received But then it adds That the desire of Confession is included in Contrition Which is impossible to be proved by Scripture Reason or Antiquity For so lately as in the time of the Master of the Sentences and Gratian in the 12 th Century it was a very disputable Point whether Confession to a Priest were necessary And it is very hard for us to understand how that should become necessary to Salvation since which was not then Some of their own Writers confess that some good Catholicks did not believe the necessity of it I suppose the old Canonists may pass for good Catholicks and yet Maldonat saith That all the Interpreters of the Decrees held that there was no Divine Precept for Confession to a Priest and of the same Opinion he grants Scotus to have been But he thinks it is now declared to be Heresie or he wishes it were And we think it is too much already unless there were better ground for it 2. That an Anathema is denounced against those who do not understand the words of Christ Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. of the Sacrament of Penance so as to imply the necessity of Confession Whereas there is no appearance in the words of any such Sense and themselves grant that in order to the Remission of Sins by Baptism of which St. Matthew and St. Mark speak in the Apostles Commission there is no necessity of Sacramental Confession but a general Confession is sufficient And from hence the Elder Iansenius concludes That the Power of Remission of Sins here granted doth not imply Sacramental Confession Cajetant yields There is no Command for Confession here And Catharinus adds That Cajetan would not allow any one Place of Scripture to prove Auricular Confession And as to this particular he denies that there is any Command for it and he goes not about to prove it but that Cajetan contradicts himself elsewhere viz. when he wrote School-Divinity before he set himself to the study of the Scriptures Vasques saith That if these words may be understood of Baptism none can infer from them the Necessity of Auricular Confession But Gregory de Valentia evidently proves that this place doth relate to Remission of Sins in Baptism not only from the Comparison of places but from the Testimonies of Saint Cyprian Saint Ambrose and others 3. That it is expressed in the same Anathema's that this hath been always the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholick Church from the beginning We do not deny the ancient practice either of Canonical Confession as part of the Discipline of the Church for publick Offenses nor of Voluntary Confession for ease and satisfaction of the perplexed Minds of doubting or dejected Penitents but that which we say was not owned nor practised by the Church from the beginning was this Sacramental Confession as necessary to the Remission of sins before God It is therefore to no purpose to produce out of Bellarmine and others a great number of Citations to prove that which we never deny but if they hold to the Council of Trent they must prove from the Fathers that Sins after Baptism cannot be forgiven without Confession to men which those who consider what they do will never undertake there being so many Testimonies of undoubted Antiquity against it And it is observable that Bonaventuâ—e grants that before the Lateran Decree of Innocentius 3. it was no Heresie to deny the necessity of Confession and so he excuses those who in the time of Lombard and Gratian held that Opinion And all other Christians in the World besides those of the Church of Rome do to this day reject the necessity of particular Confession to a Priest in order to Remission as the Writers of the Church of Rome themselves confess So Godignus doth of the Abyssins Philippus à SS Trinitate of the Iacobites Clemens Galanus of the Nestorians who saith They made a Decree against the use of Confession to any but to God alone And Alexius Meneses of the Christians of St. Thomas in the Indies The Greeks believe Confession only to be of Positive and Ecclesiastical Institution as the late Author of the Critical History of the Faith and Customs of the Eastern Nations proves And the very Form of their Absolution declares that they do not think particular Confession of all known Sins necessary to pardon for therein the Priest absolves the Penitent from the sins he hath not confessed through forgetfulness or shame And now let any one prove this to have been a Catholick Tradition by Vincentius his Rules viz. That it hath been always received every where and by All. VIII Of Indulgences HE believes that his Holy Father the Pope can give him leave to commit what sins he pleaseth especially if he can make him a present of a round Sum of Mony he never need doubt of an Indulgence or Pardon for himself and his Heirs for ever for all sorts of Crimes or Wickedness he or any of his Posterity may have convenience of falling into And having this Commission in his Pocket under the Popes Broad Seal he may be confident that Christ will confirm and stand to all that his Vicar upon Earth has granted and not
to be the Foundation of Indulgences 2. They would be rather hurâ—ful than profitable and the Church would deceive her Children by them 3. They could not be granted for the Dead 4. They who receive Indulgences do undergo Canonical Penances 5. The Form of them doth express that they do relate to God not only to the Church And this I think is sufficient to shew how far he is from true Representing the Nature of Indulgences for we do not dispute the Church's Power in relaxing Canonical Penances to penitent sinners upon just Causes IX Of Satisfaction HE believes very injuriously of Christs Passion being perswaded that his Sufferings Death were not sufficiently satisfactory for our sins but that it is necessary for every one to make satisfaction for themselves And for this end after he has been at Confession the Priest injoyns him a Penance by the performance of which he is to satisfie for his offences And thus confidently relying upon his own penitential Works he utterly evacuates Christ's Passion and though he professes himself a Christian and that Christ is his Saviour yet by his little trusting to him he seems to think him to be no better than what his Crucifix informs him that is a meer Woodden one HE believes it damnable to think injuriously of Christs Passion Nevertheless he believes that though condign Satisfaction for the Guilt of Sin and the Pain eternal due to it be proper only to Christ our Saviour yet that penitent Sinners being redeem'd by Christ and made his Members may in some measure satisfie by Prayer Fasting Alms c. for the temporal pain which by order of God's Justice sometimes remains due after the Guilt and the eternal pains are remitted So that trusting in Christ as his Redeemer he yet does not think that by Christ's Sufferings every Christian is discharg'd of his particular Sufferings but that every one is to suffer something for himself as S. Paul did who by tribulations and in suffering in his own flesh did accomplish those things that wanted of the Passions of Christ and this not only for himself but for the whole Church Col. 1.24 and this he finds every where in Scripture viz. People admonish'd of the greatness of their sins doing Penance in Fasting Sack-cloth and Ashes and by voluntary austerities endeavouring to satisfie the Divine Justice And these personal Satisfactions God has sufficiently also minded him of in the punishments of Moses Aaron David and infinite others and even in the Afflictions sent by God upon our own Age in Flagues Wars Fires Persecutions Rebellions and such like Which few are so Atheistical but they confess to be sent from Heaven for the just Chastisement of our sins and which we are to undergo notwithstanding the infinite Satisfaction made by Christ and without any undervaluing it Now being thus convinc'd of some temporal punishments being due to his sins he accepts of all Tribulations whether in Body Name or Estate from whence-soever they come and with others of his own chusing offers them up to God for the discharging this debt still confessing that his Offences deserve yet more But these penitential Works he is taught to be no otherwise satisfactory than as joyn'd and apply'd to that satisfaction which Jesus made upon the Cross in virtue of which alone all our good Works find a grateful acceptance in God's sight IX Of Satisfaction 1. HE believes it damnable to think any thing injuriously of Christ's Passion But then he distinguishes the Eternal and Temporal Pain due to Sin As to the Guilt and Eterternal Pain the satisfaction he saith is proper to Christ but as to the Temporal Pain which may remain due by God's Iustice after the other are remitted he saith that Penitent Sinners may in some measure satisfy for that by â—rayer Fasting Alms c. 2. These Penitential Works he saith are no otherwise satisfactory than as joâ—ned and applyed to Christ's Satisfaction in virtue of which alone our good Works find a grateful acceptance in God's sight But for right apprehending the State of the Controversy we must consider 1. That they grant both Eternal and Temporal Pain due to Sin to be remitted in Baptism so that all the satisfaction to be made is for Sins committed after Baptism 2. We distinguish between Satisfaction to the Church before Absolution and Satisfaction to the Justice of God for some part of the punishment to sin which is unremitted 3. We do not deny that truly Penitential Works are pleasing to God so as to avert his displeasure but we deny that there can be any Compensation in way of Equivalency between what we suffer and what we deserve The Matter in Controversy therefore on this Head consists in these things 1. That after the total Remission of Sins in Baptism they suppose a Temporal Punishment to remain when the Eternal is forgiven which the Penitent is to satisfy God's Justice for and without this being done in this Life he must go into Purgatory for that End Of which more under that Head 2. That this Satisfaction may be made to the Justice of God after Absolution is given by the Priest So that although the Penitent be admitted into God's Favour by the Power of the Keys according to their own Doctrine yet the Application of the Merits of Christ together with the Saints in the Sentence of Absolution according to their Form do not set him so free but he either wants a new Supply from the Treasure of the Church i. e. from the same Merits of Christ and the Saints or else he is to satisfy for the Temporal Punishment by his own Penances 3. That these Penitential Works are to be joyned with the Merits of Christ in the way of proper Satisfaction to Divine Justice And however softly this may be expressed the meaning is that Christ hath merited that we may merit and by his Satisfaction we are enabled to satisfy for our selves And if the Satisfaction by way of Justice be taken away the other will be a Controversy about Words 4. That these Penitential Works may not only be sufficient for themselves but they may be so over-done that a great share may be taken from them to make up the Treasure of the Church for the benefit of others who fall short when they are duly applied to them in the way of Indulgences And about these Points we must desire greater Proof than we have ever yet seen X. Of Reading the Holy Scripture HE believes it part of his Duty to think meanly of the Word of God to speak irreverently of the Scripture to do what he is able to lessen the repute of it and bring it into disgrace And for this end he says it is obscure full of ambiguous expressions plain contradictions not fit to be read by the Vulgar nor fit to be translated into Vulgar Languages And without respect to Christ or his Apostles profanely Preaches that no Ten Books in the World have done so much
other Latin one whatsoever Beza in his Preface to the New-Testament Anno 1559. blames Erasmus for rejecting it Paulus Fagius cries out against all that disallow it Cap. 4. Vers. Lat. Paraph Chald. Ludovicus de Dieu with admiration confesses it to be most Faithful in Not. ad Evang. Praef. Causabon prefers it before the Greeks Text now in use and acknowledges that it agrees with the Ancient Manuscripts in Not. ad Evang. Act. Grotius professes to the World that he highly esteems it for that it contains no erroneous Opinions and is very Learned nulla dogmata insalubria continet multum habet in se eruditionis Prâ—f Annot. in vet Test. And for this reason he refers his Annotations generally to this Translation as he declares himself So that seeing this Version is deliver'd to him with the approbation of his whole Church and is commended by most Learned Adversaries he thinks he has great reason to receive it and that he may peruse it without any danger that can come to him from any Corruptions or Falsifications And because he has not the like assurance of the English Translation allowed by Protestants or any other made since the Reformation by any of that Perswasion but sees that there has been almost as many different Translations made and published by these as there had been men of different Humours different Spirits and different Interests whereof none have ever approv'd the Versions of any of the rest but cry'd out against and Condemn'd them of many Alterations Additions Detractions and Forgeries Bucer and the Osiandrians exclaiming against Luther Luther against Munster Beza against Castaleo Castaleo against Beza Calvin against Servetus Illyricus against Calvin and Beza Our English Ministers against Tindal and his Fellows And this not upon the account of some oversights or like mistakes or the following of different Copies but accusing one another of being Absurd and senseless in their Translations of obscuring and perveâ—ing the meaning of the Holy Ghost of Omissions and Additions of perverting the Text in eight hundred forty and eight pieces of corrupt and false Translations all which in express Terms has been charg'd by great Abbetters of the Reformation against a Bible yet us'd in England and ordered to be read in all Churches by Queen Elizabeth and to be seen in the Abridgement of a Book deliver'd by certain Ministers to King Iames pag. 11.12 in Mr. Burges's Apology Sect. 6. Mr. Broughton's Advertisement to the Bishops And in Doctor Reynold's refusing before the King at Hampton-Court to subscribe to the Communion-Book because it warranted a corrupt and false Translation of the Bible For these and such other reasons he is commanded not to read any of these Translations but only that which is recommended to him by the Church XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible 1. WE do not dispute about the Vulgar Edition whether it may not be preferr'd before modern Latin Editions because of its great Antiquity in some parts of it and its general Reception since the time of Gregory I. But our dispute is whether it be made so Authentick since the Council of Trent that no Appeals are to be made to the Originals i. e. whether that Council by its Authority could make a Version equal to the Originals out of which it was made Especially since at the time of that Decree the Vulgar Edition was confessed to be full of Errors and Corruptions by Sixtus V. who saith he took infinite pains to correct them and yet left very many behind as appeared by Clement VIII who corrected his Bibles in very many places and grants some faults were left uncorrected still Now how was it possible for the Council of Trent to declare that Edition Authentick which was afterwards so much corrected And whether was the correct Edition of Sixtus V. Authentick or not being made in pursuance of the Decree of the Council If not how comes Clement his Edition to be made Authentick when the other was not since there may be Corruptions found in that as well as the other and no one can tell but it may be reviewed and corrected still as some of their own Writers confess it stands in need of it 2. Our Controversy is not so much about the Authority of the Vulgar Latin above other Latin Versions to those who understand them but whether none else but the Latin Version must be used by those who understand it not And here our Representer saith That he is commanded not to read any of these Translations speaking of Tindal's and that in Queen Elizabeths time but only that which is recommended to him by the Church If this relate to the Vulgar Latin then we are to seek why the common people should have none to read but what they cannot understand if to Translations of their own then we doubt not to make it appear that our Translations allowed among us is more exact and agreeable than any they can put into their hands XIII Of the Scripture as a Rule of Faith HE believes it lawful nay that it is his obligation to undervalue the Scripture and take from it that Authority which Christ gave it For whereas Christ left this to the World as the Rule of Faith and as a Sacred Oracle from whence all his Followers might be instructed in the Precepts of a good Life learn all the Mysteries of their Faith and be resolv'd in all difficult and doubtful Points of Religion He is taught flatly to deny all this and to believe that the Scripture is not capable of deciding any one point of Controversy or reconciling the different Sentiments of Men in Religion And thus demeans himself towards the word of God in a manner most unbecoming a Christian. HE believes it damnable to undervalue the Scripture or take from it the Authority given it by Christ. He gives it all respect due to the Word of God he owns it to be of greatest Authority upon Earth and that it is capable of leading a Man to all Truth whensoever it is rightly understood But to any one that misunderstands it and takes it in any other sense than what was intended by the Holy Ghost he believes it to such a one to be no Scripture no word of God that to such a one it is no Rule of Faith nor Iudge of Controversies And that what he thinks to be the Doctrine of Christ and Command of Heaven is nothing but his own Imagination and the suggestion of the Devil And since by the experience of so many thousand Heresies since our Saviour's time all pretending to be grounded on Scripture he finds that almost every Text of the Bible and even those that concern the most Essential and Fundamental Points of the Christian Religion may be interpreted several ways and made to signifie things contrary to one another and that while thus contrary meanings are by several Persons drawn from the same Words the Scripture is altogether silent without discovering
look on themselves as obliged to shew him the Respect due to his place which he knows is not the matter in question Two things however he saith which seem to justifie his Title 1. He is the Successor of St. Peter to whom Christ committed the Care of his Flock But how far is this from proving the Pope to be Head of the Church under Christ For how doth it appear that Christ ever made St. Peter Head of the Church or committed his Flock to him in contradistinction to the rest of the Apostles This is so far from being evident from Scripture that the Learned Men of their Church are ashamed of the Places commonly produced for it it being impossible ever to justify the sense of them according to their own Rules of interpreting Scripture viz. by the unanimous consent of the Fathers For 1. Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church is interpreted by many of the Fathers both Greek and Latin of S Peters Confession and not of his Person so by S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Basil of Selucia S. Hilary S. Gregory Nyssen and Theodoret all great and considerable Persons in the Christian Church whose words are plain and full to that purpose and so they can never produce the unanimous Consent of the Fathers for S. Peter's Supremacy out of these words 2. And unto thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are interpreted by the Fathers of S. Peter in common with the other Apostles so Origen S. Cyprian S. Hilary S Hierom and S. Augustine as they are all owned by some Members of the Roman Communion And 3. For these words Feed my Sheep a late learned Doctor of the Sorbon shews that if they prove any thing peculiar to Saint Peter they must prove him sole Pastor of the Church which was the thing Saint Gregory disputed against so warmly But that there was nothing peculiar to Saint Peter above or beyond the rest of the Apostles he shews at large from S. Chrysostom S. Cyril S. Augustine and others to whom I refer the Reader and to the former Authors But suppose it were made to appear that Saint Peter was Head of the Church How doth the Bishop of Rome's Succession in that Headship shew it self To that he saith 2. That there hath been a visible Succession of above Two hundred and fifty Bishops acknowled as such in all past Ages by the Christian World As such What is that As Bishops of Rome That is not of weight enough to put it upon Tryal as Heads of the Catholick-Church That he knows is not only denied by us but by all the Greek Armenian Nestorian Abyssin Churches so that we dare say it was never allowed in any one Age of the Christian Church But we need not insist on the proof of this since the late mentioned Authors of the Roman Communion have taken so great pains not only to prove the Popes Supremacy to be an Incroachment Usurpation in the Church but that the laying it aside is necessary to the Peace and Unity of it And until the Divine Institution of the Papal Supremacy be proved it is to no purpose to debate what manner of Assistance is promised to the Pope in his Decrees Our Author is willing to decline the Debate about his personal Infallibility as a matter of Opinion and not of Faith and yet he saith he doubts not but God doth grant a special Assistance to the High Priest for the good of the whole Flock under the New Law as he did under the Old and produces the Instance of Caiaphas Joh. 11.51 This is a very surprizing way of Reasoning for if his Arguments be good from Scripture he must hold the Popes personal Infallibility as a matter of Faith and yet one would hardly think he should build an Article of Faith on the instance of Caiaphas For what consequence can be drawn from Gods over-ruling the Mind of a very bad man when he was carrying on a most wicked design to utter such words which in the event proved true in another sense than he meant them that therefore God will give a special Assistance to the Pope in determining matters of Faith Was not Caiaphas himself the man who proposed the taking away the Life of Christ at that time Was he assisted in that Council Did not he determine afterwards Christ to be guilty of Blasphemy and therefore worthy of Death And is not this a rare Infallibility which is supposed to be consistent with a Decree to crucifie Christ And doth he in earnest think such Orders are to be obeyed whether the Supreme Pastor be Infallible or not For so he concludes That his Sentence is to be obeyed whether he be Infallible or no XIX Of Dispensations HE believes that the Pope has Authority to pispense with the Laws of God and absolve any one from the obligation of keeping the Commandments So that if he has but his Holy Fathers leave he may confidently Dissemble Lie and Forswear himself in all whatsoever he pleases and never be in danger of being call'd to an account at the last day especially if his Lying and Forswearing was for the common good of the Church there being then a sure Reward prepar'd for him in Heaven as a recompence of his good Intentions and Heroick Atchievements And if at any time he should chance to be catch'd in the management of any of these publick and Church-concerns and being obnoxious to Penal Laws should have Sentence of Death pass'd on him he has liberty at his last hour on the Scaffold or Ladder to make a publick Detestation of all such Crimes to make protestations of his Innocence to call God to witness that he denies unjustly and that as he is immediately to appear before the Supreme Judge he knows no more of any such designs and is as clear from the Guilt of them as the Child unborn And this though the Evidence against him be as clear as noon-day though the Jury be never so Impartial and the Judge never so Conscientious For that he having taken the Sacrament and Oath of Secresie and receiv'd Absolution or a Dispensation from the Pope may then Lye Swear Forswear and Protest all that he pleases without scruple with a good Conscience Christian-like Holily and Canonically HE believes that the Pope has no Authority to dispense with the Law of God and that there 's no Power upon Earth can absolve any one frome the Obligation of keeping the Commandments or give leave to Lie or Forswear or make that the breaking of any the least Divine Precept shall not be accountable for at the day of Judgment He is taught by his Church in all Books of Direction in all Catechisms in all Sermons that every Lie is a Sin that to call God to witness to an Vntruth damnable that it ought not to be done to save the whole World that whosoever does it either for his own personal account
Sacrifice of the Mass which has been observ'd perform'd frequented by the Faithful in all Agâ—s attested by the General Consent of ancient Canons universal Tradition Councils and the practâ—ce of the whole Church mention'd and allow'd of by all the Fathers Greek and Latin and never call'd into question but of lâ—te Years being that pure Offering which Malachy Prophecying of Christ foretold should be offer'd among the Gentiles in every place Mal. 1.11 as it is understood by several Fathers and particularly S. Cypr. l. 1. c. 18. advers Iud. S. Ierom S. Theodoret S. Cyril in their Commentaries upon this Text S. Augustine l. 18. c. 15. de Civit. S. Chrysost. in Psal. 95. and others Of the MASS UNder this Head which is thought of so great consâ—quence in the Roman Church I expected a fuller Representation than I here find as about the Opus Operatum i. e. how far the meer Act is effectual About their Solitary Masses when no Person receives but the Priest about the People having so little to do or understand in all the other parts of the Mass About the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mass how useful and important they are About reconciling the present Canon of the Mass with the present Practises About offering up Masses for the honour of Saints All which we find in the Council of Trent but are omitted by our Representer Who speaks of the Mass as tho there were no Controversie about it but only concerning the Sacrifice there supposed to be offered up and which he is far from true Representing For the Council of Trent not only affirms a true proper propitiatory Sacrifice to be there offered up for the quick and dead but denounces Anathema's against those that deny it So that the Question is not Whether the Eucharist may not in the sense of Antiquity be allowed to be a Commemorative Sacrifice as it takes in the whole Action but whether in the Mass there be such a Representation made to God of Christ's Sacrifice as to be it self a true and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the Qâ—ick and the Dead Now all that our Representer saith to the purpose is 1. That Christ bequeathed his Body and Blood at his last Supper under the species of Bread and Wine not only a Sacrament but also a Sacrifice I had thought it had been more proper to have offered a Sacrifice than to have bequeathed it And this ought to have been proved as the Foundation of this Sacrifice viz. That Christ did at his last Supper offer up his Body and Blood as a Propitiatory Sacrifice to God And then what need his suffering on the Cross 2. He gave this in charge to his Apostles as the first and chief Priests of the New-Testament and to their Successors to offer But Where When and How For we read nothing at all of it in Scripture Christ indeed did bid them do the same thing he had there done in his last Supper But did he the offer up himself or not If not How can the Sacrifice be drawn from his Action If he did it is impossible to prove the necessiâ—y of his dying afterwards 3. This Sacrifice was never questioned till of late years We say it was never determined to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice till of late We do not deny the Fathers interpreting Mal. 1.11 of an Offering under the Gospel but they generally understand it of Spiritual and Eucharistical Sacrâ—fices and although some of them by way of Accommodation do apply it to the Eucharist yet not one of them doth make it a Propitiatory Sacrifice which was the thing to be proved For we have no mind to dispute about Metaphorical Sacrifices when the Council of Trent so positively decrees it to be a True Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice XXIII Of Purgatory HE believes contrary to all Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity that besides Heaven and Hell there is a third place which his Church is pleas'd to call Purgatory a place intended purely for those of his Communion whâ—re they may easily have admittance after this Life without danger of falling into Hell for that though Hell was designed first for the punishment of Sinners yet that now since the blessed discovery of Purgatory Hell may easily be skip'd over and an eternal Damnation avoided for an exchange of some short Penalty undergone in this Pope's Prison where he never need fear to be detained long for that if he has but a friend left behind him that will but say a few Hail-Maries for his Soul or in his Testament did but remember to order a small sum to be presented to some Mâ—ss Priest he never need doubt of being soon releas'd for that a Golden Kâ—y will as infallibly open the Gates of Purgatory as of any other Prison whaâ—soever HE believes it damnable to admit of any thing for Faith that is contrary to Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity and that the Being of a Third Place call'd Purgatory is so far from being contrary to all or any of these that it is attested confirm'd and establish'd by them all 'T is expresly in the 2 d. of the Maccabees c 12. where Money was sent to Hierusalem that Sacrifices might be offered for the slain And ' â—is recommended as a Holy Cogitation to Pray for the Dead Now though these Books are not thought Canonical by some yet St. Augustine held them as such and says they are so received by the Church l. 18. de Civit. But whether so or no one thing is allow'd by all viz. That they contain nothing contrary to Faith and that they were cited by the Antient Fathers for the Confutation of Errors forming of good Manners and the explication of the Christian Doctrine Thus were they us'd by Origen for Condemnation of the Valentinian Hereticks Orig. in cap 5. Ep. ad Rom. thus by St. Cyprian Lib. de Exhor Mart. c. 11. thus by Euseb. Caesariensis Lib. Praepar Evang. 11. c. 15. thus by St. Greg. Naz. Ambros. c. And he is in a manner certain that the Books would never have been put to this Use by these Holy and Learned Fâ—thers they would never with such confidence have produc'd their Authority nor would they have been read by the Church in those Golden times had this Doctrine of a Third Place and of Prayers for the Dead which they maintain been any idle Superstition a meer Dream contrary to Reason the Word of God and Antiquity or had it been any Error at all The being also of a Third Place is plainly intimated by our Saviour Matth. 12.32 where he says Whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this World neither in the World to come By which words Christ evidently supposes that though these shall not yet some sins are forgiven in the World to come which since it cannot be in Heaven where no sin enters nor in Hell whence there is no Redemption it must necessâ—rily be
say that Infidels shall not be damned for their Infidelity where the Gospel hath not been sufficiently proposed to them and no Christian for not believing any Article of Faith till it be so proposed that we must be damned for not believing the Articles of the Roman Faith which never have been and never can be sufficiently proposed to us Methinks such men should study a little better their own Doctrine about the sufficient Proposal of matters of Faith before they pass such uncharitable and unlearned Censures XXXVI Of Ceremonies and Ordinances HIS Church upon the presumption of being Apostolical and Commissioned by Christ has brought in such an infinite number of unnecessary superstitious Ceremonies that the whole exercise of her Religion consists in nothing but a vain Pomp and empty Shew And whereas Christians are commanded by the Apostle to serve the Lord in Spirit and Truth She has made void this Precept and neglecting both Spirit and Truth has restor'd the heavy Yoke of Jewish Rites without the least Authority of the Word of God but rather in express opposition to it has made these her humane Inventions take place of the Divine Law And then besides her Ceremonies what an endless account is there of other Ordinances Institutions Precepts to which she obliges all in her Communion How many are her Fast-days Rogation and Ember-days How many her Festival and Holy-days How many her Injunctions on several degrees of People That Priests shall not Marry that whosoever is in Orders shall be oblig'd to the reciting or singing such and such Offices That Marriage shall not be permitted but at some set times and a multitude of other such respective Commands which have no grounds in Scripture and no other Authority for them besides the decrees of some Popes who for some private Ends and the making themselves great thought fit to lay these burdens upon the People Some being first instituted by Pope Telesporus as the Fast of Lent Some by Calâ—xtus as the Ember-days Some by Pope Nicholas as the Prohibition of Marriage And so all the rest And yet forsooth all these must be observed under pain of eternal Damnation as if God and the Pope commanding were but all one and had Heaven and Hell equally at their disposure HIS Church has appointed a great number and variety of Ceremonies to be used in the Celebrating Divine Service in the Offices and the Administration of the Sacraments She has likewise many Observances Ordinances Constitutions appertaining to Discipline and the Government of the Flock And all these are receiv'd approv'd or instituted by her every one in her Communion does embrace admit and willingly submit to without opposition exception or calling any into question because altho the Particulars thus appointed or commanded be not to be found in Scripture yet there being in the Scripture an express and absolute Command given to the whole Flock of Christ of following and being obedient to those that have thus order'd these things in virtue of that Command they voluntarily and without constraint accept all that is of their Appointment without excepting against any thing unless it be manifestly sinful And this they look on as a Christian Duty belonging to all such that are by God's Pleasure in subjection to the Hâ—gher Powers or under charge And therefore as a Servant having receiv'd a Command from his Master is oblig'd to comply with it in case it be not sinful altho he cannot find the thing then particularly commanded in Scripture the general Precept of Servants being obedient to Masters being sufficient to let him know his Obligation and to remove all scruple And as Châ—ldren are in Duty oblig'd to perform the Will of their Parents upon the Command Obey thy Father and thy Mother whether the thing particularly willed be in Scripture or no so they judge it the Duty of all Christian People to submit without contention to the Ordinances and Constitutions of their Pastors and Prelates altho the things particularly order'd by them be not express'd in Scripture it being a sufficient ground for this their Submission and Obedience that God has given them a General Command Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your Souls as they that must give account Hebrews 13.17 Remember them which have the Rule over you who have spoken to you the Word of God whose Faith follow Hebrews 13 7. So that to them it seems a very fallacious rule leading to all Confusion and unchristian Comentions viz. That the Higher Powers our Superiours Pastors and Prelates are not to be obeyed but only in such things as are express'd in Scripture and as for any other Particulars whosoever upon Examination cannot find what is commanded by them in Holy Writ may lawfully refuse Submission nay he is oblig'd to resist For however this seems to bear much of the Word of God in the face of it yet certainly 't is wholly destructive to it and under pretence of adhering close to the Scripture undermines the very Author of it This the Primitive Christians understood so well that they detested all such Maxims and following the Advice of the Apostle chose rather to trust their Souls in the hands of those whom God had plac'd over them by an humble Submission to the Government and a peaceable Obedience to their Decrees than by a presumptuous questioning of every thing and raising vain disputes to take the Rule of the Flock out of the hands of those to whom God had providentially deliver'd it and place themselves Judges over the Church their Elders Prelates and Pastors whom God had commanded them to hear and be in Subjection to So that we never read that they ever pretended to weigh the Ordinances of their Superiors by their own reasoning or to bring them to the Test of the Word of God before the acceptance but alway judg'd it conform to the Word of God that their Governours should Rule and they Obey Thus when the Apostles observ'd the Sunday instead of the Sabbath and met together at Pentecost we don't read that the Faithful then began to turn over their Bibles to find a Command for these particulars but with a prompt Obedience readily followed them in the Observance So when Abstinence from Blood and strangled Meats was order'd by the Elders assembled at Ierusalem Acts 15. the multitude of Believers having heard the Decree never murmur'd at it or call'd it into question however seemingly contrary to the intention of Christ who in abrogating the Law of Moses was thought to have cut off all these Obligations but they all rejoyced for the Consolation ib. v. 31. So when St. Paul gave orders to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 11. in what manner and posture they were to behave themselves at Prayers in their Assemblies both Men and Women we don't hear that he was challeng'd by any to shew by what authority of Scripture he thus reprov'd and prescrib'd in these Particulars or by what they
recommended to us by the practice of Christ and his Apostles and of all Primitive Christianity Neither has the use of Holy Ceremonies been wholly disapproved by those of the Reformation The English Profession of Faith publish'd in the year 1562. allows them in the 34 th Article The Bohemick Confession in the 15 th Article Anno 1537. The Augustine Tit. de Miss Anno 1530. as it was penn'd by Melancthon So that since Ceremonies are generally look'd on as commendable and lawful amongst Christians the Papists judge it proper to those who have the Rule to Order and Dispose of them and declare to the Flock how when and where they are to be observed And if they who govern judge fit to oblige the Faithful to the observance of any in particular they teach that it is the Duty of the Flock to Obey Things indifferent after such Commands being no longer of choice but necessary and no less obliging than the Commands of a Father to his Child where in case the thing be not apparently sinful 't is no Perswâ—sion of the thing being superfluous can excuse an obstinate denial from Disobedience It being more safe and Christian like for all that are under any Government whether Natural Ecclesiastical or Civil to perform and comply with such things as they judge in their own private Sentiments Unnecessary mâ—rely upon the account of being Commanded than upon such considerations to disturb the Order of Government and fly in the Face of Lawful Authority than which nothing is more opposite to the Principles of Christianity and destructive of all Humane Society And upon these grounds it is that the Papists founding themselves upon the sure Foundation of Huminity and Obedience have in all Ages acknowledged Overseers and Rulers over them to watch and feed the Flock to whom God hath given Power there being no Power but of God and that whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation Romans 13.1 2. XXXVI Of Ceremonies and Ordinances HIS Discourse on this Head is against those who refuse to obey their Superiours in things not expressed in Scripture which is no part of our Controversie with them But yet there are several things about their Ceremonies we are not satisfied in As 1. The mighty number of them which have so much muffled up the Sacraments that their true face cannot be discerned 2. The Efficacy attributed to them without any promise from God whereas we own no more but decency and significancy 3. The Doctrine that goes along with them not only of Obedience but of Merit and some have asserted the Opus Operatum of Ceremonies as well as Sacraments when the Power of the Keys goes along with them i. e. when there hath been some Act of the Church exercised about the matter of them as in the Consecration of Oyl Salt Bread Ashes Water c. XXXVII Of Innovations in Matters of Faith HIS Church has made several Innovations in matters of Faith and howsoever she lays claim to Antiquity with a pretence of having preserv'd the Doctrine of the Apostles inviolable and entire yet 't is evident to any serious Observer that the greatest part of her Belief is mere Novelties that bearing date from Christ or his Apostles but only from some of her own more modern Synods There scarce having pass'd any Age yet wherein there has not in these Ecclesiastical Mints been coyn'd New Articles which with the counterfeit stamp of Christ and his Apostles are made to pass for Good and Currant amongst his credulous and undiscerning Retainers And besides these what a great number of Errors have been introduc'd at other times how many did Pope Gregory bring in and how many the Ignorance of the Tenth Age So that if we compare the Church of Rome now with the Primitive times of the first three or four hundred years there are no two things so unlike she is a Garden now but quite overgrown with Weeds she is a Field but where the Tares have perfectly choaked up the Wheat and has little in her of Apostolical besides the Name HIS Church has never made any Innovation in Matters of Faith what she believes and teaches now being the same that the Catholick Church believ'd and taught in the first three or four Centuries after the Apostles And though in most of her General Councils there has been several Decisions touching Points of Faith yet can no one without an injury to truth say that in any of these has been coin'd new Articles or Christians forced to the acceptance of Novelties contrary to the Scripture or ancient Tradition These have only trodden in the Apostles steps as often as they have been in the like circumstances with them doing exactly according to the Form and Example left to the Church by those perfect Masters of Christianity And therefore as the Apostles in their Assembly Acts 15. determin'd the Controversie concerning the Circumcision and proposed to the Faithful what was the Doctrine of Christ in that point of necessity to be believ'd of which till that Decision there had been rais'd several Questions and Doubts but now no longer to be questioned without the Shipwrack of Faith So in all succeeding Ages the Elders of the Church to whom the Apostles left their Commission of watching over the Flock in their Councils have never scrupled to determine all such Points which had been controverted amongst the Brethren and to propose to them what of necessity they were to believe for the future with Anathema pronounced against all such as should presume to preach the contrary Thus in the year 325. the first Nicene Council declar'd the Son of God to be Consubstantial to his Father against the Arians with an Obligation on all to assent to this Doctrine though never till then propos'd or declar'd in that Form Thus in the year 381. the Holy Ghost was declar'd to be God against Macedonius and his Followers in the first Constantinopolitan Council And in the first Ephesin Anno 431. Nestorius was condemned who maintain'd two Persons in Christ and that the blessed Virgin was the Mother of God with a Declaration That both these Tenets were contrary to the Catholick Faith In the second Nicene Council Anno 787. Image-breakers were Anathematiz'd And so others at other times and at last in the Council of Trent was declar'd the Real Presence Transubstantiation Purgatory the lawfulness of the Invocation of Saints of keeping Holy Images c. against Luther Calvin Beza c. And now tho in all these and the other General Councils the Persons condemned took occasion from these New Declarations to cry out Novelties Novelties to fright the People with the noise of new coin'd Articles and that the inventions of Men were impos'd on them for Faith Yet 't is evident that these New Declarations contain'd nothing but the Antient Faith and that there had never been any such Declarations made had not the Doctrine propos'd in them
of the Bible before any other and not allowing any Translations into a Mother-Tongue to be ordinarily read 14. In believing that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular Person 15. In relying upon the Authority of the present Church for the sense of Scripture 16. In receiving and believing the Churches Traditions as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assenting to them with Divine Faith just as he doth to the Bâ—ble 17. In believing that the present Guides of the Church being assembled in Councils for preserving the Unity of the Church have an Infallible Assistance in their Decrees 18. In believing the Pope to be the Supreme Head of the Church under Christ being Successor to S. Peter to whom he committed the care of his Flock 19. In believing that Communion in both Kinds is an indifferent thing and was so held for the first four hundred years after Christ and that the first Precept for Receiving under both Kinds was given to the Faithful by Pope Leo I. and confirmed by Pope Gelasius 20. In believing that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded on Scripture Authority and Reason 21. In believing that to the saying of Prayers well and devoutly it is not necessary to have attention on the Words or on the Sense of Prayers 22. In believing that none out of the Communion of the Church of Rome can be saved and that it is no Uncharitableness to think so 23. In believing that the Church of Rome in all the new Articles defined at Trent hath made no Innovation in mat ters of Faith Our Reasons against it in the several Particulars 1. THou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image or any likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth c. Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them Which being the plain clear and express Words of the Divine Law we dare not worship any Images or Representations lest we be found Transgressors of this Law Especially since God herein hath declared himself a Iealous God and annexed so severe a Sanction to it And since he that made the Law is only to interpret it all the Dictinctions in the World can never satisfy a Mans Conscience unless it appear that God himself did either make or approve them And if God allow the Worship of the thing Represented by the Representation he would never have forbidden that Worship absolutely which is unlawful only in a certain respect 2. We have an Advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous 1 John 2.1 And one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Iesus 1 Tim. 2.5 For Christ is entered into Heaven it self now to appear in the Presence of God for us Heb. 9 24. And therefore we dare not make other Intercessors in Heaven besides him and the distance between Heaven and us breaks off all Communication between the Saints there and us upon Earth so that all Addresses to them now for their Prayers are in a way very different from desiring others on Earth to pray for us and if such Addresses are made in the solemn Offices of Divine Worship they joyn the Creatures with the Creator in the Acts and Signs of Worship which are due to God alone 3. Call upon me in the day of Trouble I will deliver thee and thou shalt glorifie me Psâ—l 50.15 When we pray to Our Father in Heaven as our Saviour commanded us we do bâ—t what both Natural and Christian Religion require us to do But when men pray to the Blessed Virgin for Help and Protection now and at the hour of Death they attribute that to her which belongs only to God who is our Helper and Defender And altho Christ knew the Dignity of his Mother above all others he never gives the least Encouragement to make such Addressâ—s to her And to suppose her to have a share now in the Kingdom of Christ in Heaven as a Copartner with him is to advance a Creature to Divine Honour and to overthrow the true Ground of Christs Exaltation to his Kingdom in Heaven which was His suffering on the Cross for us 4. And no man knoweth of the Sepulchre of Moses unto this day Deut. 34.6 Why should God hide the Body of Moses from the People if hâ— allowed giving religious Honour and Respect to Relicks Why should Hezekiah break in pieces the Brazen Serpent because the Children of Israel did burn Incense to it 2 Kings 18.4 especially when it was a Type or Representation of Christ himself and God had wrought many Miracles by it 5. Whom the Heaven must receive until the times of the Restitution of all things Acts 3.21 And therefore in the Eucharist we adore him as sitting on the right hand of God but we dare not direct our Adoration to the Consecrated Host which we believe to be the Substance of Bread and Wine tho consecrated to a Divine Mystery and therefore not a fit Object for our Adoration 6. The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 This is spoken of the Bread after Consecration and yet the Apostle supposes it to be Bread still and the Communion of his Body is interpreted by the next Words For we being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all Partakers of that one Bread v. 17. Which is very different from the Bread being changed into the very Body of Christ which is an Opinion that hath no Foundation in Scripture and is repugnant to the common Principles of Reason which God hath given us and exposes Christian Religion to the Reproach and Contempt of Iews Turks and Infidels 7. When you shall have done all those things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable Servants we have done that which was our Duty to do St. Luke 17.10 And therefore in no sense can our best Works be truly meritorious of Eternal Life Which consisting in the enjoyment of God it is impossible there should be any just Proportion or due Commensuration between our best Actions and such a Reward 8. And the Son said to him Father I have sinned against Heaven and in thy sight S. Luke 15.21 Where Confession to God is required because the Offence is against him but it is impossible for any Man upon Earth to forgive those whom God doth not forgive And he alone can appoint the necessâ—ry conditions of Pardon among which true Contrition and Repentance is fully declared but Confession to a Priest thô it may be useful for the ease of the Penitent is no where in Scripture made necessary for the Forgiveness of Sin 9. I said I will confess my Transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin Psal. 32.5 If God doth fully forgive the Guilt of sin there remains no Obligation to Punishment for where-ever that is the guilt remains It is true God may not sometimes fully pardon but he may reserve some temporal Punishment here for his own
Honour or the Chastisement of a penitent Sinner But then what have any men to do to pretend that they can take off what God thinks fit to lay on Can any Indulgences prevent Pain or Sickness or sudden Death But if Indulgences be understood only with respect to Canonical Penances they are a most notorious and inexcusable corruption of the Discipline of the Ancient Church 10. For if when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Romans 5.10 And therefore no Satisfaction to the Justice of God is now required from us for the Expiation of any Remainder of Guilt For if Christ's Satisfaction were in it self sufficient for a total Remission and was so accepted by God what Account then remains for the Sinner to discharge if he perform the Conditions on his part But we do not take away hereby the Duties of Mortification Prayer Fasting and Alms c. but there is a difference to be made between the Acts of Christian Duties and Satisfaction to Divine Iustice for the Guâ—lt of Sin either in whole or in part And to think to joyn any Satisfactions of ours together with Christ's is like joyning our hand with God's in Creating or Governing the World 11. Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly in all Wisdom teaching and admonishing one anotâ—er c. Col. 3.16 How could that dwell richly in them which was not to be communicated to them but with great Caution How could they teach and admonish one another in a Language not understood by them The Scriptures of the New Testament were very early perverted and if this Reason were sufficient to keep them out of the hands of the People certainly they would never have been published for common use but as prudently dispensed then as some think it necessary they should be now But we esteem it a part of our Duty not to think our selves wiser than Christ or his Apostles nor to deprive them of that unvaluable Treasure which our Saviour hath left to their use 12. All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3.16 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2 Pet. 1.21 Therefore where there is no Evidence of Divine Inspiration those Books cannot be made Canonical But the Jewish Church To whom the Oracles of God were committed never deliver'd these Books as any part of them being written when Inspiration was ceased among them And it is impossible for any Church in the World to make that to be divinely inspired which was not so from the beginning 13. But I say Have they not heard Yes verily their sound went into all the Earth and their Words unto the ends of the World Rom. 10.18 Therefore the Intention of God was that the Gospel should be understood by all Mankind which it could never be unless it were translated into their several Languages But still the difference is to be observed between the Originals and Translations and no Church can make a Translation equal to the Original But among Translations those deserve the greatest esteem which are done with the greatest Fidelity and Exactness On which account our last Translation deserves a more particular Regard by us as being far more useful to our People than the Vulgar Latin or any Translation made only from it 14. Thy Word is a Lamp unto my Feet and a Light unto my Path Psalm 119.105 Which it could never be unless it were sufficient for necessary direction in our way to Heaven But we suppose Persons to make use of the best means for understanding it and to be duely qualified for following its Directions without which the best Rule in the World can never attain its End And if the Scripture have all the due Properties of a Rule of Faith it is unconceivable why it should be denied to be so unless men find they cannot justify their Doctrines and Practices by it and therefore are forced to make Tradition equal in Authority with it 15. Wo unto you Lawyers for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledg ye entred not in your selves them that were entring in ye hindred S. Luk. 11.52 From whence it follows that the present Guides of the Church may be so far from giving the true Sense of Scripture that they may be the chief Means to hinder Men from right understanding it Which argument is of greater force because those who plead for the Infallibility of the Guides of the present Church do urge the promises made to the Jewish Church at that time as our Author doth from those who sat in the Chair of Moses and from Calâ—phas his Prophesying 16. We have also a more sure word of Prophesie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed 2 Pet. 1.19 And yet here the Apostle speaks of something delivered by the Testimony of those who were with Christ in the Holy Mount From whence we infer that it was not the Design of Christ to lâ—ave us to any Vocal Testimony buâ— to refer us to the Written Word as the most certain Foundâ—tion of Faith And it is not any Pâ—â—sons assumâ—ng the Title of the Catholâ—ck Church to themselves can give them Authority to impose any Traditions on the Faith of Christians or require them to be believed equally with the Written Word For before any Traditions can be assented to with Divine Faith the Churches Authority must be proved to be Divine and Infallible either by a written or unwritten Word but it can be done by neither without overthrowing the necessity of such an Infallibility in order to Divine Faith because the Testimony on which the Churches Infallibility is proved must be received only in a way of Credibility 17. Also of your own selves shall Men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Acts 20.30 Which being spoken of the Guides of the Christian Church without Limitation of Number a possibility of Error is implied in any Assembly of them unless there were some other Promises which did assure us That in all great Assemblies the Spirit of God shall always go with the casting Voice or the greater Number 18. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Unity of the Faith c. Ephes. 4.13 14 15. Now here being an account given of the Officers Christ appointed in his Church in order to the Unity and Edification of it it had been unfaithfulness in the Apostle to have left out the Hâ—ad of it in case Christ had appointed any Because this were of more consequence than all the rest being declared necessary to Salvation to be in subjection to him But neither this Apostle nor St. Peter himself give the least intimation of it Which it is impossible to conceive should have been left out in the Apostolical Writings upon so many