or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion then this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery then contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcilable Enemies to Popery as we are to Phanaticism and desire that all the World may know iâ— but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Phanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best Instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way then in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now J judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Dayes But I doubt whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has lest a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without the Information we receive by the Scripture I cannot Divine and yet we may as easily know that there is a Church as we can know which is the true Church without the Scripture For there is no other means of knowing either that there is a Church or what this Church is or what are the Properties of a True and Sound and Orthodox Church but by Revelation and we have no other Revelation of this but what is contained in the Holy Scriptures As for the Second That the Church is the means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures it is in some sense very true in some sense very false 1. It is in some sense true and acknowledged by all sober Protestants As 1. If by the Church we understand the Universal Church of all Ages as we receive the Scriptures themselves handed down by them to our time so what ever Doctrines of Faith have been universally received by them is one of the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture For the nearer they were to the times of the Apostles the more likely they were to understand the true sense of their Writings being instructed by the Apostles themselves in the meaning of them And thus we have a certain Rule to secure us from all dangerous Errors in expounding Scripture For the great and fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion are as plainly contained in the Writings of the first Fathers of the Church and as unanimously asserted by them as the Authority of the Scriptures themselves and therefore though we have not a Traditionary Exposition of every particular Text of Scripture yet we have of the great and fundamental Doctrines of Faith and therefore must never expound Scripture so as to contradict the known and avowed sense of the Catholick Church And this course the Church of England takes she receives the Definitions of the four first General Councils and requires her Bishops and Clorgy to Expound the Scriptures according to the profest Doctrines of those first and purest Ages of the Church 2. We ought to pay great deference to and not lightly and want only oppose the Judgement and Authority of the Particular Church wherein we live when her Expositions of Scripture do not evidently and notoriously contradict the sense of the Catholick church especially of the first and best Ages of it For it does not become private men to oppose their Sentiments and Opinions to the Judgement of the church unless in such plain cases as every honest man may be presumed a very competent Judge in the matter and no church nor all the churches in the World have such Authority that we must renounce our senses and deny the first principles of Reason to follow them with a blind and implicite Faith And thus the church that is the sense and Judgment of the catholick church is a means for the finding out the true sense of Scripture and though we may mistake the sense of some particular Texts which the Romanists themselves will not deny but that even infallible councils may do who tho' they are infallible in their conclusions yet are not alwayes so in the Arguments or Mediums whither drawn from Scripture or Reason whereby they prove them yet it is Morally impossible we should be guilty of any dangerous mistake while we make the catholick Doctrine of the church our Rule and in other matters follow the Judgment and submit to the Authority of the church wherein we live which is as absolutely necessary as Peace and Order and good Goverment in the church 2. But then this is very false if we mean that the church is the only means of finding out the true sense of the Scriptures on if by the church we understand any particular church as I suppose this Person does the Roman Catholick that is the particular universal church of Rome or if we mean the church of the present Age or by Means understand such a Decretory sentence as must determine our Faith and command out Assent that we must seek
for no other Reason of our Faith but the Authority of the church in expounding Scriptures I shall discourse something briefly of each of these 1. To say that the church is the only Means to find out the true sense of Scripture is very false and absurd For 1. This supposes the Holy Scriptures to be a very unintelligible Book which is a great reproach to the Holy Spirit by which it was Indited that he either could not or would not speak intelligibly to the World 2. This is a direct contradiction to those Exhortations of Christ and his Apostles to study the Scriptures which were made to private Men and therefore necessarly supposes that the Holy Scriptures are to be understood as other Writtings are by consideing the Propriety of the Words and â—â—nguage wherein they are written the scope and design of the place and such other means as honest and studious Inquirers use to find out the meaning of any other Book 3. If the Scriptures are so unintelligible that an honest man cannot find out the meaning of them without the infallâ—ble interpretation of the Church I would desire to know whither Christ and his Apostles Preach'd intelligibly to their Hearers If they did not to what purpose did they Preach at all By what means were men Converted to the Faith If they did how come these Sermons to be so unintelligible now they are written which were so intelligible when they were spoken For the Gospels contain a plain History of what Christ did and of what he said and the Apostles Wrote the same things to the Churches when they were absent which they Preach'd to them when they were present and we reasonably suppose that they as much designed that the Churches should understand what they wrote as what they Preach'd and therefore that they generally used the same form of words in their writting and in their Preaching And this makes it a great Riddle how one should be very plain and easie to be understood and the other signifie nothing without an infallible Interpreter 4. If the Scriptures be in themselves unintelligible I would desire to know how the Church comes to understand them If by any humane means together with the ordinary Assistances of the Divine Spirit then they are to be understood and then why may not every Christian in proportion to his skill in Languageâ— and in the Rules of Reason and Discourse understand them also If the Church cannot understand the Scriptures by any humane means but only by Inspiration for there is no Medium between these two to what purpose were the Scriptures written For we might as well have learn'd the will of God from the Church without the Scriptures as with them GOD could have immediately revealed his will to the Church without a written Rule as well as reveal the meaning of that written Rule which it seems has no signification at all till the Church by Inspiration gives an Orthodox meaning to it 5. And iâ— we cannot understand the Scriptures till the Church Expounds them to us how shal we know which is the Church and that this Church is such an infallible Interpreter of Scriptures The Church is to be known only by the Scriptures and the Scriptures are to be understood only by the Church if we will know the Church we must first understand the Scriptures and if we will understand the Scriptures we must first know the Church and when both must be known first or we can know neither it is impossible in this way either to understand the Scriptures or find out the Church For suppose the Church does expound Scripture by Inspiration how shall we be assured that it does so Must we believe every Man or every Church which pretends to Inspiration This is a contradiction to the Apostles Rule not to believe every Spirit but to try the Spirits How then shall they be tried I know but two wayes either by Miracles or by Scripture Miracles are now ceas'd unless we will believe some fabulous Legends which all wise men in the Church of Rome are ashamed of and if there were real Miracles wrought they are of no Authority against a standing Rule of Faith which the Apostle calls a more sure word of Prophesie If then we must judge of these pretences to Revelation by the Scriptures which is the only way now left then there is a way of understanding the Scriptures without this Revelation for if we must understand the Scriptures by Revelation and Revelation by the Scriptures we are got into a new Circle and can understand neither Obj. But do we not see how many Schisms and Heresies have been occasioned by suffering every one to Expound Scripture for himself How many Divisions and Sub-divisions are there among Protestants who agree in little else besides their opposition to Popery And is it possible to cure this without an an Infallible Interpreter of Scriptureâ— Is it not a contradiction to common Experience to say that the sense of Scripture is plain and certain when so few men can agree what it is Ans 1. Yes we do see this and lament it and are beholden to the Church of Rome and her Emissaries in a great measure for it But yet we know thus it has been in all Ages of the Christian Church as well as now and we take the same way to confute these Heresies and to preserve the purity of the Faith and the Unity of the Church which the Primitive Fathers did by appealing to Scripture and the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholick Church which is the best way any Church can take when there is no infallible Judge of controversies And if the Primitive Church had known any such infallible Judge they would certainly have appealed to him at one time or other and it had been impossible that any Errors or Heresies should for any long time together have disturbed the Church but we hear nothing of him for many hundred years after Christ but the ancient Fathers took the same way to confute the Heresies of their dayes which we do now which is a good proable Argument that they knew no better And the present Divisions of the Christian Church are no greater Argument against us then the Ancient Heresies were against the Primitive Church or then the Protestant Heresies as they are pleased to call them are against the church of Rome For what advantage has the church of Rome upon this account above any other profession of Christians Those who are of the same communion are of the same Mind Thus it is among us and it is no better among them for we are no more of their mind then they are of ours nay notwithstanding all their pretences to infallibility most of the Disputes which divide the Protestant churches are as fairly disputed among themselves witness the famous controversie between the Jansenists and Molinists which their infallible Judge never thought fit to determine to this day They live indeed in the communion of
same Doctrines which she does and she looks upon it as a just prejudice against any Expositions of Scripture if they contradict the common Faith of the first Christians and therefore when the words of Scripture are fairly capable of different senses she chooses that sense which is most agreeable with the Catholick Faith and practice of the Primitive Church but should any Doctrines be imposed upon her as Articles of Faith which are no where to be found in Scripture or which are plainly contrary to it as the new Trent Creed is whatever pretence there be for the Antiquity of such Doctrines she utterly rejects them she will not put out her Eyes to follow any other Guide and thanks be to God she needs not reject any truly Catholick Doctrine in this way We still retain the Faith of the Primitive Church and are greatly confirmed in it from that admirable consent there is between the Scriptures as Expounded by us and that Faith which was anciently owned and received by all Christians Having thus shewn in what sense the Church is the Interpreter of Scripture I proceed now to the Second thing contained in this Paper That this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now these few words contain a great many and very great mistakes The subject of the inquiry is how we may find out such a Church whose word we may safely take for the true sense and meaning of Scripture Now 1. The Author of this Paper whither ignorantly or designedly I know not alters the state of the Question and in stead of a Church which is an unerring and Infallible Interpreter of Scripture which would be very well worth finding he tells us how we may know a true Church now I take a true Church and and an infallible Interpreter of Scripture to be very different things A Church may be guilty of Schism and Heresie and yet may be a true Church though not a sound Orthodox and Catholick Church for a true Church is such a Church as has all things necessary and essential to the Beeing and Constitution of a Church this a Church may have and superadd other things which are destructive of the Christian Faith and very dangerous and fatal mistakes as we believe and are able to prove the Church of Râ—me has done and yet we acknowledge her a true Church because she retains the true Christian Faith though miserably Corrupted by Additions of her own as a man is a true man though he be sick of a mortal Disease Now if a true Church may corrupt the Christian Faith we have no reason to rely on the Authority of every true Church for the true sense and meaning of Scripture 2. Let us suppose that by a true Church he means an Infallible Church whose Authority we may safely rely on in Expounding Scriptures this Church he sayes is to be known by a continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now if this visible uninterrupted Succession be the mark of such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then 1. The Greek Church is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture for she has as visible uninterrupted a Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day as the Church of Rome has and so we have two infallible Churches not to instance in any more at present who have as good a Succession as either of them which are directly opposite to each other and what shall we do in this Case Must we believe Contradictions or must we dis-believe infallible Churches 3. If a visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles makes aâ—y church an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then all the churches which were planted by the Apostles were infallible All the churches which were planted by the Apostles have an equally visible Succession from Christ those churches which were planted by the Apostles may be presumed as infallible while the Apostles were present with them as they were afterwards and those churches which succeeded these Apostolical churches at the distance of an Age or two may be supposed as infallible as any church of this Age is for if a visible Succession from Christ makes a church infallible why should not a Succession of a hundred or two hundred years make them as infallible as a Succession of sixteen hundred years unless they think that Infallibility increases with the Age of the Church which I could wish true but we see very little sign of it Now according to these Principles all the churches which were planted by the Apostles and have a continual visible Succession from Apostolical Churches through all Ages since the time of the Apostles must be infallible for if a continual visible Succession confers Infallibility and is the mark whereby we must know it then every Church which ever had or has to this day this visible Succession must have Infallibility also which it seems is entailed on Succession And thus we have found out a World of infallibility and it is wonderful how any Apostolical Church came to be over-run with so many Errors and Heresies and to grow so corrupt and degenerate as to provoke GOD to root them up if every Apostolical Church was infallible I cannot imagine how whole Churches which visibly succeeded the Apostles should be infected with Heresie for if Infallibility it self will not secure a Church from Heresie the LORD have mercy upon us 3. This mark he gives how to find out such a true Church at is an infallible Interpreâ—er of Scripture viz. A continual visible Succession from Christ till this day includes another great mistake for it supposes that there is some church now in being on whose Authority we must rely for the sense of Scripture for otherwise there can be no use of a visible Succession to this day in this Controversie If as I have already Proved at large we must rely only on the Authority of the Primitive Church not of the church of this present Age for the sense of Scripture and that not as an infallible Judge buâ— as the most Authentick Witness of the Apostolical Doctrine and Practice then we cannot find out this church by a visible Succession to this day but by examining the ancient Records of the Primitive Church where we shall find what the Faith and Practice of the Church in those dayes was which is the safest Rule to guide us in the Exposition of Scripture Though there were no Church in the World at this day which could prove a continual visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles yet while we have the Scriptures and the Records of the Primitive church we have very sufficient means for the understanding the true meaning of Scripture So that of whatever use this talk of a continual visible Succession may be in other cases it is wholly impertinent in this A church which cannot prove such a continual visible Succession which was not founded by any Apostle
Imprimatur February 15th 1686. Jo. Edinburgh A COLLECTION OF DISCOURSES Lately Written by some DIVINES of the CHURCH OF ENGLAND AGAINST THE ERROURS and CORRUPTIONS OF THE Church OF Rome To which is prefix'd a Catalogue of the several Discourses EDINBVRGH Re-Printed by John Reid for Thomas Brown Gideon Schaw Alexander Ogston and George Mosman Stationers to be sold at their Shops Anno DOM. 1687 THE CATALOGUE Of the DISCOURSES contained in this Book I. A Discourse concerning the Guide in Matters of Faith with Respect especially to the Romish pretence of the necessity of such an One as is infallible Page 1 II. The Protestants Resolution of Faith being an Answer to three Questions First How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of the Scripture Secondly Whither a visible Succession from Christ to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an Infallible Interpreter of Scripture And whither no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture Thirdly Whither the Church of England can make out such a Visible Succession Page 31 III. A Discourse about the Charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther Page 57 IV. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is mean'd by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be rejected Page 82 V. A Discourse concerning the Vnity of the Catholick Church maintained in the Church of England Page 117 VI. A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship or a Scripture proof of the unlawfulness of givng any Religious Worship to any other Beeing besides the One supreme GOD. Page 158 VII A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue Page 212 VIII A Discourse concerning the Devotions of the Church of Rome especially as compared with those of the Church of England in which is shewn that what ever the Romanists pretend there is not so true Devotion amongst them nor such a Rational Provision for it nor encouragement to it as in the Church established by Law among Vs Page 250 IX A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints Page 295 X. A Discourse against Transubstantiation Page 345 XI A Discourse concerning the Adoration of the Host as it is taught and practised in the Church of Rome wherein an Answer is given to T. G. on that subject and to Monsuer Boileau's late Book de Adoratione Eucharistiae Paris 1685. Page 375 XII A Discourse against Purgatory Page 421 XIII A Discourse concerning Auricular Confession as it is prescribed by the Council of Trent and practised in the Church of Rome With a Postscript on occasion of a Book lately Printed in France called Historia Confessionis Auricularis Page 447. FINIS A DISCOURSE CONCERNING A GUIDE IN MATTERS OF FAITH THE design of this Discourse is the Resolution of the following Query Whither a Man who liveth where Christianity is The Question professed and refuseth to submit his judgment to the Infallibility of any Guide on Earth and particularly to the Church or Bishop of Rome hath notwithstanding that refusal sufficient means still left him whereby he may arrive at certainty in those Doctrines which are generally necessary to the Salvation of a Christian Man Satisfaction in this Inquiry is of great Moment For The moment of this Question it relateth to our great end and to the way which leads to it And it nearly concerneth both the Romanists and the Reformed If there be not such a Guide the Estate of the Romanists is extreamly dangerous For then the Blind take the Blind for their unerring Leaders and being once misled they wander on without correcting their Error having taken up this first as their fixed Principle that their Guide cannot mistake the way On the other hand If God hath set up in his Church a Light so very clear and steddy as is pretended the Reformed are guilty of great presumption and expose themselves to great uncertainty by shutting their Eyes against it Now there lyes before Men a double Temptation to a belief The Temptations to believe the Affirmative part of this Question of the being of such a Guide in the Christian Church Sloth and Vitious Humility of mind Sloth inclineth Men rather to take up in an Implicit Faith then to give themselves the trouble of a strict Examination of things For there is less Pain in Credâ—lity then in bending of the Head by long and strict Attention and severe Study Also there is a Shew of Humility in the deference which our understandings pay unto Authority especially to that which pretends to be under Christ Supreme on Earth Although in the paying of it without good reason fiâ—st understood Men are not Humble but Slavish But these Temptations prevail not upon honest and considerate Minds which inquire without prejudice The true Resolution of the Query after Truth and submit to the Powerful Evidence of it Such will resolve the Question in the Affirmative and they may reasonably so do by considering these propositions which I shall treat of in their order First The Christian Church never yet wanted nor shall it ever want either the Doctrines of necessary Faith or the Belief and Profession of them Secondly Wheresoever GOD requireth the Belief of them he giveth means sufficient for Information and unerring Assâ—nt Thirdly Whatsoever thâ—se means are every Man 's Personal reason giveth to the Mind that last Weigh which turneth Deliberation into Faith Fourthly The means which God hath given us towards necessary Faith and the ceâ—â—ainâ—y of it is nâ—t the Authority of any infallible Guide on Earth Yet Fifthly All 〈…〉 is not to be rejected in our pursuance of the 〈…〉 in the finding out or â—â—ating of which it is a very 〈…〉 Sixthly By the 〈…〉 to us the Holy Scriptures in the 〈…〉 â—â—ans sufficient to lead us to certainty 〈…〉 to â—iâ—e Eternal First 〈…〉 and Profession of the nâ—â—essâ—r 〈…〉 Faith are annexed Prop. I 〈…〉 the Chriâ—â—â—â—â— Church There â—â— but 〈…〉 and accâ—â—â—ing â—â— he saying of Leo the great * Nisi 〈…〉 Fides non est â— M Ser. 2â— If 〈…〉 at all For it cannot be contrary â—â— it seâ—â— And though it be 〈◊〉 â—et Men oâ— diâ—â—ering Creeds â—ret 〈…〉 it as the Merchants of Reliâ—â—s in the Church of 〈◊〉 shew in several places the one â—â—amless Coat of Christ †â—ee Ferrand l. 1. c. 1. Sect 4. disquis Relig. This one Faith never did nor ever shall in all places fail The Apostles were themselves without error both in their own assent to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith and in the delivery of them They heard the Oracles of Christ from his own mouth and they were Witnesses of his Resurrection And they spake * Act. 4. 19 20. what they had seen and heard And they gave to the World Assurance of the Truth by the
plain a case as Heresie if our Church thinketh a private Man may without an infallible Guide on Earth judge aright of it it does but believe as Pope Adrian believed as he professed in a Synod of Rome of which profession report is made in the 2d Synod of Nice †Syn. Nic. 2. art 7 sec vers Anastasii Licet enim Honorio post mortem anathema sit dictum ab Orientalibus sciendum tamen est quia fuerat super haeresi accusatus propter quam solam licitum est minoribus majorum suorum moribus resistendi vel pravos sensus libere respuendi c. For speaking of the Sentence against Pope Honorius he excuseth it in point of good behaviour because it was given in the case of Heresie For in that case and that case alone he allowed Inferiors so he was pleased to call the Oriental Bishops to reject the corrupt sense of those who are superiour to them I will hasten to the next Proposition after I have added one thing more which relates to the guidance of Ecclesiastical Authority And it is this Those of the unlearned Laity who are Members of the Church of England have much more of the just guidance of Ecclesiastical Authority than the like order of Men in the Church of Rome For the Authentick Books of that Church being all written in the Latin Tongue the illiterate People resolve their Faith into the ability and honesty of their Confessor or Parish Priest They take it upon his word that this is the Doctrine this the Discipline this the Worship of their Church Whereas each Minister in our Church can direct the People to the Holy Bible to the Books of Homilies Articles Canons Common-Prayer Ordination as set forth in their native Tongue by publick Authority Of this they may be assured by their own Eyes as many as can but competently read They do not only take this from the mouth of a Priest but from the Church it self Where the Laws of the Church and the Statutes of the Civil Government are written in an unknown Tongue there the Unlearned depend more upon private than publick Authority for they receive the Law from particular Priests or Judges Though Ecclesiastical Authority be a help to our Prop. VI. Faith yet the Holy Scripture is the only infallible Rule of it and by this Rule and the Ministeral Aids of the Christian Church we have sufficient means without Submission to papal Infallability to attain to certainty in that Faith which is generally necessary to Salvation I do not mean that by believing the whole Canon of the Scripture in the gross we thereby believe all the necessary Articles of the Faith because they are therein contained That looks too like a fallacy and it giveth countenance to an useless Faith For he that believes on this manner hath as it were swallow'd a Creed in the lump only whereas it is necessary for a Christian to know each particular Article and the general Nature Tendency of it Otherwise his Faith will not have a distinct influence upon his Christian behaviour to which if it were not useful it were not necessary To believe in general as the Scripture believes is with the Blind and Flexible Faith of a Romanist to believe at adventure He believes as his Church believes but he knows not what is the belief of his Church and therefore is not instructed by that Faith to behave himself as a Member of it The Scripture is that rule of Faith which giveth us all the particular Articles which are necessary to eternal Life By this rule the Primitive Fathers govern'd themselves and this they commended to the Churches And Clemens Alexandrinus a Cl. Alex. Strom. 2. Kanon Ekklesiastikos he Synodia c. Strom. 7 Alethon kai pseudon kriterion does in terms call the Consent of the Old and New Testament the Ecclesiastical Canon and the Touch-stone of true and false I will not multiply Testimonies enough of them are already collected b V. Davenant de Judice normā fidei c. 12. p. 53. c. D. Till Rule of Faith part 4. sect 2. p. 320. c. I will rather pursue the Argument before me in these three Assertions First a Protestant without the submission of his Judgement to the Roman Church may be certainly directed to the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture Secondly He may without such submission sufficiently understand the Rule of Faith and find out the Sense of such places in those Canonical Books as is necessary to the belief of a true Christian Thirdly This rule of Faith is the principal means of Union in Faith in the Christian Church First a Protestant without the submission of his Assert I. Judgement to the Roman Church may be certainly directed to the Holy Scriptures It is commonly said by Men of the Roman perswasion but injudiciously enough that we may as well receive our Creed from them as we do our Bible The Scribes and Pharisees might have said the like to the People of the Jews But with the good Text they conveighed down to them a very false gloss and misinterpreted the Prophesies as meant of a pompous temporal Messiah But for the Reformed they have received neither Creed nor Bible from the Church of Rome The first enumeration of those Books they find in the Apostolical Canons and in those of the Council of Laodecea no Westren writings They have received the Scriptures from the Universal Church of all Ages and Places the Copies of them having been as widely dispersed as the Christians themselves And they receive them not from the infallibility of any particular Church but upon the validity of this sure principle that all the Christian World so widely dispersed could not possibly conspire in the imposing of false Books upon them For particular Churches we may of all others suspect the Roman in reference to the Scriptures For what sincerity of dealing may we hope for from such a Cabal of Men as has forged decrees of Councils and Popes obtruded upon the World Apocryphal Books as Books Canonical purged out of the writings of the Fathers such places as were contrary to their Innovations depressed the Originals under an imperfect Latin Copy and left on purpose in that Copy some places uncorrected for the serving of turns For example sake they have not either in the Bible of Sintus or in that of Clement both which though in War against each other are made their Canon changed the word She in the third of Genesis a Gen. 3. 15. for That or He. But contrary to the Hebrew Text to the Translation of the Seventy to the Readings of the Fathers They persist in rendring of it after this manner She shall break thy Head They believe this Reading tendeth most to the Honour of the blessed Virgin whom they are too much inclined to exalt in the Quality of a Mother above her Son The English Translation of Doway hath followed this plain
and partial corruption Secondly A Protestant may without Submission Assert II. of his judgement to the Roman Church find out in the Books of Holy Scripture the necessary Articles of Christian Faith Two things are here supposed and both of them are true First That the Scriptures contain in them all the necessary Articles of our Faith Secondly That the sense of the Words in which these Articles are expressed in Scripture may be found out by a Protestant without the Submission of his Judgement to the Papacy First The Scriptures contain in them all the necessary Articles of the Faith This is true if the Scriptures themselves be so For this they Witness * See S. Joh. 20. 30. 31. c. 21. 25. St. Paul b 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16 17. saith of the Old Testament as expounded of Christ that it was able to make a Man wise unto Salvation Much more may this be affirmed of the entire Canon The Apostles preached the necessaries to Salvation and what they had preached they wrote down * Iren. l. 3. c. 1. concerning the manner of it Eusebius may be consulted †Eus Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 14. For the Primitive Fathers they allowed the Scriptures to be a sufficient Rule Irenaeus said of them they were perfect * Iren. l. 2. c. 47. S. Aug. de doct Christ l. 2. c. 9. and of the words of St. Austine this is the sense Among those things which are plainly set down in Scripture all those things are to be found which comprehend Faith and Good Manners Nay the Romanists themselves attempt to prove their very additional Articles out of the Bible That there are in it the Articles of the Apostolical Creed is evident enough to a common Reader But how the Romish Articles should be found in that Bible which was written some hundreds of years before they were invented is a riddle beyond the skill of Apollo Secondly the sense of the Scriptures in matters necessary to Salvation may be found out by Men of the Reformed Religion without Submission to Roman Infallibility The Learned know the Originals and the true wayes of Interpretation And amongst us those of the Episcopal Clergy have obliged the World with such an Edition of the Bible in many Languages as was not before extant in the Roman Church And a Romanist who writes with great mastery in such matters prefers it before the great Bible of Paris a V. P. S. p. Hist Critique p. 583 Mais elle est plus ample plus commode c. For those of the Laity who are Unlearned they have before them a Translation which erres not in the Faith And the phrases are not so obscure but that by study and Ministerial helps they may understand them They have before them a Translation which erres not in the Faith Of this the Italians and the French may be convinced by comparing the Translations of James de Voragine and the Divines of Lovain with those of Signior Diodati and Olivetan or Calvin And the English may receive satisfaction in this matter by comparing their Translations with that of Doway In all of them they will find the same Fundamental Doctrines of Faith And were there any such material alteration made in our Bible it would appear by the notorious inconsistence of one part of the Canon with another It would have been long ago detected and exposed to publick shame both by the Romanists and the other Dissenters from our Communion But the former are not able to produce one instance and the latter agree with us in the use and excellence of the Translation though in other things they extreamly differ from us And where they do but dream we erâ—e they forbear not to proclaim it In so much that a difference in the Translations of the Psalter which concerns not Faith or Manners †See Hook Eccl. Pol. Book fifth Sect. 19. and a supposed defect in the Table for keeping Easter have been made by them publick Objections * Mr. Hs. peaceable design renewed p. 14. and stumbling blocks in the way to their Conformity It is true there is a Romanist who hath raved against the Bible of the Reformed in these extravagant words ‡ A. S. Reconciler of Religions Printed 1663. c. 11. p. 38 39. The Sectaries have as many different Bibles in Canon Version and sense as are dayes in the year The Sectarian Bible is no more the Word of GOD then the Alcoran Almanack or Aesops Fables Of great corruption he speaks in general but his Madness has admitted of so much caution that he forbears the mention of any one particular place The Learned Romanists understand much better and the Ingenuous will confess it And they are not ignorant that we Translate from the Original Tongues after having compared the Readings of the most Ancient Copies and of the Fathers Whilst they Translate the Bible from the Vulgar Latin which indeed in the New Testament is a tolerable but in the Old a very imperfect Version If our English Bible were turned into any one of the Modern Tongues by a Judicious Romanists who could keep Counsel it would pass amongst many of that Church for a good Catholick Translation And this is the rather my perswasion because I have read in Father Simon a Historie critique ch 25. p. 392. 393. that not unpleasant story concerning the Translation of Mr. Rene Benoist a Doctor of the Faculty of Paris This Doctor had observed that a new Latin Translation of the Organon of Aristotle performed by a person who understood not the Greek Tongue had been very well received Upon this occasion he was moved to turn the Bible into the French Tongue though he was ignorant of those of the Greek and Hebrew For the accomplishing of this Design he served himself upon the French Translation of Geneva changing only a few words and putting others of the same signification in their room But it seems he was not exact enough in this change of words For he having overlooked some words which were used by the Genevians and not the Romanists a discovery was made by the Divines of Paris and this Edition of the Bible was condemned by them though published under the name of one of their Brethren I do not say that such places of Scripture as contain Matters of Faith are plain to every Man But those who have a competence of capacity who are not prejudiced against the Truth who pray to God for his assistance who attend to what they read who use the Ministerial helps which are offered to them shall find enough in Holy Writ to Guide them to everlasting life In finding out the sense of the Scriptures the Church gives them help but it does not by its Authority obtrude the sense upon them The Guides of it are as Expositors and School-Masters to them And by comparing phrase with phrase and place with place and by other such wayes they teach them how to judge of
that she died and was not miraculously assumed The Ascension of Elias is thus expounded b Dom. infrâ Oct. Asc in 3. Noct. p. 443. He was taken up into the Aerial not the Aetherial Heavens from whence he was dropped in an obscure place on Earth there to remain to the end of the World and then to expire with it They say †Infra Oct. Asc 3. Noct. Lect. 8. p. 447. of Job That when he spake of a Bird and of her path in the Air he by a figure called Christ a Bird and by the motion of it in the Air figured also our Lords Ascension We may perceive by these few Instances what an entrance into the sense of Scripture is like to be given whilst a Pope has the Key of Knowledge in his keeping Thirdly If Men would use the Church as their Assert III. Ministerial Guide and admit of the scripture as the only Rule by which all Matters of Faith are to be measured they would agree in the proper means to the blessed end of Unity in the Faith This was the perswasion of St. Austine who thus applieth himself to Maximinus * S. Aug cont Max. l. 3. Neither ought I at this time to alledge the Council of Nice nor you that of Ariminum For neither am I bound to the authority of the one nor you to that of the other Let us both dispute with the Authorities of scripture which are Witnesâ—es common to both of us Whilst the Romanists ascribe the differences which arise amongst the Reformed to their want of an infallible Guide and to their different interpretations of the scriptures they unskilfully derive effects from causes which are not the natural Parents of them There is saith St. Austine one Mother of all strifes and she is Pride Neither doth the scripture divide us nor does the infallibility of their judge unite them Their Union such as it is ariseth from the mighty force of their external Polity and they speak not differently because they dare not and the strength of that Polity arose at first from Rome not as the Chair of St. Peter but as the Seat of the Empire Our divisions like theirs arise as all Wars do be they Ecclesiasticall or Civil from the unruly Lusts and Passions of Men. And from these likewise arise generally the misinterpretations of plain Laws and Rules the sense of which must be made to chime according to the Interest of prejudiced Men or else they will not give attention to them If the Lusts and Passions of Men were mortified all Christians agreeing in the certainty of the Scriptures though not of any Living Guide and the words of one being as intelligible as those of the other All might agree in one Creed and put an end to those unnecessary Controversies which entangle Truth and extinguish Charity FINIS THE PROTESTANT RESOLUTION OF FAITH Being an Answer to THREE QUESTIONS I. How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of the Scripture II. Whither a visible Succession from CHRIST to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an infallible Interpreter of Scripture and whither no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture III. Whither the Church of ENGLAND can make out such a visible Succession London Printed And Edinburgh Re-printed by J. Reid for T Brown G Schaw A Ogston and G Mosman Stationers in Edinburgh to be sold at their Shops 1686. THE PREFACE TO THE READER THese Papers which are here presented to thee were write for the use of a private Person and by the Advice of some Friends are now made Publick We find how busie the Romish Emissaries are to corrupt our People and think our selves equally concerned to Antiaote them against Popâ—â—y and Phanaticism Two extreams equally dangerous to the Government of Church and State in these Kingdoms both in their Principles and Practices and both of them very great Corruptions of the Christian Religion and very dangerous to mens Souls Some of our Clergy have already been so charitable to our Dissenters as to warn them of their danger and by the Strength and Evidence of Scripture and Reason to Convince them of their mistakes and I pray God forgive those men and turn their Hearts who will not contribute so much to their own Conviction and Satisfaction as diligently and impartially to read and consider what is so charitably offered to them Ignorance and mistake may excuse men whâ— have no opportunities of knowing better but such wilfull and resolved Ignorance which bars up mens miâ—ds against all means of better Information will as soon damn them as sins against knowledge And now it might justly be thought want of charity to those of the Roman communion should we take no care at all of them nay want of charity to those of our own communion and to Dissenters themselves who are daily assaulted by the busie Factors for Rome For the Disputes against the church of Rome as well as against Dissenters are for the most part too Learned and too Voluminous for the instruction of ordinary People and therefore some short and plain Discourses about the principal Matters in dispute between us is the most effectual way we can take to confirm men in their Religion and preserve them from the crafty Insinuations of such as lie in wait to deceive Some few Attempts which have been already made of that kind give me some hope that several other Tracts will follow that the ruine of the church of England if God shall please ever to permit such a thing whither by Popery or Phanaticism may not be charged upon our neglect to instruct People better Some Persons it seems whose Talent lies more in censuring what others do then in doing any good themselves are pleased to put some sinister constructions on this Design as it is imposible to design any thing so well but men of ill minds who know not what it means to do good for goods sake shall be able to find some bad name for it Some guess that we now write against Popery only to play an after-Game and to regain the Favour and good Opinion of Dissenters which we have lost by writing against them But I know not that any man has lost their Favour by it nor that any man values their Favour for any other reason then to have the greater advantage of doing them good If so good a work as confuting the Errors of the church of Rome will give the Dissenters such a good Opinion of us as to make them more impartially consider what has been writ to perswade them to communion with the church of England I know â—â— reason any man has to be ashamed to own it though it were part of his design but whither it is or not is more then I know I dare undertake for those Persons I am acquainted with that they neither value the favour nor fear the displeasure either of Phanaticks
the same church notwithstanding these Disputes because it is a very dangerous thing to leave it but they are more beholden to the Inquisition then to infallibility for this Unity 2. How do these Divisions and Heresies which disturb the Church prove that no man can be certain of his Religion If we can certainly know what the sense of Scripture is notwithstanding there are many different Opinions about it then the diversity of Opinions is no Argument against us if we cannot be certain of any thing which others deny dispute or doubt of then how can any Papist be certain that his Church is infallible For all the rest of the Christian Church deny this and scorn their Pretensions to it I may indeed safely acquiesce in the Determinations of an infallible Judge whom I am infallibly assured to be infallible how many contrary Opinions soever there are in the World But when infallibility it self is the matter of the dispute and I have no infallible way to know whither there be any such thing or where this infallibility is seated if diversity of Opinions be an Argument against the certainty of any thing which I am not and cannot be infallibly assured of then it is a certain demonstration against infallibility it self Unless we will take the Church of Romes word for her own infallibility we cannot have the Decision of an infallible Judge in this matter for she will allow no other infallible Judge but her self and yet this is so absurd a way that it supposes that we believe and that we dis-believe the same thing at the same time For unless we before-hand believe the Church to be infallible her saying so is no infallible proof that she is infallible and yet the very demand of a proof supposes that we are not certain of it that we doubt of it or dis-believe it When we ask the Church whither she be infallible it supposes that we are not certain of it otherwise we should need no proof and when we believe the Church to be infallible because she sayes so it supposes that we did before-hand believe that she is infallible otherwise her saying so is no proof The greatest Champions for the Church of Rome never pretended that they could produce any infallible proofâ— which is the true Church Cardinal Bellarmine attempts no more then to alledge some Motives of Credibility to make the thing probable and to incline Men to believe it and yet it is impossible we can be more certain of the Infallibility of the Church then we are that it is a true Church and if a Papist have only some motives of Credibility to believe the Church of Rome to be a true Church he can have no greater probabilities that it is an infallible Church Now not to take notice what a tottering Foundation some high probabilities though they amounted to a moral assurance is for the belief of infallibility which is to put more in the Conclusion then there is in the Premises The only use I shall make of it at present is this That we can at least be as certain of the meaning of Scripture as the Papists are that their Church is infallible for they can be no more infallibly assured of this then we are of our interpretations of Scripture and therefore if the diversity of Opinions about the sense of Scriptures proves that we cannot be certain what the true sense of it is the same Argument proves that they cannot be certain that their Church is infallible because this is not only doubted but absolutly denied by the greatest part of the Christian World and was never thought of by the best and purest Ages of it So this Argument proves too much and recoils upon themselves like a Gun which is overcharged and if for their own sakes they will grant that we may be certain of some things which are as confidently denied and disputed by others then the diversity of Opinions in the Church is no Argument that we cannot be certain of our Religion but only teacheth us greater caution and diligence and Honesty in our inquiries after Truth 3. These Divisions and Heresies that are in the Christian Church are no better Argument against the truth and certainty of our Religion then the diversities of Religions that are in the World are against the truth of Christianity The whole World is far enough from being Christian great part of it are Jews or Pagans or Mahumetanes still and this is as good an Argument to prove the uncertainty of all Religions as the different Parties and Professions of Christians are to prove that we cannot be certain what the true Christian Church nor what true Christianity is The Gospel of our Saviour was not designed to offer any force or violence to mens Faith or understanding no more then to their wills Were there such an irresistible and compulsory Evidence in the Gospel that wherever it was Preach'd it should be impossible for any man though never so wicked and ill disposed to continue an Infidel or to prove a Heretick Faith would be no greater a Vertue then forc'd Obedience and Compliance is The Gospel has Evidence enough to Convince honest Minds and is plain enough to be understood by those who are honest and teachable and therefore has its Effects upon those who are Curable which is all that it was designed for Those who will not beleive may continue Infidels and those who will not understand may fall into Errours and believe a Lye and yet there is Evidence enough to Convince and Plainness enough to Instruct well disposed minds and certainty enough in each to be the foundation of a Divine Faith The sum is this Though the Instructions of the Church are a very good means for the understanding of the sense of Scripture yet they are not the only means the Holy Scripture is a very intelligible Book in such matters as are absolutly necessary to Salvation and could we suppose that a man who never heard of a Church should have the use of the Bible in a Language which he understood by a diligent reading of it he might understand enough to be saved 2. If by Church is mean'd any Particular Church as suppose the Roman Catholick Church or the Church of the present Age it is absolutely false to say that the Church in this sense is alwayes a sure and safe means of understanding the Scripture What has been Universally believed by all Christian Churches in all Ages or at least by all Churches of the first and purest Ages of Christianity which were nearest the times of the Apostles and might be presumed best to understand the sense of the Apostles in the great Articles of our Faith is a very safe Rule for the interpretation of Scripture and the general Practice of those Primitive Apostolick Churches in matters of Government and Discipline before they were corrupted by worldly Ambition and secular Interest is a very safe Rule for our Practice also and this is the
Governed by Apostolical Men when we cannot reasonably suspect any Deviation from the Primitive Practice and this is the Rule which the Church of England owns in such matters and by which she rejects and confutes both the Innovations and corruptions of the Church of Rome and the wild pretences of Phanaticism So that we do in the most proper sense own the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best means for Expounding Scripture We do not leave every man to Expound Scripture by a private Spirit as our Adversaries of the Church of Rome reproach us we adhere to the ancient Catholick Church which the Church of Rome on one side and the Phanaticks on the other have forsaken And though we reject the new invention of an infallible Judge yet we are no Friends at all to Scepticism but can give a more Rational account of our Faith then the Church of Rome can Had we no other way of understanding the sense of Scripture but by Propriety of the Language and the Grammatical construction of the Words and the scope and design of the Texts their connexion and Dependence on what goes before and what follows and such like means as we use for the understanding any other Books of humane composition I doubt not but honest and diligent Inquirers might discover the true meaning of Scripture in all the great Articles of our Faith but yet this alone is a more uncertain way and lyable to the Abuses of Hereticks and Impostors The Socinians are a famous Example what Wit and Criticism will do to pervert the plainst Text and some other Sectaries are as plain a demonstration what wâ—rk Dullness and Stupidity and Enthusiasm will make with Scripture but when we have the practice of the Catholick Church and an ancient and venerable summary of the Christian Faith which has been the common Faith of Christians in all Ages to be our Rule in Expounding Scripture though we may after all mistake the sense of some particular Texts yet we cannot be guilty of any great and dangerous mistakes This use the Church of England makes of the Catholick Church in Expounding Scripture that she Religiously maintains the ancient Catholick Faith and will not suffer any man to Expound Scriptures in opposition to the ancient Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church But though the Belief and Practice of the Catholick Church be the best means of understanding the true sense of Scripture yet we cannot affirm this of any particular Church or of the Church of any particular Age excepting the Apostolick Age or those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles Notwithstanding this the Church of Rome may be no good Expositor of Scripture for the Church of Rome though she usurp the name of the Catholick Church as presuming her self to be the Head and Fountain of catholick Unity yet she is but a part of the catholick Church as the Church of England and the Churches of France aind Holland are and has no more right to impose her Expositions of Scripture upon other Churches then they have to impose upon her If there happen any controversie between them it is not the Authority of either Church can decide it but this must be done by an appeal to Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of it For when we say that the belief and Practice of the Catholick Church is the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture we do not mean that the Church is the Soveraign and absolute Judge of the sense of Scripture but the meaning is that those Churches which were founded by the Apostles and received the Faith immediately from them and were afterwards sor some Ages governed by Apostolical men or those who were taught by them and convers'd with them are the best Witnesses what the Doctrine of the Apostles was and therefore as far as we can be certain what the Faith of these Primitive Churches was they are the best Guides for the Expounding Scripture So that the Authority of the Church in Expounding Scripture being only the Authority of Witnesses it can reach no farther then those Ages which may reasonably be presumed to be Authentick and credible Witnesses of the Doctrines of the Apostles and therefore if we extend it to the four first general councils it is as far as we can do it with any pretence of Reason and thus far the Church of England owns the Authority of the Church and commands her Ministers to Expound the Scriptures according to the Catholick Faith owned and profess'd in those days but as for the later Ages of the church which were removed too far from the Apostles dayes to be Witnesses of their Doctrine they have no more Authority in this matter then we have at this day nor has one church any more Authority then another 3. And therefore if by the church being the means of knowing the sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures be understood the Judgment and Sentence and Decree of the church that we must seek no farther for the reason of our Faith then the infallible Authority of the church in Expounding Scripture this also is absolutely false and absurd This is more then Christ and his Apostles assumed to themselves while they were on Earth they were indeed infallible Interpreters of Scripture but yet they never bore down their Hearers meerly with their Authority but Expounded the Scriptures and applied ancient Prophesies to their Events and took the vail off of Moses's Face and shewed them the Gospel state concealed under those Types and Figures they confirmed their Expositions of Scripture by the force of Reason and appealed to the Judgments and consciences of their Hearers whither these things were not so Christ commands the Jews nor meerly to take his own word and to rely on his Authority for the truth of what he said but to study the Scriptures themselves and the Bereans are commended for this generous temper of mind that they were more noble then those of Thessalonica for they daily search'd the Scriptures to see whither the Doctrine the Apostles preach'd were to be found there or not Now I think no Church can pretend to be more infallible then Christ and his Apostles and therefore certainly ought not to assume more to themselves then they did and if the Church of Rome or any other Church will convince us of the truth of their Expositions of Scripture as Christ and his Apostles convinc'd their Hearers that is by enlightning our Understandings and convincing our Judgments by proper Arguments we will gladly learn of them This course the Primitive Christians took as is evident in all the Writings of the ancient Fathers against Jews and Hereticks they argue from the Scriptures themselves to prove what the sense of Scripture iâ— they appeal indeed sometimes to the sense of the Catholick Church not as an infallible Judge of Scripture but as the best Witnesses of the Apostolical Doctrine Thus
Tertulliâ—â— argues against Hereticks in his Book De Praescriplionibus â—â—t when they reason about the sense of Scripture they never direct us to any infallible Judge but use such Arguments as they think proper to convince Gain-sayers Nay this is the way which was observed in all the Ancient Councils the Bishops of the church met together for common counsel and advice and in matters of Discipline and Government which were subject to their Authority they considered what was ' most for the publick benefit of the church and determined them by their Authority not as infallible Judges but as Supreme Governours of the church In the disputes of Faith they reason from Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not from their own Authority and what upon a serious debate and inquiry they found to be most agreeable to the sense of Scripture and the Doctrine of the church of former Ages that they determined and decreed to be received in all churches as the catholick Faith That this is so is evident from all the Histories of the most Ancient and celebrated councils which any man may consult who pleases Now I would ask some few Questions about this matter 1. Whither-these councils took a sure and safe way to find out Truth If they did not what reason have we to believe that they determined right If they did then we may use the same way which they did for that which is a good way in one Age is so in another and then there is no necessity of an Infallible Judge to find out the sense of Scripture because we have other certain wayes of doing this the same which all the ancient Councils observed 2. I would know whither it be not sufficient for every Christian to receive the Decrees and Determinations of these councils upon the same Reason and Authority which moved the Fathers assembled in council to make these Decrees Whither for instance we must not believe the Eternal God-head of Christ and that he is of the same substance with his Fatherâ— for the same Reasons for which the Nicene Fathers believed this and required all christians to believe it If we must then Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not the Authority of a general council or any Infallible Judge is the Reason of our Faith For the Nicene Fathers who were the first that met in a General council could not believe this upon the Authority of any other General council much less upon their own Authority unless we will say that they first Decreed this then believed it because they themselves Decreed it If Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church antecedently to the determinations of a General council or any other pretended Infallible Judge be not a sufficient foundation for our Faith then the whole christian World before the council of Nice which was the first general council had no sufficient Foundation for their Faith for there was no particular Bishop or church in those dayes which pretended to be the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures We Protestants have the same way to understand the Scriptures have the same Reason and Foundation of our Faith which the Nicene Fathers themselves had or which any christan could have before there was any general council and if the church of Rome do not think this enough we cannot help that we are abundantly satisfied with it The Authority of a general council in those dayes was deservedly sacred and venerable not as an infallible Judge which they never pretended to but as the most certain means they could possibly have to understand what was and in all Ages had been the received Doctrine of the catholick church They met together not to make new Articles of Faith which no council in the World ever had any Authority to do but to declare what was the truly ancient and. Apostolick Faith and to put it into such words as might plainly express the catholick sense and meet with the distempers of that Age. For this end Grave and Reverend Bishops assembled from all parts of the christian World not meerly to give their private Opinions of things but to Declare what was the received Doctrine oâ— those churches over which they presided and I know no better Argument of an Apostolick Tradition then the consent of all churches as remote from each other as East and West which were planted by several Apostles and differed very much from each other in some External Rites and Usages but yet all agreed in the same Faith And this is the true Authority of those ancient councils that they were most likely to understand the true sense of Scripture and of the Catholick Church This is the Protestant Resolution of Faith and the Nicene Fathers themselves had no other way nor pretended to any other Nay the church of Rome her self as much as she talks of Infallibility makes very little use of it She has never given us an infallible comment on Scripture but suffers her Doctors to write as fallible comments and in many things as contrary to each other as any Protestant Divines do And I cannot imagine what good Infallibility does if an infallible Church has no better means of understanding Scripture then the comments of fallible men that is no better means then every fallible Church has for no man can understand the Scripture ever the better for the Churches being infallible unless this infallible Church improve this glorious Talent of Infallibility in Expounding Scripture which she has not done to this day and I believe never will Indeed it is apparent that infallibility as it is pretended to by the church of Rome can be of no use either in the Refolution of Faith or in confuting Hereticks who deny this Infallibility and then I cannot imagine what it is good for but to multiply Disputes instead of ending them As for the Resolution of Faith suppose I ask a Papist why he believes such Articles as the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the dead to be contained in Scripture If he answer as he must do Because he is taught so by the church which is infallible my next Question is How he knows the Church to be infallible If he says he learns this from Scripture I ask him how he comes to understand the Scripture and how he knows that this is the sense of it If he know this by the infallible interpretation of the church then he runs round in a circle and knows the Scripture by the church and the church by the Scripture as I observed before if he can find out the Churches infallibility by the Scripture without the help of an infallible Judge then it seems the Scripture is to be understood without the infallible interpretation of the Church and if men can find out infallibility in Scripture without the Church I am confident they may find out any thing else in Scripture as well without the Churches infallibility For there iâ— no Article of our creed so hard to be
of civil honour due to beasts as that there is an inferiour degree of Religious Worship due to some men For all degrees of Religious Worship are as peculiar and appropriate to God as civil respects are to men and as the highest degree of civil honour is to a Soveraign Prince However should we grant that some excellent Creatures might be capable of some inferiour degrees of Religious Worship yet as the Prince is the fountain of civil honour which no subject must presume to usurp without a grant from his Prince so no creature how excellent soever has any natural and inherent right to any degree of Religious Worship and therefore we must not presume to worship any Creature without Gods command nor to pay any other degree of worship to them but what God hath prescribed and instituted and the only way to know this is to examine the Scriptures which is the only external revelation we have of the will of God Let us then inquire what the sense of Scripture is in this controversie and I shall distinctly examine the testimonies both of the Old and New Testament concerning the object of Religious Worship SECT II. The Testimonies of the Mosaical Law considered TO begin with the Old Testament and nothing is Sect 3. 1. more plain in all the Scripture then that the Laws of Moses confine â— Religious worship to that one Supreme God the Lord Jehovah who Created the Heavens and the Earth For 1. The Israelites were expresly commanded to worship the Lord Jehovah and to worship no other Beeing as our Saviour himself assures us who I suppose will be allowed for a very good Expositor of the Laws of Moses It is written Matth. 4. 10. Deut. 6. 13. Deutr 10. 10. thou shalt worship the Lord they God and him only shalt thou serve In the Hebrew Text from whence our Saviour cites this Law it is only said Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him without that addition of him only And yet both the Septuagint and the vulgar Latine read the words as our Saviour doth him only shalt thou serve and the authority of our Saviour is sufficient to justifie this Interpretation and withal gives us a general rule which puts an end to this controversie that as often as we are commanded in Scripture to worship God we are commanded also to worship none besides him For indeed the first Commandment is very express in this matter and all other Laws which concern the obiect of Worship must in all reason be expounded by that Thou shalt have none other Gods before me The Septuagint 20 Exod. 3. renders it plen emu besides me so does the Chaldee Syriack and Arabick to the same sense And it is universally concluded by all Expositors that I have seen that the true interpretation of this Commandment is that we must worship no other God but the Lord Jehovah To pay Religious Worship to any Beeing does in the Scriptures notion make that Beeing our God which is the only reason why they are commanded not to have any other Gods For there is but one true God and therefore in a strict sense they can have no other GODS because there are no other Gods to be had but whatever Beeings they worship they make that their God by worshiping it and so the Heathens had a great many Gods but the Jews are commanded to have but one GOD that is to worship none else besides him In other places GOD expresly forbids them to worship any strange Gods or the Gods of the people or those Nations Deut. 6. 14 that were round about them And least we should suspect that they were forbid to worship the Gods of the people only because those Heathen Idolaters worship Devils and wicked Spirits the Prophet Jeremiah gives us a general notion who are to be reputed false GODS and not to be worshipped Thus shall ye say unto them the Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Jer. 10. 11. Earth even they shall perish from the Earth and from under these Heavens So that whatever Beeing is worshipped whither it be a good or a bad Spirit which did not make the Heavens and the Earth is a false GOD to such Worshippers and I suppose the Church of Rome will not say that Saints or Angels or the Virgin Mary as much as they magnifie her made the Heavens and the Earth And then according to this rule they ought not to be worshipped But to put this past doubt that the true meaning of these Laws is to forbid the worship of any other Beeing besides the Supreme GOD I shall observe two or three things in our Saviours answer to the Devils temptation which will give great light and strength to it 1. That our Saviour absolutely rejects the worship of any other Beeing together with the Supreme GOD. The thing our Saviour condemns is not the renouncing the worship of God for the worship of Creatures for the Devil never tempted him to his but the worship of any other being besides GOD though we still continue to worship the Supreme GOD. It is written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Which is a plain demonstration that men may believe and worship the Supreme God and yet be Idolaters if they worship any thing else besides him The Devil did not desire our Saviour to renounce the worship of the supreme God but was contented that he should worship God still so he would but worship him also And therefore it is no reason to excuse the Church of Rome from Idolatry because they worship the supreme God as well as Saints and Angels this they may do and be Idolaters still for Idolatry does not consist meerly in renouncing the worship of the supreme God but in worshipping any thing else though we continue to worship him When the Jews worship'd their Baalims and false gods they did not wholly renounce the worship of the God of Israel and the Heathens themselves especially the wisest men amongst them did acknowledge one supreme God though they worshiped a great many inferiour Deities with him 2. Our Saviour in his answer to the Devils temptation does not urge his being a wicked and Apostate Spirit an enemy and a rebel against God but gives such a reason why he could not worship him as equally excludes all Creatures whither good or bad Spirits from any right to Divine Worship Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Him and none else whither they be good or bad spirits for our Saviour does not confine his answer to either and therefore includes them both When we charge the church of Rome with too plain an imitation of the Pagan Idolatry in that worship they paid to their inferiour Daemons which was nothing more then what the Church of Rome now gives to Saints and Angels they think it a sufficient answer that the Heathens worshiped Devils and Apostate Spirits
Angels or Saints departed said God at any time Sit thou on my right hand to make intercession for Men Of which of them has he at any time affirmed as he has done of Christ He is able to save them to the uttermost that come to God by him seeing he ever lives to make Intercession for Men That if any Man Sin he is an Advocate with the Father for him Or whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in his name it shall be given you Certainly they who will have Angels and Saints Mediatours betwixt God and Men ought to produce a Commission signed by God or his Son Jesus to constitute them such but this they are no more able to do then they are to make a grant of such Power and Honour themselves to them It 's true the Blessed Spirits above are said to stand about the Throne of God and the Holy Angels to behold his Face and as the Honour of a Prince is encreased by the number of his Attendants so is our Lords exaltation rendered the more Glorious by those ten thousand times ten thousand that Minister unto him but yet it 's never said They sit at Gods right Hand or live for ever to make Intercession for us and having no such delegation of Power from God for this office the Honour and Worship that belongs to it can't be given to them without manifest Wrong and Sacriledge to Christ who has The Holy Angels are Gods ministring Spirits and the Spirits of Just-Men departed his Glorified Saints but God hath made Jesus the Lord and Christ and put all things in Heaven and Earth in Subjection under his feet of him only hath he said Let all the Angels Honour him and all the Saints fall down before him and all Men Honour the Son even as they Honour the John 5. 23 Father Amen To Conclude WEre we certain that the Saints departed do now reign in Heaven and enjoy the Beatifick Vision and that it was lawful to Invocate such as are undoubtely Saints as the Blessed Virgin and the Holy Apostles Yet methinks a wary Man should be shy and not over-forward to exhibit that honour to all whom the Pope hath Cannoniz'd I cannot for my heart but think that the Prelates and Bishops in King Henry the Eighth's time had as much reason to Unsaint Thomas Becket for being a Rebel against his Prince as Pope Alexander the Third had to Canonize him for being a Biggot for the Church What can a sober Christian think of the Saintship of some who never had any being in the World and of others who never had any goodness many of their Saints are meer Names without Persons and many meer Persons without Holiness nay I am very confident that the greatest Incendiaries and Disturbers of the Peace of the World do as well deserve it as that famous Pope Hildebrand or Gregory the seventh Inumerable might be instanc'd in whose Saintship justly falls under great Suspicion but 't is enough that some Romanists themselves and those of no little Authority in their Church have granted that the Popes canonizations are doubtful and subject to error If then at any Billar de beat sanct l. 1. c. 7. 8. time his Infallibility should chance to mistake as I am pretty sure he has more then once done the Members of that Church are in a sweet case and are not only in danger of Invocating Saints but Devils also which is Idolatry with a witness and by their own Confession FINIS A DISCOURSE AGAINST TRANSUBSTANTIATION EDINBVRGH Re-printed by John Reid Anno DOM 1686. A DISCOURSE AGAINST TRANSUBSTANTIATION COncerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper one of the two great positive Institutions of the Christian Religion there are two main Points of difference between Vs and the Church of Rome One about the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in which they think but are not certain that they have the Scripture and the words of our Saviour on their side The other about the administration of this Sacrament to the People in both kinds in which we are sure that we have the Scripture and our Saviour's Institution on our side and that so plainly that our Adversaries themselves do not deny it Of the first of these I shall now treat and endeavour to shew against the Church of Rome That in this Sacrament there is no substantial change made of the Elements of Bread and Wine into the natural Body and Bloud of Christ that Body which was born of the Virgin Mary and suffered upon the Cross for so they explain that hard word Transubstantiation Before I engage in this Argument I cannot but observe what an unreasonable task we are put upon by the bold confidence of our Adversaries to dispute a matter of Sense which is one of those things about which Aristotle hath long since pronounc'd there ought to be no dispute It might well seem strange if any man should write a Book to prove that an Egg is not an Elephant and that a Musket-Bullet is not a Pike It is every whit as hard a case to be put to maintain by a long Discourse that what we see and handle and taste to be Bread is Bread and not the Body of a Man and what we see and taste to be Wine is Wine and not Bloud And if this evidence may not pass for sufficient without any farther proof I do see why any man that hath confidence enough to do so may not deny any thing to be what all the world sees it is or affirm any thing to be what all the world sees it is not and this without all possibility of being farther confuted So that the business of Transubstantiation is not a controversie of scripture against scripture or of Reason against Reason but of downright Impudence against the plain meaning of scripture and all the sense and Reason of Mankind It is a most self-evident Falshood and there is no Doctrine or Proposition in the world that is of it self more evidently true then Transubstantiation is evidently false And yet if it were possible to be true it would be the most ill-natur'd and pernicious truth in the World because it would suffer nothing else to be true it is like the Roman-catholick Church which will needs be the whole Christian Church and will allow no other society of Christians to be any part of it so Transubstantiation if it be true at all it is all truth for it cannot be true unless our senses and the senses of all mankind be deceived about their proper objects and if this be true and certain then nothing else can be so for if we be not certain of what we see we can be certain of nothing And yet notwithstanding all this there is a Company of men in the World so abandon'd and given up by God to the efficacy of delusion as in good earnest to believe this gross and palpable Errour and to impose the belief of it upon the Christian World under no less
penalties then of temporal death and Eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of so false a Doctrine and to lay open the monstruous absurdity of it And in the handling of this Argument I shall proceed in this plain method I. I shall consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine II. I shall produce our Objections against it And if I can shew that there is no tollerable ground for it and that there are invincible Objections against it then every man is not only in reason excused from believing this Doctrine but hath great cause to believe the contrary FIRST I will consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine Which must be one or more of these five Either 1. The Authority of scripture Or 2ly The perpetual belief of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an belief of of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an evidence that they alwayes understood and interpreted our Saviour's words This is my body in this sense Or 3ly The authority of the present Church to make and declare new articles of Faith Or 4ly The absolute necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive this Sacrament Or 5 ly To magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle 1. They pretend for this Doctrine the Authority of Scripture in those words of our Saviour This is my Body Now to shew the insufficiency of this pretence I shall endeavour to make good these two things 1. That there is no necessity of understanding those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation 2. That there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise First That there is no necessity to understand those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation If there be any it must be from one of these two reasons Either because there are no figurative expressions in Scripture which I think no man ever yet said or else because a Sacrament admits of no figures which would be very absurd for any man to say since it is of the very nature of a Sacrament to represent and exhibit some invisible grace and benefit by an outward sign and figure And especially since it cannot be denied but that in the institution of this very Sacrament our Saviour useth figurative exressions and several words which cannot be taken strictly and literally When he gave the Cup he said This Cup is the new Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you and for many for the remission of Sins Where first the Cup is put for Wine contained in the Cup or else if the words be literally taken so as to signifie a substantial change it is not of the Wine but of the Cup and that not into the bloud of Christ but into the new Testament or new Covenant in his bloud Besides that his bloud is said then to be shed and his body to be broken which was not till his Passion which followed the Institution and first celebration of this Sacrament But that there is no necessity to understand our Saviour's words in the sense of Transubstantiation I will take the plain concession of a great number of the most learned Writters of the Church of Rome in this Controversie a de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. Bellarmine b in 3. dis 49. Qu. 75. Sect. 2. Suarez and c in 3. part dis 150. Qu. 75. art 2. c. 15. Vasquez do acknowledge Scotus the great Scholman to have said that this Doctrine cannot be evidently proved from Scripture And Bellarmine grants this not to be improbable and Suarez and Vasquez acknowledge d in sent l. 4. dist 11. qu. 1. n. 15 Durandus to have said as much e in 4. sent Q. 5. quod 4. q. 3. Ocham another famous schoolman sayes expresly that the Doctrine which holds the substance of the Bread and Wine to remain after the consecration is neither repugnant to Reason nor to Scripture f in 4 sent Q 6. art 2. Petrus ab Alliaâ—â— Cardinal of Cambray say plainly that the Doctrine of the substance of Bread and Wine remaining after Consecration is more free from absurdity more rational and no wayes repugnant to the authority of scripture nay more that for the other Doctrine viz. of Transubstantiation there is no evidence in scripture g in canon Miss Lect. 40. Gabriel Biel another Schoolman and Divine of their Church freely declares that as to any thing express'd in the Canon of the scripture a man may believe that the substance of Bread and Wine doth remain after Consecration and therefore he resolves the belief of Transubstantiation in to some other Revelation besides scripture which he supposeth the Church had about it Cardinal h in Aquin 3. part Qu. 74 art 1. Cajetan confesseth that the Gospel doth no where express that the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ that we have this from the authority of the Church nay he goes farther that there is nothing in the Gospel which enforceth any man to understand these words of Christ this is my body in a proper and not a metaphorical sense but the Church having understood them in a proper sense they are to be so explained Which words in the Roman Edition of Cajetan are expunged by order of Pope i Aegid â—â—nink de sacrâ—â—â— Q. 75. art 1. n. 13. Pius V. Cardinal k de sacram l. 2. c. 3. Contarenus and l Loc. Theolog l. 3. c. 3. Melchior Canus one of the best most judicious Writers that Church ever had reckon this Doctrine among those which are not so expresly found in scripture I will add but one more of great authority in the Church and a reputed Martyr m contra captiv Babylon c. 10 n. 2. Fisher Bishop of Rochester who ingenuously confesseth that in the words of the Institution there is not one word from whence the true presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in our Mass can be proved So that we need not much contend that this Doctrine hath no certain foundation in Scripture when this is so fully and frankly acknowledged by our Adversaries themselves Secondly If there be no necessity of understanding our Saviours words in the sense of Transubstantiation I am sure there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise Whither we consider the like expressions in scripture where our Saviour sayes he is the door and the true Viue which the Church of Rome would mightily have triumph'd in had it been said this is my true Body And so likewise where the Church is said to be Christ's body and the Rock which followed the Israelites to be Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. They drank of that Rock which followed them and that Rock was
way the Papists have to bring themselves off from these manifest Absurdities is only a running farther into greater and their little Shifts and Evasions are so thin and Subtill Sophistry or rather such gross and thick falshoods that it could not be imagined that the Heathen Adversaries could ever know them and therefore be so civil as Boileau would make them * Cap. 10. l. 2. de aaor Euch. as not to lay those charges upon them as others do nor can any reasonable and impartial man ever believe them for they are plainly these two That they doe not worship what all the World sees they worship And that they doe not eat what they take into their Mouths and swallow down Which is in plain words an open Confession that they are ashamed to own what they plainly do We do not worship the Bread say they for that we believe is done away and is turned into the naturall Body of Christ and so we cannot be charged with Bread-worship But do ye not worship that which ye see and which ye have before you and which is carried about And would not any man that sees what that is think ye worship Bread or Wafer And could you ever perswade him that it was any thing else And if notwithstanding what you think of it against all Sense and Reason it be still Bread then I hope it is Bread that ye worship and till others think as wildely as ye do ye must give them leave to think and charge you thus But if it were true that ye did not worship the Bread yet ye must and do own that ye worship the Species of the Bread and how ye should do that without being guilty of another very gross Absurdity ye do not know your selves for ye must make them so united to Christ as to make one suppositum and so one Object of Worship as his Humanity and God-Head are and then according to this way of yours Christ may as well be said to be Impanated and United to Bread or its Species as some of you have taught * Belarm de Ruperto Abbate Tuitiensi l. 3. de Euch. c. 11 that the Bread in the Eucharist is assumed by the Logos as the humane Nature was But not to mention these which wheresoever ye turn ye stare ye full in the face and should make ye blush one would think had ye not put off all shame as well as all sense in this matter grant ye what ye would have that it is not Bread but the substantial Body Flesh and Blood of a man that is in the Host will this help much to mend the matter or to lessen the Absurdity and not rather increase and swell it For besides the incredible wonder that a bit of Bread should by a few words of every common Priest be turned immediately into the true and perfect Body of a man nay into ten thousand Bodies at the same time which is a greater Miracle then ever was done in the World and is as great almost as creating the World it self out of nothing and if it were true would make the Priest a God certainly and not a man and much rather to be worship'd then a bit of Bread as Lactantins sayes of the Heathen Idols He that made them ought rather to be worship'd then they * Meliorem esse qui fecit quam illa quae facta sunt si haec adoranda sunt artificem a quo facta sunt ipsum quoque multo potiori jure adorandum esse Lactant. Instit l. 2. c. 2 Besides this it seems it is the whole Body of a man then which is eaten and swallowed down instead of Bread for sure the same thing is not one thing when it is worship'd and another thing when it is eaten and then how barbarous and inhumane as well as absurd and ridiculous must this appear to any man that is not used to swallow the most substantial Nonsense as well as the whole Body of a man for a Morsel and then all the former Absurdities which I mentioned do return again of the Eating that which we worship which the Apologists thought so wild and extravagant in the Egyptian God-eaters Well then there is no other way but to say we don't eat him as we eat other food †Boil c. 10. l. 2. Comestionem substantiae corporis Christi non esse natur alem so might the Egyptians have said too if they had pleased tho how they can otherwise eat him 't is hard to understand but only in the heretical sense of Spiritual and Sacramental Eating unless they will at the same time say They do not eat him truly and naturally and yet do eat him so and they are so used to Contradictions in this point that I don't know whither they will make any more bones of this then of the rest or of the substantial Body of a man himself when they have got so large a Faith or rather so large a Swallow But how is it that ye do not eat him after a natural and carnal manner and yet it is a carnal Body that ye so much contend for and that ye really and truly eat and 't is a Carnal mouth and throat he is put into and sometimes a very soul and wicked one And yet this must by this carnal way eat the very body of Christ as well as the most faithfull But we do not grind this Body with our Teeth nor chew him in our Mouths as our other Food nor digest him in our Stomachs nor cast him out into the draught if ye do not as ye pretend being ashamed of the most shameful and abominable Consequences of it and yet a very great many among you have owned all that z Retract Bereng sub Nicol. 2 in Concil Rom. Verum corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi sensualiter non solum Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Sic Gualt Abbaud apud Boil p. 177. as not knowing how it could be otherwise and how if this eating be Spiritual and Sacramental Christs presence may not be so too which is the Heresie on the other side a Iste in omnibus veritatem subtrahit dum asserit omnia fieri sc fractionem attritâ—onem corporis Christi in Eucharistia non substantia sed in specie visibili forma panis Sacramento tantum Gualter adversus Abailard apud Boil 179. and ye seem to make strange Monsters of your selves that have spiritual Teeth and can spiritually and not naturally eat a natural and a carnal body and if ye do not thus eat it as ye eat other meat when ye take it into your Mouths and into your Stomacks and do every thing to it that you do to your other food which is as like eating as it were very true and natural eating and if it be not Bread which is thus eaten when it is just as like other Bread as is
that any other speculative scientifical Doctrine doth little or nothing conduce to a happy and blessed life but that on This our everlasting happiness doth depend and that we cannot reject This without certain Ruine Therefore we ought to take head that cunning Men do not deceive us that we do not hearken to the teachers of New Doctrineâ— which have no foundation in the Scripture their pretences to infallibility and demonstration in matters of Faith are false and unreasonable for they assume these great and unwarrantable privileges only to deceive the Ignorant and to obtrude fictitious articles of Faith upon Mankind Wherefore all that now remains is to make some short Reflections upon the Authours of Purgatory and other new-invented Doctrinâ—â— in the Church of Rome First They may be charged for imposing upon our belief things contrary to reason self-inconsistent and incongruous of this I will give but one instance which is their asserting that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament is changed into the real and substantial Body and Blood of Christ For this is the hardest thing that ever was put upon men in any Religion because they cannot admit it unless their reason be laid aside as no competent Judge in the matter unless also they give the lye to the report of their senses And if they do this how shall we think that GOD made our Faculties true which if he did not do we are absolutely discharged from all duty to him because we have no faculty that can resolve us that this is of GOD for if our reason must not be trusted we must cease to be Men if our senses are not to be believed the chiefest proof of Christians falls to the ground which was the sight of those who saw our Saviour after he was risen from the Dead Now if I may not believe the reason of my â—â—nd in conjunction with three or four of my senses how shâ—ll I know 〈…〉 that any thing is this or that therefore I say that this Doctrine is a gross invention of Men contrary both to reason and sense Secondly The Truths they do acknowledge are made void by subtile distinctions or equivocations as for example their Doctrine of Probability and of directing the intention if a Man can find any Doctour among them that held such an opinion it makes that Doctrine probable and there is nothing so contrary to the rules of Vertue and Conscience but what some Romish Casuistical Doctour hath resolved to be good and practicable just as Tully sayes there is nothing so absurd or ridiculous which some Philosopher or other hath not maintained and asserted So by directing their intention they may declare that which is false and deny that which is true because they intend the credit of their Church and Religion this mere intention shall excuse them from the guilt of downright falshood and lying They are so well practised in equivocations that you cannot confide in any words they speak they are so ambiguous and of such doubtfull meaning in their evasions their Speech shall bear a double sense whereas no Man ought to use wit and parts to impose upon another or to make a Man believe That which he doth not mean For the Christian Law is plain and obvious void of all ambiguity or ensnaring speeches free from all Sophistications and windings of Language never flies to words of a dubious or uncertain signification but plainly declares the truth to Men therefore these practices are contrary to that simplicity and plain heartedness which ought to be in the conversation of every Christian Thirdly They super-add to Religion things altogether unlikely to be true and dishonorable to GOD which will appear in these following particulars I. The use of Images in the Worship of God an Idolatry they are too guilty of otherwise they would never leave out the second Commandment and divide the Tenth into two to conceal iâ— from the People We find better Doctrine then this among the Philosopeers who say God is to be Worshipped by Purity of Mind for this is a rational service and a worshâ—p most suitable to an immaâ—erial Beeing it being the use of that in us which is the highest and noblest of our Faculties II. The veneration of Reliques a very vain and foolâ—sh thing for there can be no certainty at this distance of time what they are and if they were indeed what they are taken for what veneration is or can be due to them For inanimate â—hings are far inâ—eriour to those that have life and for the living to worshâ—p things that are dead is unaccountable and irrational III. The Invocation or worship of Angels and Saints our Fellâ—w creatures particularly of the Virgin Mary to whom they make more Prayers then to our Saviâ—uâ— himself alâ—hâ—ugh her Name be not mentioned in aâ—l the Epâ—stles of the Apostles altâ—ough Christ himself as foreseeing the degeneracy of the Church in this thing did ever restrain all exâ—ravagant imaginations of honour due to her yet the adoration of her is the most considerable part of their Religion But why should a Man so prostâ—ue himself as to Worship those I am sure God would not have me Worship for he would not have us adore any Creature as the Apostle argues Col. 2. 18. It is but a shew of humility to worship Angels who are placed in the highest order of Creatures and if they are not to be Worshipped sure none below them are and God hath declared there is but one supreme self-existent Beeing and one Mediatour between God and Man the Man Jesus Christ IV. They withhold the use of Scripture from the People because they say Knowledge of the very Oracles of God will make them contentious and disobedient to Authority if this be true then the blame of all this must be laid upon our blessed Saviour for revealing such a Doctrine to the World as this is and thereby we should condemn the Apostles for making known such a Doctrine to Men in a Tongue they understand but I suppose the Papists are not willing to lay all the miscarriages of the World upon Christ and his Apostles Although Men may abuse the Knowledge of the Scripture yet the abuse of a thing that is usefull was never accounted a sufficient reason for the taking it away therefore Men are not to be hindred from the Know-of the Scriptures for fear they should become proud or rebellious for this would be as if one should put out a Man's Eyes that he might the better follow him or that he might not loose his way for there is nothing in the whole Doctrine of out blessed Saviour which is unfite for any Man to know but what is plainly designed to promote holiness and the practice of a good life the Romanists do indeed pretend that the unity and peace of the Church cannot be maintained unless the People be kept in ignorance then the mischief will be that for the end of keeping Peace and Unity in the Church
miraculous signs of their Apostolical Office And if they had not had such Assurance themselves and could not have given proof to others of their mission there would have been a defect in the first promulgation of the Gospel and such as could not afterwards have been amended That which at first had been delivered with uncertainty would with greater uncertainty have been conveighed down to after Ages and Men who in process of time graft error upon certain Truth would much more have grafted error upon uncertain Opinion Ever since the Apostles times there has been True Faith and the Profession of it in the Catholick Church And it will be so till Faith shall expire and Men shall see him on whom they before believ'd For a Church cannot subsist without the Fundamentals of Christianity And Christ hath Sealed this Truth with his promise that there shall be a Church as long as this World continues * S. Mat. 28. 20. I mean by a Church a visible Society of Christians both Ministers and People for publick Worship on Earth cannot be invisible But the True Faith and the Profession of it is not fixed to any place or to any succession of Men in it God's Providence has written the contrary in the very Ashes of the Seven Churches of the lesser Asia Neither is any particular Church though so far infallible in Fundamentals as to be preserved from actual error an infallible Rule to all other Christians If they follow the Doctrine of it they erre not because it is true but if they follow that Church as an unerring Guide or Canon they mistake in the Rule and Motive of their Faith For that particular Church which Teacheth Truth might possibly have err'd and the Church which erres might have shined with the True Light But the whole Church cannot erre in any Age for then the very being of a Church would cease Neither doth it hence follow that the Faith of the Roman Church when Luther arose was the only true and certain Doctrine For that Church was not then the only visible Church on Earth The Greek Church for instance sake was then more visible than now it is and more Orthodox The Rich Papacy having much prevailed upon the necessities of it by Arguments guilded with Interest That Church did not erre in Fundamental Points the Article of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father by the Son which the Romans accuse of Heresie being easily acquitted of it if Men agreeing in the sense forbear contention about the Phrases Besides if our Fore-Fathers under the Papacy embraced the True Faith we have it still the Faith not being removed but the Corruption Their Question therefore Where was your Religion before Luther is not more pertinent amongst Disputers than this amongst Husbandmen Where was the Corn before it was weeded We have seen that necessary Faith is perpetual and it is as Prop. II manifest that wheresoever God requireth the belief of it he vouchsafeth sufficient means for information and unerring Assent Of all he does not require this belief for to all the Gospel is not preached and where it is preached there are Infants and Persons of Age so distempered in Mind as to remain unavoidably Children in understanding And though thâ— same sum of Doctrines is generally necessary to Salvation yet the Creed of all men is not of equal length seing they have unequal capacities But wheresoever there is a particular Society of Men who call themselves a Church yet erre actually in the necessary Articles of the Faith it is certain they were not forced into that error for want of external means For the Just Judge of the World would never have required Unity in the Faith upon pain of his Eternal displeasure if he had not given to Men Power sufficient for such Unity No Tyranâ— on Earth has been guilty of such undisguised injustice as that is which maketh a Law for the punishment of the Blind because they miss their way The Articles of Christian Religion come not to the Mind by natural reason but by Faith and Faith comes by hearing or reading and where these means are not offered a Man is rather an Ignorant Person then an Unbeliever Wherefore our Saviour told the perverse Jews * Joh. 15. 22 23. that if the Messiah had never been revealed to them they had not been answerable for the Sin of Infidelity But that since he was come to them and by them despised their Infidelity was blackned with great aggravation The means then are sufficient wheresoever the end Prop. III. is absolutely required but whatsoever those means are the Act of Assent is to be utlimately resolved into each Mans Personal reason For no Man can believe or assent but upon some ground or motive which appears credible to him He could not believe unless he had some reason or other why he believed When all is done said Mr. Thorndike * To the Reader of the Dis of Govern of Churches Men must and will be Judges for themselves I do not quote the saying because it is extraordinary but because that Learned Man said it who was careful to pay to Authority its minutest dues If a man believe upon Authority he hath a farther reason for the believing of it He is not willing to take Pains in examining that which is proposed to him or he thinks himself of less Ability in understanding then those from whom he borrows his Light If he desireth another to judge for him his choice is determined by the Opinion he hath conceived of him Every Man has his reason though it be a weak one and such as cannot justify it self or him Something at last turns the Ballance though it be but a Feather This the Romanists own as well as the Reformed till it toucheth them in the case of a new Convert To induce a Man of another particular Church to embrace their Communion they submit these weighty points to his private Judgement What is a True Church and which are the marks of it What is the Roman Church And whither the marks of the True Church do only belong unto the Roman What Men or what Books spâ—â—k the sense of that Church They tell us †R. H. Guide in Controv. in Pref. p. 3. That the Light of a Man 's own reason first serves him so far as to the discovery of a Guide Also that in this discovery the Divine Providence hath left it so clear and evident that a sincere and unbyassed quest cannot miscarry But when once this Guide is found ouâ— the Man is afterwards for all other things that are prescribed by this Guide to subject and resign his reason As if it were not as difficult to judge of such a Guide as of his direction It seems the Roman Church is like a Cave into which a Man has Light enough to enter but when once he is entred he is in thick Darkness But how subservient soever our reason may be
Palaestinians Egyptians Thebaeans Libyans Mesopotamians a Persiaâ— a Socrat. â— Hâ—l c. 8. p. 19. Scythian Bishop and many others from other Countries But there was but one Bishop for Africa one for Spain one for Gaul two Priests as Deputies of the infirm and Aged Bishop of Rome Whilst for Instance sake there were seventeen Bishops for the small Province of * V. Concil Labb Tom. 2. p. 50. c. Isauria yet such Councils are very useful such we reverence but God did not set them up as the only and the infallible Guides of Faith If there were such Guides what Guided the Church which was before them By what rule was Ebion judged before the Council of Nice How can we be infallibly Guided by them in Controversies of Faith not determined by them nay not brought before them nay scarce moved till these latter dayes Such for the purpose are the Controversies about the vertue of the Sacrifice of Christ and of Justification by the Faith of meere recumbence upon his Merits Or how shall a private Man who erres in the Faith be delivered from his Heresy seing he may die some years ere a Council can assemble or being assembled can form its decrees Arius vented his Heresie about ten years before the Council of Nice was called for the suppressing of it And soon after he had given vent to it it spread throughout Egypt and Lybia and the upper Thebes as Socrates †has reported And in a short time many other Provinces and Cities were Socr. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 6. p. 9. infected with the contagion of it And in the pretended Council of Trent no less then five Popes were successively concerned and it lasted in several places longer then two legal lives of a Man * From A. 1545. to A. 1563. There was indeed a Canon in the Western Church †V. Council Const sess 39. for the holding of a Council once in the space of each ten years But that Canon has not been hitherto obeyed and as affairs stand in the Church it is impracticable For the Pope will exclude all the Greek and Reformed Bishops He will crowd the Assembly with Bishops of his own Creation and with Abbots also he will not admit of former Councils unless they serve his purpose not so much as that of Nice it self * V. Greg. magn Ep. 6. 31. Leo. 1. Ep. 53. Gelas 1. Ep. 13. He will be the Judge though about his own Supremacy He will multiply Italians and others who upon Oath †Concil Labb Tom. 10. p. 23. 379. Pontific Roman owe their votes to him He will not hold a Council upon the terms approved by all Romish Princes Nor did they agree at their last Council the Emperour would noâ— send his Bishops to Bologna nor the French King his to Tren ' And though the French Church believed the Doctrines of that Synod yet they did not receive them from the Authority of it but they embraced them as the former Doctrines of the Roman Church And the Parisian ' Faculty a A. D. 1542 in coll Soâ—b See Richer H. conc general vol. 4. p. 162 163. c. prepared the way to the Articles of Trent Notwithstanding all this we firmly believe that at least the first four general Councils did not err in Faith and it is pious to think that God would not suffer so great a temptation in the Church on Earth Yet still we believe those Councils not to be infallible in their constitution but so far as they followed an infallible rule For the greaâ—est Truth is not alwayes with the greatest number And great numbers may appear on contrary sides The Council of Constantinople under Constantine Copronymus consisting of three hundred thirty eight Bishops decreed against the use of Images in Churches Yet the 2d Synod of Nice consisting of about three hundred and fifty Bishops determin'd for it And a while after in the West the council of Frankford consisting of about three hundred Bishops reversed that decree And after that the council of Trent did re-establish it though there the voting Persons were not fifty With such uncertain doubts of belief must they move who follow a Guide in Religion without reference to a farther rule But here there is offered to us by the Guide in Controversiâ—â— * an Objection of which this is the sum The fifth Canon of the Church of England does declare Object R. H. Annot. on D. Stil Answer p. 82 83. that the thirty nine Articles were agreed upon for the avoidance of the diversities of opinions and the establishing of consent touching true Religion Consent touching true Religion is consent in Matters of Faith Establishing of consent relateth both to Layety and Clergy The third and fourth Canons of 1640. Decree the Excommunication of those who will not-abjure their holding Popery and Socinianism The Reformed Churches in France teach the like Doctrine threatning to cut them off from the Church who acquiesce not in the resolution of a National Synod ‡ Art 31. ch 5 du consisâ—â—ire si un ou plusieurs c. The same course was taken with the Remonstrants in the Synod of Dort * Syn. Dord sess 138. Wherefore Protestants ought not to detract from the Authority of general Councils whilst they assume to themselves so great a Power in their particular Synods The force of this Objection is thus removed Answer Every Church hath Power of admitting or excluding Members else it hath not means sufficient to its end the order and concord of its Body Every particular Church ought to believe that it does not erre in its deflnitions for it ought not to impose any known error upon its Members But though it believes it does not erre it does not believe it upon this reason because God hath made it an infallible Guide but rather for this because it hath sincerely and with Gods assistance followeth a rule which is infallible And upon this supposition it imposeth Doctrines and excludeth such as with coâ—umacy dissent from them a See Artic. 20. 21 22. 4. This Guide is not the present Church declaring to particular Christians the sense of the church of former Ages How can this declaration be made seing Churches differ and each Church calls it self the true one and pretendeth to the Primitive pattern The Church of Rome hath on her side the suffrages of all the Councils and Fathers the first the middle the last if Campiain the Jesuite may be believed b camp Rat. 3. p. 180. Rat. 5. p. 185. On the other hand Monsieur Larroque hath Written a Book of the confirmity of the Protestant churches in France with the Discipline of the Christian Ancient church taking it for granted that their Doctrine was catholick And we likewise pretend both to the Doctrine and Discipline of it All of us cannot be in the right The Roman church without any proof calleth her self the church catholick and she pretendeth to
seventh Council * Syn. 7. Act. ult p. 886. Con. in Labb Richer H. Conc. Gen. vol. 1. p. 658. Ad calc ejusd act 7 in omn. editionibus concil legitur Epist Synod quam Tarasius c. Et diserte narrat cunctos Patres Honorium damnasse condemned as a Monothilite And he was expresly anathematized for confirming the wicked Doctrine of Sergius The guilt of Heresie in Honorius is owned in the Solemn Profession of Faith made by the Popes at their entrance on the Papacy a Lib. diurn Pontif. con sid 2. p. 41. Autores verò novi hoeretici dogmatis Sergium Pyrrhum Paulum Petru◠Episcopos unà cum Honorio qui pravis eorum assertionibut fomentum impendit pariterque Theodorum Pharamitanum Cyrum Alexandrinum cum eorum imitatoribus c. This matter is so manifest that Melchior Canus b Melch can Loci com l. 6. c. ult p. 242 243. c. professeth no Sophistry is artful enough to put the Colour of a plausible defence upon it A late Romanist hath undertaken to write the History of the Monothilites c Anton. Dez Hist Mon. Par 1678. and the Defence of Honorius seemeth to be the principal motive to that undertaking Yet so great is the power of Truth and such in this case is the plainness of it that in the Apologist himself we find these concessions That the Pope a Id. ib. p. 224. 325 226 218. was condemned by the Council and that the Council was not to be blamed †that Pope Leo the second owned both the Council and the Sentence and that Honorius was Sentenc'd as an Heretick * Id. p. 220. He would abate this guilt by saying b P. 207 208. that Honorius erred as a private Person and not as Head of the Church because his Epistle was hortatory and not compulsive It is true he erred not as Head of the Church for such he was not neither as such was he owned But he erred as a publick person and with Heretical obstinacy For Pope Leo as he noteth said concerning him that he had made it his business to betray and subvert the Holy Faith c Id. p. 122. profanā proditione immaculatam fidem subvertere conatus est Flammam confovit p. 123. Now this matter of Fact sufficeth for the refuting all the fallacious reasonings of the patrons of Papal infallibility For all must agree that they d de Socer Christ p. 40 are not unerring Guides who actually erre The Sieur de Balzac d Socr. Chr. p. 40. mocks at the weakness of one of the Romish Fathers who offered four reasons to prove that the Duke D' Espernon was not returned out of England And offered them to a Gentleman who had seen him since his return There seemeth no fitness in the constituting of such a Arg. V Guide nor any necessity for it Had it been agreeable to Gods Wisdom his Wisdom would not have been wanting to it self God having made Man a Reasonable Creature would not make void the use of deliberation and the freedom of his judgment There is no vertue in the Assent where the Eye is forced open and Light held directly to it It is enough that God the rewarder of them who believe hath given Men sufficient faculties and sufficient means And seing Holiness is as necessary to the pleasing of GOD and to the peace of the World as Union in Doctrine to which there is too frequently given a lifeless assent seing there must be Christian Obedience as long as there is a Church seing as the Guide in Controversie * R. H. Annot. on D. St. Answ p. 81. himself urgeth the Catholick Church and all the parts of it are believed in the Creed to be Holy as well as Orthodox We ask not the Romanists an impertinent Question when we desire them to tell us why a means to infallibility in the judgement rather than irresistibleness in the pious choice of the Will is to be by Heaven provided in the Church Both seem a kind of Destination of equal necessity But though the Reformed especially those of the Prop. V. Church of England see no necessity for an infallible Guide nor believe there is one on the face of the earth yet they do not reject all Ecclesiastical Guidance but allow it great place in matters of Discipline and Order and some place also though not that of an unerring Judge in Matters of Faith At the beginning of the Reformation the Protestants though they refused the judgment of the Pope their Enemy yet they declined not the determination of a Council And in the Assembly at Ausburgh the Romanists and Protestants agreed in a council as the Umpire of their publick difference At this the Pope was so alarumed saith the Sieur de Mezary * Hij A. 1. that he wrote to the Kings of France and England that he would do all they would desire provided they hindred the calling of a Council In the Reformation of the Church of England great regard was had to the Primitive Fathers and Councils And the aforesaid French Historian was as much mistaken in the affairs of Our Church when he said of our Religion that it was a medly of the Opinions of Calvin and Luther a A. as he was afterwards in the affairs of our State when he said King James was elected at the Guild-hall King of England b 10. A. 1603. The Romanists represent us very falsly whilst they fix upon us a private Spirit as it stands in opposition to the Authority of the Catholick Church Mr. Alabaster c See J. Racsters 7 motives of W. A p. 11 12. expresseth one motive to his conversion to the Roman Church in these Words Weigh together the Spouse of Christ with Luther Calvin Melancthon Oecumenical councils with private opinions The Reverend learned Fathers with Arius Actius Vigilantius Men alwayes in their time Burned for Hereticks of which words the former are false reasoning the latter is false History The Bishop of Meaux d Confer avec M. claut de p. 110. reasons after the same fallacious manner Supposing a Protestant to be of this perswasion that he can understand the Scriptures better than all the rest of the Church together of which perswasion he saith very truly that it exalteth Pride and removeth Docility The Guide in controversies d R. H. Annot on D. St. Answ p. 84. puts the Question wrong in these terms Whither a Protestant in refusing the submission of his judgment to the Authority or Infallibility of the Catholick Church in her Councils can have in several Articles of necessary Faith wherein the sense of Scripture is controverted as sure a Foundation of his Faith as he who submits his judgement to the foresaid Authority or also Infallibility Here the Catholick Church is put in place of the Roman Authority and Infallibility are joyned together and it is suggested dishonestly concerning the Reformed that they lay aside
the meaning themselves They give them light into the nature of the Doctrine they do not require them to take it upon trust They endeavour to open their understandings that they may themselves understand the Scriptures And if they cannot themselves understand the Doctrine it will be of little use to them in their lives For they then believe in general that it is a necessary Truth but what Truth it is or for what ends it is necessary they apprehend not A Foolish Master in the Mathematicks may require his Schollars to take it upon his word that a Problem is demonstrated But a wâ—se and useful teacher will give them light into the manner of the demonstration in such sort that they themselves shall at last be able to judge that it is truly performed And till they can do this they are not instructed St. Hierom relates it in praise of Marcella a Roman Lady a S. Hieron in praef ad comment in Epist ad Galat Vt sentirem me non tam Discipulam habere quam Judicem v. Psal â—19 99. that she would not receive any thing from him after the Pythagorean manner or upon bare Authority She would with such care examine all things that She seemed to him not so much his Schollar as his Judge It is certain that there are great depths and obscure Mysteries in the Holy Bible But the Doctrines of Christian Faâ—th are to the sincere and industrious and such as wait on God in the way of the Reformed Church sufficiently plain But to the Idle the prejudiced the captious Light it self is Darkness The Romanists affright with this pretence of obscurity and profoundness as if we must not adventure into any part of the Waters because in some places we may go beyond our depth If there are hard and difficult places which the Vnstable wrest who required their meanness to make a Judgment of that for which they might perceive themselves to be insufficient But whilst St. Peter speaketh of some few places in St. Paul's writtings which are obscure he does at the same time suppose many others to be plain enough for the capacities of the Unlearned And if they be evil Men though very Learned they will wrest the plainest places and as some did in St. Hieroms * S. Hieron in Ep. ad Paulin. ad sensum suum incongrua aptant testimonia Et ad voluntatem suaÌ„ S Scripturam repugnantem trahunt days they will draw violently to their private sense a Text of Scripture which is incongruously and with reluctance applied to it It is true all Sects of Christians cite the Scriptures but that does not prove the obscurity of those Sacred writings It rather shews the Partiality Boldness and Sophistry of those who alledge them All Laws are obscure if this Argument hath force in it For every Man in his own case has the Law on his side Men take up their opinions and Heresies from other reasons and then because the name of Scripture is venerable they rake into the several Books of it and they bend and torture places and force them on their side by unnatural construction So do the Socinians producing all niceties of Grammar and Criticism in a matter of Faith Yet the Guide in Controversies a R. H. Guide c. Disc 4. p. 375 376 377 378. c. useth it as an Argument against the plainness of this Rule of Faith that the Socinians cite the Holy Scriptures in favour of their Heresie But is not this Argument two-edged And will it not cut as well on the other side and do Execution against the words of Fathers and Councils and the Apostolical Creed it self For the Socinians those especially who are turned Arians since Petavius hath furnished them with Quotations will cite the writings of the Ancients And Slichtingius a mere Socinian * V. Confess fid Christ ed. nom Eccl. Polon c. hath expounded every Article of the Creed in a sense agreeable to the Heresie of his Master But if the Scriptures were so obscure in necessary matters what remedy would be administred by the Roman Church They cannot offer to us any Ancient Infallible exposition What the Antienâ—s have said the Reformed generally understand much better then Popes amongst whom there have been some who could scarse read the Holy Gospel in Latin For the Fathers of the earliest Ages they were more busied in writing against Heresies then in explaining of Scriptures Nor to this day hath the Roman Church given any Authentick Collection of Expositions either of the Ancients or of her own And if we must go to any Church for a comment on the Scriptures let the Roman be one of our last Refuges For it is manifest that the Key the Papalins use is the Wordly Polity of that Church And as they like so they interpret Had not they governed themselves by this art we should not have found in the writings of their Popes and in the very Caâ—â—â— Law it self those words which were spoken to Jeremiah expounded of the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome a V. Innoc. 3. in decret Greg. l. 1. tit 33. c. 6. Greg. Ep 12 Extrav de Major Obed. 1. P. Pi. 5. in Bulla Cont. R. Eliz. in Camd. Annal A. 1570. I have set thee over Kings to root out to pluck up and to destroy b Jerem. 1. 10. The Donatists found their Church in these words of the Canticles Tell me thou whom my Soul loveth where thou feedest where thou makest thy Flock to rest at noon For they expounded this as it 〈◊〉 them best of the Flock of their 〈◊〉 the Southern Countrey of Africa Such Exâ—â—unders of Scripture are those Popish Writers who interpret Feed my sheep of the Universal Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome and conclude that a Pastâ—r must drive away Wolves or depose Princes huâ—â—ul to the Church But the straining of such Metaphorical expressions as an excellent Person * D. Falkner in Christ Loy p. 315. saith proves only that they want better proofs And by a like way of interpretation from the same Text it might be concluded that all Christians are Fools because Sheep are silly Creatures No expositions are more besides the sense of the Text or more ridiculous then some of those which may be found in the Roman Church And those who composed them appear to have looked asquint on the Scriptures For whilst they looked on them they seemed to have looked another way I will instance only in a few of those many absurd expositions with which the Roman Breviary abounds The words of the Angel to the Holy Virgin a sword shall go through thine own soul also are a Domin infrâ— Octav. Nati v. in 2. nocturno Lect. 8. p. 175. interpreted of that word of God which is quick and powerful and sharper then any two-edged sword And this sense is designed as an evasion of their reasoning who from that Text conclude concerning the blessed Virgin
Rule whereby our Church is reformed and to which we appeal There are but three things necessary to be understood by Christians either the Articles of Faith or the Rules of Life or the external Order and Discipline of the Church and Administration of Religious Offices 1. As for the Rules of Life all those Duties which we owe to GOD and Men they are so plainly contained in the Holy Scriptures that no honest man can mistake them I suppose the church of Rome her self will not pretend that there is any need of an infallible Interpreter to teach men what is mean'd by Loving GOD with all our Heart and our Neighbour as our selves 2. As for the Articles of Faith those which are fundamental to the christian Religion and which every Christian ought to believe are so plain in Scripture that every honest and unprejudiced man may understand them but however as I observed before we govern our selves in these things by the received Doctrine of the catholick church of the first and purest Ages and if this be not a safe Rule we can be certain of nothing And what the catholick Faith was we learn from those short summaries of Faith which were universally owned by all catholick churches For what we now call the Apostles creed was very anciently received in all churches with some little variety indeed of Words and Phrase but without any difference of sense and the catholick Faith was not only preserved in such short Summaries and creeds which were as liable to be perverted by Hereticks as the Scriptures themselves but was more largely explained in the Writings of the ancient Fathers and though this will not enable us to understand every Phrase and Expression of Scripture but we must use other means to do that as Skill in the Original Languages a knowledge of ancient customs and ancient Disputes to which the Apostles frequently aflude a consideration of the Scope and Design of the place c. Yet the catholick Faith received and owned by the Primitive Church is so far a Rule as it directs us to Expound Scripture to a true catholick sense As St. Paul commands the Romans that those who prophesie should Prophesie according to the proportion of Faith Rom. 12. 6. Kat ' analogian pisteos according to the Analogie of Faith That is that in the interpreting the Scriptures of the Old Testament they should expound them to a christian sense according to those Doctrines of the christian Faith which he had taught them and this was a safe Rule for expounding the Old Testament which contained the Types and Figures and Prophesies of the Gospel-State And thus in expounding the new Testament now it is committed to writting we must Prohpesie according to the Analogie of Faith or as he commands Timothy in his Preaching Hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard from me 2. Tim. 1. 13. It seems the Apostle had given him a form of sound words according to which he was to direct his Preaching whither this refers to a short summary of Faith such as our Creed is I cannot say though it is not improbable it may but it is plain we have a form of sound words delivered to us by the Catholick Church which contains the true Catholick Faith and therefore ought to be so far a Rule to us in expounding Scripture as never to contradict any thing which is contained in it for that is to contradict the Faith of the Catholick Church And when one great Article of this Faith concerning the Eternal God-head of Christ the Son of God was corrupted by Arius a Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria it gave an occasion for a full Declaration of the sense of the Catholick Church about it And though the effects of that Controversie were very fatal to the Church yet it was very happy that it broke out in such an Age when it could be determined with greater certainty and greater Authority then it could have been in any succeeding Age of the Church by men who were venerable for their Age for their Wisdom for their Piety for their undaunted Confessions under Heathen and Persecuring Emperours who knew what the sense of the Catholick Church was before this Controversie broke out and before External Prosperity had through ease and wantonness corrupted the Faith as well as the Manners of Christians 3. As for matters of External Order Discipline and Government the Universall Practice of the Catholick Church is the best and safest Comment on these General Rules and Directions we have laid down in Scripture There is no doubt at all but the Apostles did appoint Governours and Rules of Order and Discipline in the Churches planted by them what these were the Christians of those dayes saw with their eyes â— in the dayly practice of the Church and therefore the Apostles in those Epistles which they wrote to their several Churches did not give them so punctual and particular an account of those matters which they so well knew before but as occasion served make only some accidental mention of these things and that in such general terms as were well enough understood by them who knew the practice of the Church in that Age but it may be cannot meerly by the force of the words which may be capable of several Senses be so certainly and demonstratively determined to any one sense by us who did not see what was done in those dayes as to avoid all possible Cavils of contentious men This has occasioned those disputes concerning Infant Baptism the several Orders and Degrees of Church Governours the Rites and ceremonies of Religious Worship and the like Those who lived in those dayes and saw what the Apostles did in these matters could not doubt of these things thought it were not in express words said that infants should be baptized with their Parents or that Bishops are a Superiour Order to Presbyters and Presbyters to Deacons or that it is lawful for the Governours of the Church to institute and appoint some significant Rites and ceremonies for the more decent and orderly Administration of Religious Offices But because there is not a precise and punctual account given of these matters in the Writings of the Apostles which there was no need of then when these things were obvious to their very Senses some perverse and unreasonable Disputers who obstinately reject all other Evidence will judge of these things just as they please themselves and alter their Opinions and Fancies as often as they please But now if there be any certain way to know what the practice of the Apostles was in these cases this is the best comment we can possibly have on such Texts as are not sufficiently plain and express without it Now me thinks any reasonable man must acknowledge that the best way to understand the Practice of the Apostles is from the Practice of the Catholick Church in succeeding Ages especially while the memory of the Apostles was fresh and the Church
found there as the Churches infallibility is But however that be after all this boast of infallibility a Papist has no more infallible Foundation for his Faith then a Protestant has nor half so much We believe the Articles of the Christian Faith because we find them plainly taught in Scripture and universally received as the sense of Scripture by the Catholick church in the best and purest Ages of it A Papist believes the Church to be Infallible because he thinks he finds it in Scripture though the Catholick church for many Ages never found it there and the greatest part of the Christian church to this day cannot find it there Now if they will but allow that a Protestant though a poor fallible Creature may reason about the sense of Scripture as well as a Papist and that the Evidence of reason is the same to both then we Protestants stand upon as firm ground as the Papists here and are at least as certain of all those Doctrines of Faith which we find in the Scripture and are ready to prove by it as they are of their Churches infallibility but then we have an additional Security that we Expound the Scriptures right which they want and that is the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church which confirms all the Articles of our Faith and Rules of Worship and Discipline but gives not the least intimation that the Pope or Church of Rome was thought infallible by them and if the Primitive Church was ignorant of this which is the best witness of Apostolical Tradition it is most probable that no such thing is contained in Scripture though some mercenary Flatterers of the Pope have endeavoured to perswade the World that they found it there So that we have a greater assurance of all the Articles of our Religion from Scripture and Catholick Tradition then a Papist can have of the Churches Infallibility and yet he can have no greater assurance of any other Doctrines of Religion which he believes upon the Churches Infallibility then he has of Infallibility it self So that in the last Resolution of Faith the Protestant has much the advantage of the Papist for the Protestant resolves his Faith into the Authority of the Scriptures Expounded by the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church the Papist resolves his into the Infallibility of the Church which he finds out only by Expounding Scripture by a private Spirit without the Authority of any church but that whose Authority is under dispute And as the Doctrine of Infallibility is of no use in the last Resolution of Faith so it is wholly useless in disputing with such Hereticks as we are who deny Infallibility for it is a vain thing to attempt to impose any absurd or groundless and uncatholick Doctrines upon us by the Churches infallible Authority who believe there is no such infallible Judge but are resolved to trust our own Eyes and to adhere to Scripture and the Catholick Faith of the Primitive Church in these matters And therefore the great Advocats for the Church of Rome are forced to take the same course in confuting Heresies as they call them that we do They alledge the Authority of Scripture the Authority of Fathers and Councils to justifie their Innovations and here we willingl joyn issue with them and are ready to prove that Scripture and all true Antiquity is on our side and this has been often and unanswerably proved by the learned Patrons of the Reformation But there are some very material things to be observed from hence for our present purpose For either they think this a good way to prove what they intend and to convince Gain-sayers the Authority of Scripture and Primitive Antiquity or they do not If they do not think this a good way to what purpose are there so many Volumes of Controversie written Why do they produce Scripture and Fathers and Councils to justifie the Usâ—â—pations of their Church and those new Additions they have made to the Christian Faith and Worship If this be not a good way to convince a Heretick why do they give themselves and us such an impertinent trouble If this be a good way then we are in a good way already we take that very way for our satisfaction which by their own Confession and Practice is a very proper means for the conviction of Hereticks and to discover the Truth and after the most diligent inquiries we can make we are satisfied that the Truth is on our side If the Authority of Scripture signifie any thing in this matter then it seems Hereticks who reject â—he Authority of an Infallible Judge may understand Scripâ—ure without an Infallible Interpreter by the Exercise of Reason and Judgment in studying of them otherwise why do they pretend to expound Scripture to us and to convince us by Reason and Argument what the true sense of Scripture is If the Authority of the Primitive Church and first Christian Writers be considerable as they acknowledge it is by their appeals to them then at least the present Pope or Church is not the sole infallible Judge of controversies unless they will say that we must not Judge of the Doctrine or Practice of the Primitive Church by ancient records and then Baronius his Annals are worth nothing but by the Judgement and Practice of the present Church The sum is this There is great reason to suspect that the Church of Rome her self does not believe her own Infallibility no more than we Protestants do for if she does she ought not to suffer her Doctors to dispute with Hereticks from any other Topick but her own Authority when they vie Reasons and Arâ—uments with us and dispute from Scripture and Antiquity they appeal from the infallibility of the present church to every mans private Reason and Judgment as much as any Protestant does and if the Articles of the Christian Faith may be establish'd by Scripture and Antiquity without an infallible Judge as they suppose they may be by their frequent attempts to do it this plainly overthrows the necessity of an infallible Judge In a word not to take notice now how weak and groundless this pretence of Infallibility is it is evident that it is a very useless Doctrine for those who believe the churches Infallibility have no greater assurance of their Faith then we have who do not believe it and those who do not believe the churches Infallibility can never be confuted by it So that it can neither establish any mans Faith nor confute any Heresies that is it is of no use at all The Church of England Reverences the Authority of the Primitive Church as the best witness of the Apostolical Faith and practice but yet resolves her Faith at last into the Authority of the Scriptures She receives nothing for an Article of Faith which she does not find plainly enough taught in Scripture but it is a great confirmation of her interpretation of Scripture that the Primitive church owned the
but had great numbers of Disciples a visible Society of Christians who followed their Judgements Some of these sadly bewailed the degenerate state of the Roman church others petitioned for and advised not only the correction of the abuses of good Doctrines and innocent Institutions but the Reformation of gross Errours and scandalous Additions to the christian Faith and others in great Authority promised an amendement and to reduce the whole frame of christianity to its Primitive sense Model And the famous council of Trent was promis'd and begun to rectifie Errours and Abuses creept into the Romish Faith and Government yet after a long Sitting it fatally concluded confirming those corruptions which was hop'd after so many complaints and addresses with strong reasons for them should have been throughly redrest and reform'd The Original of their barbarous Inquisition will be a standing record of the frequent and stout oppositions that were made against the Romish Innovation in the christian Faith And so long as the Blood of the numerous Albigenses and Waldenses cryes to Heaven for Vengeance against the Papal cruelty we have a cloud of Witnesses for this Truth who resisted unto Death the new Doctrines of Rome The carriage of old Wicliff and his Followers tells us plainly in story that the corruptions of Rome had no such quiet possession but ever and anone some or other inconsiderable numbers did endeavour to eject them out of their hold though they paid dear for it And so long as the Treachery of their council of Constance about the safe conduct granted to poor Huss and his Disciples in number above forty thousand remains upon record never to be forgotten or forgiven so long we have clear evidences of strong resistance made to the Romish Religion before the times of Luther And in most Countries and times where and when the Romish corruptions began from small and obscure beginings to be gross and plain some or other in greater or lesser numbers began to Renounce and Protest against them What though some of these early Reformers might hold some erroneous Opinions which we our selves condemn yet however they opposed the Romish Church in her corruptions and these tended to a Reformation which was compleated only by degrâ—eâ—â— and 't is no wonder some Stumbled in such a night of Ignorance And have not the Agents of Rome destroyed the Papers and Records disguis'd their Adversaries and falsify'd their Opinions to serve the power and Interest of their great Mistriss They therefore branded the Waldenses with the name of Manichaism and that they affirmed two Principles or Originals of all things because they asserted that the Emperour was independent of the Pope and that they denyed CHRIST to be the Son of GOD because they could not believe a crust of Bread to be CHRIST And they have fram'd as lewd stories against many excellent Men of the latâ—r Ages who withstood the approaches of their Doctrine and Government which we certainly know and the more ingenuous among them confess to be notoriously false Though we have reason to believe because of the severity and industry of the Romish Factors ever warm against those who opposed her Practises a great number of Honest and Learned Men as those Ages would afford are buried in obscurity and their names unknown there being an Expurgatorian Index for the merits of such Men as well as Books and Editions yet we have a sufficient Catalogue of them who kept up the Title and claim of old Christianity would not suffer their new Errors to plead prescription 2. By shewing what Errours and Mistakes are included in the Question 1. That these new Errors of Rome are absolutely necessary to the being of a Christian Church For though we believe all that Christ and his Apostles taught all things that are contain'd in the Holy Scriptures all things that undoubted Tradition or good Reason proves to drive themselves from both or either yet because we do not assent and Subscribe to the new Articles of Faith that Rome hath invented for us we cease to be a Christian Church are mark'd for Hereticks which are worse than Pagans with them and must be certainly damn'd Nay should we embrace all the other Doctrines of Rome and deny only the Popes Authority and Supremacy that Epitome of their Christianity it would avail us little we are Heathens still Should we reject but one Article of Pope Pius's Creed suppose the Doctrine of Purgatory or Merit yet because this questions Infallibility the centâ—e of all their Religion we are in the state of Damnation still Should we receive their Doctrines as probable and in a larger and more favâ—urable meaning yet because we do not entertain them as Articles of Faith in the sense of the Church our case is not mended we shall meeâ— with Fires here and hereafâ—er for our reward Should we wink and swallow them all down with a good Catholick stomach yet iâ— the Bishop of Rome should give out a new Edition of Faith enlarged with many more monstrous Doctrines and Opinions yet if we boggle and kick at them all our former Righteousness shall not not be remembred we are Apostates worse than Truks and Infidels and who can tell what this Infallible and powerful Guide of â—â—â—â—stendom will do For when things obscure or of an indifferent Nature when things wherein they differ among themselves and only serve a temporal Interest when Opinions which they can dispense withal upon occasion when only the modes and manner of Truth when Contradictories and Doctrines directly leading unto impiety and things Barbarous and Blasphemous have been christened Articles of Faith and Fundamentals of Religion have we not just reason to suspect as ill or worsé may be done again And the intrigues of Trent may be acted once more and as many new Articles of Faith as Titular Bishops by the same Spirit moving in the same manner were not the first and early Christians sound Members of Christs Body though they never thought of such wild Opinions as these and publish'd truths directly contrary to them And could I suppose them to have known these Innovations out of Zeal and Fidelity to their trust would have detested and abhor'd them Was Christ negligent in the discharge of his mighty Office and his Apostles defective in their Duties and Ministry not to acquaint the first Christians with these great truths and were they reveal'd in the Tridentine Council only to us upon whom the ends of the world are come These Primitive Disciples of Christ thought themselves secure of Heaven by this short Creed that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God And the contrary was the character of the Man of Sin that denied that Jesus was come in the Flesh that he was the God incarnate and the true Messiah and were scandalized at his meanness and obscurity S. Paul told the Jaylor that certainly he would be saved if he believed that Jesus was the Christ all other Fundamentals of Christianity one
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
to this effect That Tradition which was of so much use in the Primitive Church was not unwritten Traditions or Customs commended or ratified by the supposed infallibility of any visible Church but did especially consist in the Confessions or Registers of particular Churches And the unanimous consent of so many several Churches as exhibited their Consessions to the Nicene Council out of such Forms as had been framed and taught before this Controversie arose about the Divinity of CHRIST and that voluntaâ—ily and freely these Churches being not dependent one upon another nor overswayed by any Authority over them nor misled by Faction to frame their Confessions of Faith by imitation or according to some patern set them was a pregnant argument that this Faith wherein they all agreed had been delivered to them by the Apostles and their Followers and was he true meaning of the holy Writings in this great Article and evidently proved that Arius did obtrude such interprerations of Scripture as had not been heard of before or were but the sense of some private persons in the Church and not of the generality of Believers In short the unanimous consent of so many distinct visible Churches as exhibited their several Consessions Catechisms or Testimonies of their own Forefathers Faith unto the Council of Nice was an argument of the same force and efficacy against Arius and his Partakers as the general consent and practice of all Nations in worshipping a Divine Power in all Ages is against Atheists Nothing but the ingrafted notion of a Deity could have induced so many several Nations so much different in natural disposition in civil Discipline and Education to effect or practise the duty of Adoration And nothing but the evidence of the ingrafied word as St. James calls the Gospel delivered by CHRIST and his Apostles in the holy Scriptures could have kept so many several Churches as communicated their Confessions unto that Council in the unity of the same Faith The like may be said of the rest of the four first General Councils whose Decrees are a great confirmation of our belief because they deliver to us the consent of the Churches of CHRIST in those great Truths which they assert out of the holy Scriptures And could there any Traditive Interpretation of the whole Scripture be produced upon the Authority of such Original Tradition as that now named we would most thankfully and joyfully receive it But there never was any such pretended no not by the Roman Church whose Doctors differ among themselves about the meaning of hundreds of places in the Bible Which they would not do sure nor spend their time unprofiâ—ably in making the best conjectures they are able if they knew of any exposition of those places in which all Christian Doctors had agreed from the beginning V. But more then this we allow that Tradition gives us a considerable assistance in such points as are not in so many letters and syllables contained in the Scriptures but may be gathered from thence by good and manifest reasoning Or in plainer words perhaps whatsoever Tradition justifies any Doctrine that may be proved by the Scriptures though not found in express terms there we acknowledge to be of great use and readily receive and follow it as serving very much to establish us more firmly in that Truth when we see all Christians have adhered to it This may be called a confirming Tradition of which we have an instance in the Doctrine of Infant-Baptism which some ancient Fathers call an Apostolical Tradition Not that it cannot be proved by any place of Scripture no such matter for though we do not find it written in so many words that Infants are to be baptised or that the Apostles baptised Infants yet it may be proved out of the Scriptures and the Fathers themselves who call it an Apostolical Tradition do alledge testimonies of the Scriptures to make it good And therefore we may be sure they comprehend the Scriptures within the name of Apostolical Tradition and believed that this Doctrine was gathered out of the Scriptures though not expresly treated of there In like manner we in this Church assert the authority of Bishops above Presbyters by a Divine right as appears by the Book of Consecration of Bishops where the persons to be ordained to this Office expresses his belief That he is truly called to this Ministration according to the will of our LORD JESVS CHRIST Now this we are perswaded may be plainly enough proved to any man that is ingenuous and will fairly consider things out of the holy Scriptures without the help of Tradition but we also take in the assistance of this for the conviction of gain-sayers and by the perpetual practice and Tradition of the Church from the beginning confirm our Scripture proofs so strongly that he seems to us very obstinate or extreamly prejudiced that yields not to them And therefore to make our Doctrine in this point the more authentick our Church hath put both these Proofs together in the Preface to the Form of giving Orders which begins in these words It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been three Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons I hope no body among us is so weak as to imagine when he reads this that by admitting Tradition to be of such use and force as I have mentioned we yield too much to the Popish Cause which supports it self by this pretence But if any one shall suggest his to any of our people let them reply That it is but the pretence and only by the Name of Tradition that the Romish Church supports it self For true Tradition is as great a proof against Popery as it is for Episcopacy The very foundation of the Popes Empire which is his succession in St. Peters Supremacy is uâ—terly subverted by this the constant Tradition of the Church being evidently against it And therefore let us not lose this Advantage we have against them by ignorantly refusing to receive true and constant Tradition which will be so far from leading us into their Church that it will never suffer us to think of being of it while it remains so opposite to that which is truely Apostolical I conclude this with the Direction which our Church gives to Preachers in the Books of Canons 1â—71 in the Title Concionatores That no man shall teach the people any thing to be held and believed by them religiously but what is consentaneous to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the Catholick Fathers and Ancient Bishops have gathered out of that very Doctrine This is our Rule whereby we are to guide our selves which was set us on purpose to preserve our Preachers from broaching any idle novel or popish Doctrines as appears by the conclusion of that Injunction Vain and old Wives Opinions and Heresies and Popish Errours abhorring from the Doctrine and
and Ceremonies she is sensible when they are too numerous how apt they are to darken the inward and more essential luster of Religion and prove a burden instead of a Relief to its Worship which she takes notice c Preface to the common prayer concerning Ceremonies why some are abolished St. Augustine complain'd of in his time But have since so encreased in the Eastern as well as Western Churches that it must argue a great aw to make the Service look like any thing serious and Sacred However this number alone where the particulars are not otherwise obnoxious tempts some to spend all their zeal therein and diverts them from things more necessary or gives too much occasion to others to quarrel about them Yet withal being apprehensive how needful it would be to maintain Order and Decency She hath kept some though very few and those most plain and unexceptionable in their nature most significative of the end for which they were appointed and most ancient and universal in their Institution and practice hinted in the tittle of our Liturgy as it is changed from the former And to prevent all differences hereabout she hath expressed her sense of them so clearly and explicitely that one would think no peevish obstinacy had room to interpose a scruple however the event hath proved Thus abundantly hath the Church of England vindicated her Reformation from all pretence of Apostacy from the True Ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church and shewed in all instances how careful she hath been to preserve the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of peace with all the Members thereof Nor hath she been wanting in any respect or reverence due thereunto No Church being more cautious and sparing in its determinations more Canonical in its Impositions more Regular in its Succession and more charitable in its Censures making all necessary provision for her own Children so within the bounds of Catholick Unity that had other Churches observed the like method or measures way had been made for an universal consent a Touto gar en pote tes Ecclesias to kauchema hoti apo ton peraton tes oikumenes epi ta perata microis symbolaiois ephodiazomennoi hoi ex hekastes Ecclesias adelphoi pantas pateras kai adelphous euriscon S. Basil Ep. 198. T. 3. p. 409. and every true Christian where ever he came would have found his own Church wherewith to communicate without hesitancy in all Religious Offices And as b St. Augustin observed in his time he would have needed but to enquire for the Catholick Church and no Schismatick would have darred to divert him to their Conventicles But if after the confusions and disorders of so many Centuries amidst such a depraved state by corrupt manners diversities of opinions and perplext Interests so great a happiness be not to be hoped for now that private person or particular Church will clear themselves before GOD and all good men that do what is in their power towards it and pray to Him to amend what they cannot change and in the mean time make the best use of what means they enjoy Upon which Premises an easie Solution is given to the old cavilling question Where was your Church before the Reformation or that time We answer Just where it is Thereby no new Church was set up no new Articles of Faith brought in no new Sacraments no new order of Priesthood to minister in holy things all which would have indeed required new Miracles and a new immediate Authority from Heaven so attested only the old were purged from impurities in Doctrine Worship and Practice which in passing through so many degenerate Ages they had contracted and that an ordinary Power might suffice to do If we were in the Catholick Church before we are so still and hope to better purpose We are not therefore out of it because there rash Censures have excluded us and then they unreasonably take advantage to argue against us from their own act We never formally shut them out what ever they have done to us What degrees of corruption in Faith or Manners may be consistent with the bare being of a Church or the possibility of salvation therein is needless and dangerous for us nicely to enquire it may be impossible for us to know I am sure it is most safe for us to reform what we know to be amiss and to leave those who do not to stand or fall by their own Master It is a very ill requital of our Charity if it be turned into a weapon of offence to wound or slay us by that by which we shewed our desire of their Cure But they and we must stand another trial and await a finall infallible Sentence which ours here cannot change The best security that we know to meet it with comfort will be to use the most strict impartiality with our selves and the greatest Charity to others Yet our Adversaries glory in nothing more then in the name of the Catholick Church and boast in no Title so much as that of Catholicks which hath had deservedly so great veneration in all Antiquity But their claim here truly examined will prove as fallacious and arrogant as in any other instance For the term Catholick if we respect the notation of the word or the most constant use of it is the same as Vniversal and so joyned to the Church signifies the general Body of all Christians dispersed throughout the World opposed to any distinct Party or separate Communion Thus we find it constantly applied by St. Augustin in all his Tracts against the Donatists St. August de unitate Ecclesiae c 2. T. 7. p. 5. 10. Quaestio certe inter nos versatar ubi sit Ecclesia utrum apud nos an apud illos quae utique und est quam majores nostri Catholicam nominarunt ut ex eo ipso nomine ostenderent quia per totum est Ibid. c. 3. p. 514. Christi Ecclesia canonicarum Scripturarum Divinis certissimis testimoniis in omnibus Gentibus designata est Et c. 4. ab ejus corpore quod est Ecclesia it a dissentiunt ut eorum communio non sit cum toto quacunque ea diffunditur sed in aliqua parte separata inveniatur manifestum est eos non esse in Ecclesia catholica Et. c. 12. p. 533. aliud Evangelizat qui periisse dicit de caetero mundo Ecclesiam in parte Donati in sola Aâ—rica remansisse Item de fide symbolo in eam partem de Ecclesia catholica T. 3. p. 149. Haeretici de Deo falsa sentiendo ipsam fidem violant Schismatici autem discissionibus iniquis a fraterna Caritate dissiliunt quapropter nec Haereticus pertinet ad Ecclesiam Catholicam quae diligit Deum nec Schismaticus quoniam diligit proximum and so opposed to them who went about to shut it up within their own Party and straitned Communion therein too closely imitated by our Adversaries who in spite of name
condition of those who lived in that Communion before the Reformation many of them groaned under those Oppressions from which we are happily freed nay whatever charitable allowance may still be made for them who now live within those Boundaries where they have little opportunity of knowing better and are under vaâ—â— prejudices by contrary Education and the severest awe over them Now far I say these cases may be pleadable must be left to GOD and their own Consciences As for those born and bred among us who have been treacherously deluded into Apostacy from us or will persist in their hereditary obstinate averseness to us against the Clearest conviction which they may receive and in opposition to the express Laws of GOD and of the Land to the perpetual disturbance of the State and confusion of the Church there appears no room for any excuse to lessen their Crime or alleviate their doom which will be mightly encreased when all manner of hidden and crafty Artifices or open violence against the common Rights of Humane Society and moral Honesty as well as the Faith and Charity of Christs Church are imployed and consecrated into a religious but blind Zeal for the destruction of both No marvel if the Nation awakened with the effects hereof which it hath sometimes felt and oftner had reason to fear have provided some severe Laws for an aw over them and to stop the first beginnings of such exorbitant attempts ready to break through all ordinary inclosures and which will hardly be restrained by the usual methods of Government No temper is more difficulty mastered or more mischievous if let loose then such a false fiery zeal which neglected burns all before it But whatever may have been their Treatment of us formerly or we may justly apprehend would be still had they any opportunity which GOD pervent we ought not and hope shall not ever desist from wishing and endeavouring as much as is in our power their real welfaâ—e and so of all our implacable Enemies and therein their hearty Union with us in the holy Offices of Religion and Fellowship of GODs Church where they live with the sincere renounciation of those dangerous Errours and Practices that hitherto keep them at a distance from us In Conclusion instead of querulous expostulations or catching occasions to find fault we have great reason to admire and adore that gracious Providence which amidst so many Confusions Disorders and Corruptions that prevail too much in most places â—ound about hath placed our Lot in so happy a soil and provided for us so goodly a Heritage and safe Retreat in the Bosom of that Church whose Charity is as eminent as its Faith and its Order as signal as its Purity whose Arms are alwayes open to receive its returning Enemies with the most tender Compassions as well as to cherish its faithful Friends with the wholsom and indulgent provisions where nothing is wanting to ensure our safety and encourage our proficiency in every thing that is good and excellent Which upon former tâ—al of both the opposit extremes the whole Kingdom hath seen necessary to fâ—ee back into to repair the Confusions and Devastions they had brought and in its most dangerous Convulsions here hath found the readiest Cure and under whose name her very Enemies desire to shelter themselves which finally engages us to express our gratitude for so peculiar Priviledges by â— ready and impartial Obedience to the holy Doctrine we are taught and a fruitful improvement of all those happy Advantages which we enjoy therein That our Lives may be answerable to our Profession and our pious vertuous peaceable and charitable Conversation may be in some proportion as defensible and remarkable as the Principles we proceed upon or the benefitâ— we lay claim to This would most effectually silence the captious Cavils of our Enemies on every side and more powerfully invite them to our communion then all other the most demonstrative Arguments When their very senses would bear witness that GOD is in us of a truth I hope we are not distitute of some such eminent Examples of unfeigned Piety true Holiness and universal Probity GOD Almighty increase their number more and more Yet whatsoever may be the effect thereof upon other men this method would unquestionably ensure our own firmest Peace here and everlasting Salvation hereafter Here we keep certainly within our own bounds and may most safely and profitably spend all our Zeal while other men please themselves in diverting it aâ—road to what they have no power over It seems horribly â—â—useous to hear men quarrel fiercely about the best church who live in the most open defiance to all Religion and I doubt there are too many of all denominations chargeable herewith Yet whatever the case of others prove it will be most safe and pious to bring it home and close to our selves Be our Church or our Profession never so much better then any other if we be not also suitably better then other men they will rise up in judgment against us at the last But by a careful and diligent observance of its sacred Prescriptions we shall justifie our Reformation throughout put a stop to the Reproaches and shame the calumnies of our Adversaries and which is the Summary of all good intentions and endeavours bring honour to our great LORD and Master the Author and Finisher of our Faith FINIS A DISCOURSE Concerning the Object of RELIGIOUS WORSHIP OR A SCRIPTURE PROOF OF THE UNLAWFULNESS of giving any Religious Worship to any other Beeing BESIDES THE ONE SUPREME GOD EDINBVRGH Re-Printed by J. Reid MDC LXXXVI A DISCOURSE Concerning the Object of Religious Worship The INTRODVCTION OF all the Disputes between â—s and the Church of Rome there is none of greater concernment then that about the Object of Religious Worship We affirm as the Scripture has taught us that we must worship the LORD our GOD and serve him only the Church Mat. 4. 10. of Rome teaches that there is a degree of Religious Worship which we may give to some excellent Creatures to Angels and Saints and Images and the Host and to the Reliques of Saints and Martyrs If they are in the right we may be thought very rude and uncivil at least in denying to pay that Worship which is due to such excellent Creatures and very injurious to our selves in it by losing the benefit of their Prayers and Patronage If we be in the right the Church of Rome is guilty of giving worship to Creatures which is due to GOD alone which is acknowledged on all hands to be the greatest of sins and therefore this is a dispue which can never be compromised though we were never so desirous of an union and reconciliation with the Church of Rome for the Incommunicable glory of GOD and the salvation of our Souls are too dear things to be given away in complement to any Church And should it appear in the next world for I believe it will never
Testament expresly told what this Idolatry is which supposes that we must learn what it is from some antecedent Laws and there were no such Laws in being but the Laws of Moses The only thing that can be said in this case is that the Apostle refers them not to any written Law but to the natural notions of Idolatry but with what reason this is said will soon appear if we consider to whom the Apostle writes and they were but Jewish and Heathen Converts As for the Heathens they had corrupted all their natural notions of Idolatry and had no sense at all of this sin till they were converted to Christianity and therefore they were not likely to understand the true notion of Idolatry without being taught it and it is not probable the Apostles would leave them to guess what Idolatry is As for the Jews God would not from the beginning trust to their natural notions but gave them express Laws about Idolatry which though they are the same Laws which natural reason dictates to us as most agreeable to the nature and worship of God yet since the experience of the world which was over-run by Idolatrous worship sufficiently prove that all men do not use their reason aright in these matters God would not trust to the use of their reason in the weighty concernments of his own worship and glory but gives them an express positive Law about it and Christ and his Apostles having done nothing to repeal this Law they leave them under the authority of it and when they warn them against Idols and Idolatry without giving them any new Laws about it must in all reason be presumed to refer them to those Laws which they already had SECT V. 4. AS a farther proof of this I observe that Christ and his Apostles did not abrogate but only complete and perfect the Mosaical Laws Our Saviour with great zeal and earnestness disowns any such intention or design Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil plerosai to fill it up by fulfilling the types and prophecies 5. Mat. 17. of it by exchanging a ceremonial for a real righteousness or by perfecting its moral precepts with new instances and degrees of vertue And therefore he adds For verily I say unto you Till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled And St. Paul who was lookt on by the believing Jews as a great enemy to the Law of Moses does renounce all such pretences Do we then make void the Acts 21. 21. 22. Rom 3. 31. Law through Faith God forbid yea we establish the Law Indeed had Christ or his Apostles attempted to have given any new Laws contrary to the Laws of Moses it had justified the Jews in their unbelief for God by his Prophet Isaiah had given this express rule to examine all new Doctrines by To the law and the testimony if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them and that Isai 8. 20. Christ himself is not excepted from this rule appears in this that this is joyned with the prophecie of the Messias both before and after as you may see in Isai 8 13. 14. and Ch. 9. 6. 7. and therefore Christ his Apostles alwayes make their appeals to the writings of the Old Testament and St. Paul in all his disputes with the Jews urges them with no other authority but the Scriptures and thö the Miracles which were wrought by the Apostles did move the Jews to hearken to them and greatly dispose them to believe their Doctrine yet it was the authority of the Scriptures whereon their Faith was founded As S. Peter tels those to whom he wrote that though they preach'd nothing to them concerning the coming of Christ but what they were eye-witnesses of and though God had given testimony to him by a voice from Heaven which they heard when they were with him in the holy Mount yet he adds We have also a more sure word of prophecie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as to a light Pet. 1. 16. 7. 18. 19. that shineth in a dark place untill the day dawn and the day-star arise in your hearts That is the Scriptures of the Old Testament and therefore the Jews of Berea are greatly commended for their diligence in searching the Scriptures and examining St. Pauls Doctrine by them and this is assigned Acts 17. 10. 11. as the reasons why many of them believed To apply this then to our present purpose I observe 1. That if Christ did not make any new Laws in contradiction to the Law of Moses then he could make no alteration in the object of Religious Worship He could not introduce the worship of Saints and Angels without contradicting that Law which commands us to worship no other Beeing but the one Supreme God For the worship of Saints and Angels together with the Supreme God is a direct contradiction to that Law which commands us to worship God alone though we should suppose that in the nature of the thing the worship of Saints and Angels were consistent with the worship of the Supreme God yet it is not consistent with that Law which commands us to worship none but God So that let this be a natural or positive Law or whatever men please to call it it is a very plain and express Law and Christ never did contradict any express Law of God It is true that Typical and Ceremonial Worship which God commanded the Jews to observe is now out of date under the Gospel and does no longer oblidge Christians but the reason of that is because it has received its accomplishment and perfection in Christ Christ has perfected the Jewish Sacrifices and put an end to them by offering a more perfect and meritorious sacrifice even the sacrifice of himself The Circumcision washings Purifications of the Law are perfected by the Laws of internal purity The external Ceremonies of the Law cease but they are perfected by an Evangelical righteousness But this I say that Christ never repealed any Mosaical Law but by fulfilling and perfecting it He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil Now methinks I need not prove that the worship of Sainâ—s and Angels is not a fulfilling but a destroying that Law which commands us to worship none but God And it is not enough to say that these are positive Laws given to the Jews though that be said without any reason for let them shew me any positive Law relating to the worship of GOD which Christ has wholly abrogated without fulfilling it 2. Yet as a farther proof that Christ has made no alteration in the object of our worship that he has not introduced the worship of Saints or Angels or Images into the Christian Church which was so expresly forbid by the Jewish Law I observe
with Thunder in his hand And my Saviour appears more lovely to my mind thoughts when I consider him as coming into the World and dying for us then when I see him pictured and carved on a Crucifix For it is more useful to see him with the Eye of Faith then of Sense and it is not the Proportion of his Body represented to my eyes but the Dignity of his Nature the love that he bore me and the Passions of his Soul for me that I admire most and which no Pencil can draw Besides a Picture or Image tells me nothing but what I knew before and it is by what I knew before that I can make sense or any devout use of this Picture for else I might take it for another profane and idle Story And I would fain know whither the reading considerately the 26 and 27th Chapters of S. Matthew will not affect any pious Heart much more then the seeing and contemplating a Picture Certainly if this will affect the Sense and bodily Passions the other will more work on our Reason and that will be to better purpose Nay the seeing of any Picture often will naturally make it familiar and not at all affecting to us 5. And if the severity of the Monks to their Bodies is not any great Sign of Devotion much less can the Austerities used by the common People turn to any great Commendation of the Church It is true they are forced to keep Fasts but it would make a Man laugh to read how their Casuists have defined concerning the modus the Measure the End of Fasting Escobar hath resolved it That no Drink breaks a Fast be it Wine or Chocolat and because it is not wholesome to drink without eating you may eat two Ounces of Bread For that is but a quarter of a Meal and if a man should chance to break his Vow of Fasting thus he is not bound to fast another day for it unless on a new Obligation And if all this be too hard you may be dispensed with for your whole Life and that whither there be any just cause for it or no. Nay Servants tho they eat never so gluttonously of the Scraps they break no Fast Indeed there need be no Rules set down concerning the Poor Peoples observing Fasting Dayes They are kept low enough without them And as for the Rich their Fasting is Mock-fasting to fast to Luxury with Wine and Fish and Sweet-meats Is not this great Self denial If any therefore are still truly mortified when they can thus help it I must rather commend their own Piety and devout Temper then the Rules and Orders of their Church which give much Liberty that a man must have a very cross-grain'd Appetite or be in the highest degree sensual not to be willing to comply with it We find then no Fault with Fasting being enjoyned and at set seasons For we our selves commend and practise it but let it not be to play tricks but for true and real Mortification and for the proper end of Mortification to humble the Body to the Soul and to bring the Mind to a better Temper and to these ends is Fasting commanded by our Church but not as if we looked on this or that kind of Meat to be unholy or design'd to purchase Heaven by our Abstinence as the Church of Rome doth 6. And as for their Pilgrimages and Worship of Reliques they must needs have less pretence to Religion For their Fasts and other Austerities somewhat resemble true Christian Duties but these have no shew that way If Pilgrimage be enjoyned for Penance then there is no thanks due to the Person performing it If it be voluntary there is no true Devotion in it For the Worth of it must consist in some of these Reasons viz. either First That GOD is more present or Secondly more propitious in one publick place of Worship then another both which are contrary either to the Nature of God or his Declaration in Scripture when he says In every place a pure Offering shall be offered to him Mal. 1. 11. And Where ever two or three are gathered together in Christs Name he is in the midst of them Mat. 18. 20. And the teaching otherwise is in some measure to revive Judaism which allowed God as to some cases to be served acceptably only in one place or Thirdly that the Saint is more present or propitious here then any where else But we are speaking of Devotion to God not to the Saint or Fourthly That it is their punishing themselves that is so acceptable but that hath been sufficiently discarded already Or Fifthly That going so far and taking such pains is a sign of their Love But a man may shew his Love to God and to his Saints too by more proper Instances and do more good by it which GOD to be sure will better accept and the Saint if he be a Saint will like as well And therefore the making such account of Pilgrimages seems rather to favour the Mahumetan then the Christian Religion For the going on Pilgrimage to Mecca is one of the five indispensable points of the Mahumetan Superstition And as for the Veneration of Reliques all the World knows what a cheat is put on Men in vending any old rotten Bone or peice of Cloth c. for a Relique of this or that Saint So that according to a moderate Computation I suppose scarcely one in a hundred is true And some have pleaded they need not be true Now what ever Devotion is performed to or on occasion of these Reliques can be commendable only in regard of the Mind and devout Temper of the Person which I think might as acceptably shew it self in any other proper time and place And there is required a long Series of Consequences before the sight of St. Joseph's Axe or any such other of their Reliques can be pretended to raise a man's Devotion But it being the chief Trade at Rome to sell feigned pieces of Antiquity and other such worthless Trinkets at a high rate I the less wonder that they have such an Esteem for Reliques for it is for their profit to keep up the value of them they being the principal commodities of the place 7. And the belief which they have of the Saints hearing them and their practice of praying to them is no proper Encouragement or instance of true Devotion For all Devotion is properly towards God and therefore the making of Addresses to any other cannot possibly have any direct Tendency to exalt our Devotion to him but is really a great hinderance For it takes mens Mindes off from GOD and sets them on his Creature And the same time that is spent in Prayer to them surely is better spent in praying to God who is more present with us hears us better and loves us more And Men's going to Saints when God is present naturally tends to provoke God's Jealousie For he declares himself jealous as to his Worship
people and are so desperately fond of this Device of keeping the people ignorant of what is prayed for that their Casuists have defined that a Man may say his Office privately in other Languages besides the Latin as in Hebrew or Greek but not in the Vulgar Language at the same time keeping the people in Ignorance and discouraging them in their devotions and exercising their Authority over them in the most dangerous manner that can be 6. Their ascribing spiritual Effects to several things which are purely of their own Invention is much to the discouragement of true devotion towards God And yet they have very many things of this Nature As Holy Water by the being sprinkled with which they believe rhe Devil shall have less power over them Agnus Dei's Swords and Medals which they wear to preserve them from dangers which being consecrated according to the Rules of their Church have through the devotion of the persons and the power of the Church a wonderful good effect though indeed God never promised any such thing To this Head I may refer also their Rosary which is nothing else but an odd combination of Pater nosters and Ave Mary's Several short prayers to the saying of which thousands of years of pardon of Sins are annex'd Their carrying the Image of St. Genovefa in procession at Paris and other Images in other places to obtain Rain c. And innumerable other such like practices on which Men are taught to relie and to expect great good by though they have neither any natural force or efficacy that way nor any assurance from God that such effects shall follow Nay even the Sacraments themselves according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome are only such a kind of charms for they are supposed to work effectually on the person without any devotion or Vertuous disposition being required of him in order to it Now whatever effect they promise above what the natural efficacy of the thing is apt and able to produce they must have express Authority from God or else they sadly delude and cheat those poor souls that depend upon them And at the best they are supposed only a shorter cut to Heaven an easier way of pleasing God and getting his Blessing and are invented only to ease a Man of the fatigue and trouble of the common and ordinary road of serving him by a constancy and regularity of Devotions Seventhly Their Manuals and books of Devotion which they give their People to read instead of the Scripture which they forbid to be used though they may design them as Helps yet I must range them among the Hindrances of Devotion For the best of them are so full of Tautologies and vain Repetitions that they must needs come uuder the censure of our blessed Saviour Matth. 6. though they use his own holy Name For so in the Jesus Psalter at the end of the Manuals of Prayers and Litanies printed at Paris in English An. 1682. In a Litany of fifteen Petitions the Name Jesu is repeated over above 130 times And in the same book in the Litany of the blessed Virgin they pray to her by 40 several Names being only so many distinct praises of her And the like is observable in all their books of Devotion which I ever saw Now their saying the same thing so often over is not contrived to help and Assist Attention or prevent Distraction or as a Repetition of what is more then ordinarly important or for any other good and prudent Reason but out of pure vanity and Ostentation or as it were even to flatter our blessed Saviour or the Saint which they pray to But most of the books and Legends which they put into the hands of their People to excite their Devotion and by which the People take an estimate of the Christian Religion are such wretched plain Forgeries and so pitifullie contrived Fables as can never be believed by Men of sense and if they could be believed are proper indeed to make Men Mad and Enthusiastical but not to advance true Devotion and he that reads only such books is qualified indeed to tell Stories and to believe Lies but no serious truth will stick to him or be valued by him So that such books as these are so far from doing good that they do much harm to Religion for they Imprint a wrong Notion of Religion on Mens Minds would make a Man believe that God is like a child pleased with Trifles that Religion and the Method of our Salvation is only a Charm and Trick which the Priests have gotten the receit of but that there is nothing in Christianity fiâ— to make a man wise and manly in his Worship of God or in the management of himself and practice of Devotion Nay the stories which are told in the Lives of their Saints and believed by the common people are enough even to deprave the natural Sentiments of Mankind concerning God and Religion so that perhaps it were much better to leave Men to the natural effluxes of their own minds then to pretend to assist them with such Helps as these That a little Water or a consecrated Bell should scare the devil or St Francis's rope charm and bind him would make a man have little fear of such an Enemy or a prodigious Veneration for such a Saint but how it should render a Man more piously affected toward GOD more relying on his Providence or more Religiously Carefull over himself I see not And these Stories though so apparently false yet being affirmed with such Confidence strike at the very Foundation of our Religion For it is apt to make Men believe that Christianity it self was at first propagated among a sad dull stupid and credulous Generation of Men when as really it first appeared in an Age as sharp-sighted as any Age before or since which is much for its Vindication It would tempt a Man to dispise a Religion in which such Men are Saints and such Practices commended and will set Christianity but on the same level with modern Judaism and Mahumetanism For the Jews have just as much to say for their Cabbala and the Turks for their incredible Fables for they are reported on the same Credit are just so credible in themselves and just as edifying of the People that attend to them The Miracles which they relate being often Just so useful as that pretended to be wrought in the Temple of Apollo when a Man coming out of the Temple it was observed that his body did not cast any shadow by which thing however strange in it self the Man was not much the better nor the World wiser But many of their Books of Devotion are worse then ridiculous for there are frequently such passages and prayers as I cannot tell how to vindicate from Blasphemy and Idolatry Saint Bonaventur's Psalter both in Latin and Italian I mentioned before in which there are I believe a thousand such Prayers to her or Expressions concerning her which I
Bread and that to be Wine and we see thy body to be distinct from both we see thy body not broken and thy bloud not shed From all which it must needs be very evident to any man that will impartially consider things how little reason there is to understand those words of our Saviour this is my body and this is my bloud in the sense of Transubstantiation nay on the contrary that there is very great reason and an evident necessity to understand them otherwise I proceed to shew 2ly That this Doctrine is not grounded upon the perpetual belief of the Christian Church which the Church of Rome vainly pretends as an evidence that the Church did alwayes understand and interpret our Saviour's words in this sense To manifest the groundlesness of this pretence I shall 1. shew by plain testimony of the Fathers in several Ages that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church 2. I shall shew the time and occasion of its coming in and by what degrees it grew up and was established in the Roman Church 3. I shall answer their great pretended Demonstration that this alwayes was and must have been the constant belief of the Christian Church 1. I shall shew by plain Testimonies of the Fathers in several Ages for above five hundred years after Christ that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church I deny not but that the Fathers do and that with great reason very much magnify the wonderfull mystery and efficacy of this Sacrament and frequently speak of a great supernatural change made by the divine benediction which we also readily acknowledge They say indeed that the Elements of bread and Wine do by the divine blessing become to us the body and bloud of Christ But they likewise say that the names of the things signified are given to the Signs that the bread and Wine do still remain in their proper nature and substance and that they are turn'd into the substance of our bodies that the body of Christ in the Sacrament is not his natural body but the sign and figure of it not that body which was crucified nor that bloud which was shed upon the Cross and that it is impious to understand the eating of the flesh of the Son of man and drinking his â—loud literally all which are directly opposite to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and utterly inconsistent with it I will select but some few Testimonies of many which I might bring to this purpose I begin with Justin Martyr who sayes expresly that * Apol. 2. p. 98. Edit Paris 1636. our bloud and Flesh are nourished by the conversion of that food which we receive in the Eucharist But that cannot be the natural body and bloud of Christ for no man will say that is converted into the nourishment of our bodies The Second is * Lib. 4. c. 34. Irenoeus who speaking of this Sacrament sayes that the bread which is from the earth receiving the divine invocation is now no longer common bread but the Eucharist or Sacrament consisting of two thingâ— the one earthly the other heavenly He sayes it is no longer common bread but after invocation or consecration it becomes the Sacrament that is bread sanctified consisting of two things an earthly and a heavenly the earthly thing is bread and the heavenly is the divine blessing which by the invocation or consecration is added to it And * lib. 5. c. 2. elsewhere he hath this passage when therefore the cup that is mix'd that is of Wine and Water and the bread that is broken receives the word of God it becomes the Eucharist of the bloud and body of Christ of which the substance of our flesh is increased and consists But if that which we receive in the Sacrament do nourish our bodies it must be bread and wine and not the natural body and bloud of Christ There is another remarkable Testimony of Irenoeus which though it be not now extant in those works of his which remain yet hath been preserv'd by * Comment in 1 Pet. c. 3. Oecumenius and it is this when sayes he the Greeks had taken some Servants of the Christian Catechumeni that is such as had not been admitted to the Sacrament and afterwards urged them by violence to tell them some of the secrets of the Christians these Servants having nothing to say that might gratify those who offered violence to them except only that they had heard from their Masters that the divine Communion was the bloud and body of Christ they thinking that it was really bloud and flesh declar'd as much to those that questioned them The Greeks taking this as if it were really done by the Christâ—â—ns discovered it to others of the Greeks who hereupon put Sanctus and Blandina to the torture to make them confess it to whom Blandina boldly answered How would they endure to do this who by way of exercise or abstinence do not eat that flesh which may lawfully be eaten By which it appears that this which they would have charged upon Christians as if they had literally eatten the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament was a false accusation which these Martyrs denied saying they were so far from that that they for their part did not eat any flesh at all The next is â—ertullian who proves against Marcion the Heretick that the Body of our Saviour was not a mere phaâ—â—asm and appearance but a real Body because the Sacrament is a figure and image of his Body and if there be an image of his body he must have a real body otherwise the Sacrament would be an image of an image His words are these * Advers Marcionem l. 4. p. 571. Edit Rigalt Paris 1634 the bread which our Saviour took and distributed to his Disciples he made his own body saying this is my body that is the image or figure of my body But it could not have been the figure of his body if there had not been a true and real body And arguing against the Scepticks who denied the certainty of sense he useth this Argument That if we question our senses we may doubt whither our Blessed Saviour were not deceived in what he heard and saw and touched * Lib. de Anima p. 319. He might sayes he be deceived in the voice from heaven in the smell of the ointment with which he was anointed against his burial and in the taste of the wine which he consecrated in remembrance of his bloud So that it seems we are to tâ—ust ouâ— senses even in the matter of the Sacrament and if that be true the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is certainly false Origen in his * Edit Huetii Comment on Matth. 15 speaking of the Sacrament hath this passage That food which is sanctified by the word of God and prayer as to that of it which is material goeth into the belly and is cast out into the
for one If says he the speech be a precept forbidding some heinous wickedness or crime or commanding us to do good it is not fiugurate but if it seem to command any heynous wickedness or crime or to forbid that which is profitable and beneficial to others it is figurative For example Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you This seems to command a heinous wickedness and crime therefore it is a figure commanding us to communicate of the passion of our Lord and with delight and advantage to lay up in our memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us So that according to St. Austin's best skill in interpreting Scripture the literal eating of the flesh of Christ and drinking his bloud would have been a great impiety and therefore the expression is to be understood figuratively not as Cardinal Perron would have it onely in opposition to the eating of his flesh and bloud in the gross appearance of flesh and bloud but to the real eating of his natural body and bloud under any appearance whatsoever For St. Austin doth not say this is a Figurative speech wherein we are commanded really to feed upon the natural body and bloud of Christ under the species of bread and wine as the Cardinal would understand him for then the speech would be literal and not figurative But he sayes this is a figurative speech wherein we are commanded Spiritually to feed upon the remembrance of his Passion To these I will add but three or four Testimonies more in the two following Ages The first shall be of Theodoret who speaking of that * Gen. 49. 11. Prophecy of Jacob concerning our Saviour he washed his garments in Wine and his clothes in the bloud of grapes hath these words †Dialog 1. as we call the mysticall fruit of the Vine that is the Wine in the Sacrament after consecration the bloud of the Lord so he viz. Jacob calls the bloud of the Vine viz of Christ the bloud of the grape but the bloud of Christ is not literally and properly but only figuratively the bloud of the grape in the same sense as he is said to be the true Vine and therefore the Wine in the Sacrament after consecration is in like manner not literally and properly but figuratively the bloud of Christ And he explains this afterwards saying that our Saviour chaâ—â—ed the names and gave to his Body the name of the Symbol or sign and to the symbol or sign the name of his Body thus when he had called himself the Viâ—e he called the symbol his bloud so that in the same sense that he called himself the Vine he call'd the Wine which is the symbol of his bloud his bloud For sayes he he would have those who partake of the divine mysteries not to attend to the nature of the things which are seen but by the change of names to believe the change which is made by grace for he who called that which by nature is a body wheat and bread and again likewise call'd himself the Vine he honour'd the symbols with the name of his body and bloud not Changing nature but adding grace to nature Whence you see he sayes expresly that when he called the Symbols or Elements of the Sacrament viz. Bread and Wine his body and bloud he made no change in the nature of the things only added grace to nature that is by the Divine grace and blessing he raised them to a spiritual and supernatural vertue and efficacy The secound is of the same Theodoret in his second Dialogue between a Catholick under the name of Orthodoxus and an Heretick under the name of Eranistes who maintaining that the Humanity of Christ was changed into the substance of the Divinity which was the Heresie of Eutyches he illustrates the matter by this similitude As sayes he the symbols of the Lords body and bloud are one thing before the invocation of the Priest but after the Invocation are changed and become another thing so the body of our Lord after his ascension is changed into the divine substance But what sayes the Catholick Orthodoxus to this why he talks just like one of Cardinal Perron's Hereticks Thou art sayes he caught in thy own net because the mystical symbols after consecration doe not pass out of their own nature For they remain in their former substance figure and appearance and may be seen and handled even as before He does not only deny the outward figure and appearance of the symbols to be chang'd but the nature and substance of them even in the proper and strictest sense of the word substance and it was necessary so to do otherwise he had not given a pertinent answer to the similitude urg'd against him The next is one of their own Popes Gelasius who brings the same Instance against the Eutychans * biblioth Patr. Toâ— 4. surely sayes heâ— the Sacrament which we receive of the body and bloud of our Lord are a divine thing so that by them we are made partakers of a divine nature and yet it ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and Wine and certainly the image and resemblance of Christ's body and bloud are celebrated in the action of the mysteries that is in the Sacrament To make this Instance of any force against the Eutychians who held that the body of Christ upon his ascension ceas'd and was chang'd into the substance of his Divinity it was necessary to deny that there was any substantial change in the Sacrament of the bread and wine into the body and bloud of Christ So that here is an infallible authority one of their own Popes expresly against Transubstantiation The last Testimony I shall produce is of Facundus an African Bishop who lived in the 6th Century Upon occasion of justifying an expression of one who had said that Christ also received the adoption of Sons reasons thus * Facund p. 144 edit Paris 1676. Christ vouchsafed to receive the Sacrament of adoption both when he was circumcised and baptized And the Sacrament of Adoption may be called adoption as the Sacrament of his body and bloud which is in the consecrated bread and cap is by us called his body and bloud not that the bread sayes he is properly his body and the cup his bloud but because they contain in them the mysteries of his body and bloud hence also our Lord himself called the blessed bread and cup which he gave to his Disciples his body and bloud can any man after this believe that it was then and had ever been the universal and received Doctrine of the Christian Church that the bread and wine in the Sacrament are substantially changed into the proper and natural body and bloud of Christ By these plain Testimonies which I have produced and I might have brought a great many more to the same purpose it is I think evident beyond all
is to all the ends and purposes of a Miracle as if it were not and can be no testimony or proof of any thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is alwayes a thing sensible otherwise iâ— could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the bread and wine in the sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand â—he reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done then it there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popâ—sh Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can buâ— have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier then to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what was before Every Man every day may work ten thousand such Mâ—racles And thus I have dispatch'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against II. it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justifie it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objections I shall reduce to these two Heads First the infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly the monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call sayes he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which be eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entered into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church of Rome blush if she can * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. I have travell'd sayes he over the World and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect. of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2. 10. the Man of Sin should come with power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falsehood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the mosâ— sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real Barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austine as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but only the appearance of it by its being done under the species of bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they
they saw them were deceived then there might be no Miracles wrought and consequently it may justly be doubted whither that kind of confirmation which God hath given to the Christian Religion would be strong enough to prove it supposing Transubstantiation to be a part of it Because every man hath as great evidence that Transubstantiation is false as he hath that the Christian Religion is true Suppose then Transubstantiation to be part of the Christian Doctrine it must have the same confirmation with the whole and that is Miracles But of all Doctrines in the world it is peculiarly incapable of being proved by a Miracle For if a Miracle were wrought for the proof of it the very same assurance which any man hath of the truth of the Miracle he hath of the falsehood of the Doctrine that is the clear evidence of his senses For that there is a Miracle wrought to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not bread but the body of Christ there is only the evidence of sense and there is the very same evidence to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not the Body of Christ but bread So that here would arise a new Controversie whither a man should rather believe his senses giving testimony against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or bearing witness to a Miracle wrought to confirm that Doctrine there being the very same evidence against the truth of the Doctrine which there is for the truth of the Miracle And then the Argument for Transubstantiation and 〈◊〉 Objection against it would just balance one another and consequeâ—â—ly Transubstantiation is not to be proved by a Miracle because thâ— would be to prove to a man by some thing that he sees that he dâ— not see what he sees And if there were no other evidence that Trâ—â—substantiation is no part of the Christian Doctrine this would â—â— sufficient that what proves the one doth as much overthâ—â—â— the other and that Miracles which are certainly the best and higâ—â— external proof of Christianity are the worst proof in the world of Trâ—â—substantiation unless a man can renounce his senses at the same tâ—â— that he relies upon them For a man cannot believe a Miracle withoâ—â— relying upon sense nor Transubstantiation without renouncing it Sâ— that never were any two things so ill coupled together as the Doctriâ—â— of Christianity and that of Transubstantiation because they draw sâ—veral ways and are ready to strangle one another because thâ— main evidence of the Christian Doctrine which is Miracles is resâ—â—ved into the certainty of sense but this evidence is clear and poiâ—â— blank against Transubstantiation 4. And Lastly I would ask what we are to think of the Argumeâ—â— which our Saviour used to convince his Disciples after his Resurrectâ—on that his Body was really risen and that they were not deluded by â— Ghost or Apparition Is it a necessary and conclusive Argâ—ment or not * Luke 24. 3â— 39. And he said unto them why are yâ—â— troubled and why do thoughts arise in your heartsâ— Behold my hands and my feet that it is I my self â—â—â— a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me hâ—â— But now if we suppose with the Church of Rome the Doctrine oâ— Transubstantiation to be true and that he had instructed his Disâ—ciples in it just before his death strange thoughts might justly havâ— risen in their hearts and they might have said to him Lord it iâ— but a few dayes ago since thou didst teach us not to believe our senses but directly contrary to what we saw viz. That the bread whicâ— thou gavest us in the Sacrament though we saw it and handled iâ— and tasted it to be bread yet was not bread but thine own natural body and now thou appealest to our senses to prove that thiâ— is thy body which we now see If seeing and handling be an unquestionable evidence that things are what they appear to ouâ— senses then we were deceived before in the Sacrament and if they be not then we are not sure now that this is thy body which we now see and handle but it may be perhaps bread under the appearance of flesh and bones just as in the Sacrament that which we saw and handled and tasted to be bread was thy flesh and bones under the form and appearance of bread Now upon this supposition it would have been a hard matter to have quieted the thoughâ—â— â—f the Disciples For if the Argument which our Saviour used did â—â—rtainly prove to them that what they saw and handled was his â—â—dy his very natural flesh and bones 〈◊〉 because they saw and â—andled them which it were impious to deny is would as strongâ—â— prove that what they saw and received before in the Sacrament was â—ot the natural body and bloud of Christ but real bread and wine â—nd consequently that according to our Saviours arguing after his â—esurrection they had no reason to believe Transubstantiation before â—or that very Argument by which our Saviour proves the reality of his â—ody after his Resurrection doth as strongly prove the reality of bread â—nd wine after consecration But our Saviours Argument was most â—â—fallibly good and true and therefore the Doctrine of Transubstanâ—â—ation is undoubtedly false Upon the whole matter I shall only say this that some other â—oints between us and the Church of Rome are managed with some â—ind of witâ— and subtilty but this of Transubstantiation is carâ—ied out by mere dint of impudence and facing down of Manâ—ind And of this the more discerning persons of that Church are of â—ate grown so sensible that they would now be glad to be rid of this â—odious and ridiculous Doctrine But the Council of Trent hath fastâ—ned it to their Religion and made it a necessary and essential Point of their Belief and they cannot now part with it if they would it is like a Mill-stone hung about the neck of Popery which will sink it at the last And though some of their greatest Wits as Cardinal Perron and of late Monsieur Arnauld have undertaken the defence of it in great Volumes yet it is an absurdity of that monstrous and massy weight that no humane authority or witâ— are able to support it It will make the very Pillars of St. Peter's crack and requires more Volumes to make it good then would fill the Vatican And now I would apply my self to the poor deluded People of that Church if they were either permitted by their Priests or durst venture without their leave to look into their Religion and to examine the Doctrines of it Consider and shew your selves men Do not suffer your selves any longer to be led blindfold and by an implicit Faith in your Priests into the belief of nonsense and contradiction Think it enough and too much to let them rook you of your money for pretended Pardons and counterfeit Reliques but let not the Authority of any Priest or Church perswade you out of your senses
granted as any one must who reads that that unless in Boileau's Phrase a Homo opiniosus cui tenacit as Error is sensum communem abstulit Boil p. 159. he be such a Bigot whose tenaciousness of his Errour has quite bereaved him of common sense which is an unlucky Character of his own Friends that Doctrine is false and therefore that the charge of Idolatry in this matter is by their own confession true But there are some more cautious and wary men amongst them who out of very just and reasonable Fears and suspicions that Transubstantiation should not prove true and that they may happen to be mistaken in that have thought of another way to cover and excuse their Idolatry and that is not from the Truth but meerly from the Belief of Transubstantiation As long say they as we believe Transubstantiation to be true and do really think that the Bread and Wine are converted into the substance of Christs body and blood and so Worship the Sacrament upon that account tho' we should be mistaken in this our belief yet as long as we think that Christ is there present and design only to Worship him and not the bread which we believe to â—e done away this were enough to free us from the charge of Idolatry To which because it is the greatest and the best Plea they have and they that make it have some misgivings I doubt not that Transubstantiation will not hold I shall therefore give a full Answer to it in the following Particulars 1. All Idolatry does proceed from a mistaken belief and a false supposal of the mind which being gross and unreasonable will not at all excuse those who are guilty of it there were never any Idolaters but might plead the excuse of a mistake and that not much more culpable and notorious one would think then the mistake of those who think a bit of Bread or a wafer is turn'd by a few words into a God They all thought however blindly and foolishly that whatever it was they worship'd ought to be worship'd upon some account or other that it was a true and fit Object and that Adoration rightly belong'd to it Idolatry tho' it be a great sin and a great injury and affront to God yet arises not so much from the malice of the will as the blindness and darkness of the understanding there were hardly ever any such Idolaters as maliciously and designedly intended to affront the true God by worshipping false Gods or Creatures as if a subject should pass by his Prince out of ill will and of purpose to affront and defie him and give the Reverence and Homage that was due to him to a Rebel or fellow Subject standing by him but they did this because they mistook the person and thought this to be the Prince that was not or that he was there where he was not or that that which was there ought to be worship'd for his sake still falsly supposing that they ought to worship that wrong Object which they took to be right or in that false manner which they took to be true for if a mistake will excuse it will excuse in one as well as another 2. Tho' they do not only think and believe that which they worship to be a true Divine Object but it really be so in it self and that which they have in their Thoughts and intentions to worship be right yet they may still be guilty of Idolatry for so were the Jews in the Idolatry of the golden Calf whereby they intended not to throw off the worship of the true GOD the God of Israel who brought them out of â—e land of Egypt for they appointed the Feast Exod. 32. 4. 5. to him under that Title and under the Name of Jehâ—vah at the same time and so in the Idolatry of the Calves set up by Jeroboam they were not designed to draw off the peopâ—e from 1 K. 12. 27. 28. worshipping the same God who was worship'd at Hierusalem but only to do it in another place and after another manner but still as T. G. a Cath. no Idol p. 330. sayes of the Roman Idolaters so it may be said of these Jewish That what they had in their Minds and Intentions to Worship was the true God and what ever was the material object of their Worship he was the formal for they did no more think the Gold then the Papists think the bread to be God So the Maniâ—hees in their Idolatry which St. Austin often mentions b Contra Faustum Manicheum l. 1. c. 3 Tom. 1. de Genesi contra Manich. l. 2. c. 25. Tom. 3. Epist 74. ad Deuterium Solem etiam Lunam adorant colant of adoring the Sun and Moon the Object which they had in their Minds and Thoughts and Purposes to Worship was CHRIST as much as the Papists have in the Eucharist I would only ask if a persons having a right Object in his mind in his thoughts and purposes to adore which T. G. c catholiks no Idolaters p. 329. 330. so often pretends would excuse him from Idolatry then suppose a person should before consecration worship the Sacramental Elements to prevent which they generally keep them from being seen yet in the Thoughts and Intentions and purposes of his mind design to worship CHRIST then supposed tho' falsly to be there as they worship him afterwards whither this would be Idolatry in him or no If not then they may worship the unconsecrated Elements as well as consecrated even whilst they believe they are Bread if it be then having a right Object in our Thoughts and Purposes and Intentions will not excuse from Idolatry 3. Whatever was the material Object of Idolatrous worship it was nor worship'd for it self no more then the Bread or its Accidents are by the Papists in the Eucharist but as they say of the Host because they believed that the true Object of worship was really present in it or in an extraordinary manner united to it a Deos velect is sedibus propriis non recusare nec fugere habitacula inire terrena quinimo jure dedicationis impulsos simulahcrorum coalescere inunctioni Arnob. contra gent. l. 6. so did the Gentiles who thought the Gods themselves or at least a Divine Power was brought into their Images by their consecrations and that it resided and dwelt there and they worshipped their Images only upon this account b Deos per simulachra Veneramur Ib. Now if they had tâ—ought this of the true God himself that it was he and noâ— any false God that was thus present in their Images this would have been nevertheless Idolatry Thus the Manichees who worship'd the Sun did not worship it for it self but because they believed CHRIST had placed his Tabernacle in the Sun so the more Philosophical Idolaters among the Heathens who worship'd the several Things of Nature as parts they thought of the Great See Voss de
the same word We venerate Baptism †Baptismum ubicunque est veneramur Id Epist 146. as we ought to do all the Rites and Ordinances of our Religion this is meant by Origen in that first place of him produced by Boileau * de Euch. Ador p. 10. ex Orlg. Homil. 12. Nostis qui Divinis mysteriis interesse consuestis quomodo cum suscipitis corpus Domini cum omni cautela veneratione servatis ne ex eo parum quid decidat ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur Reos enim vos creditis recte creditis si quid inde per negligentiam decidat Ye that are wont to be present at the Divine Mysteries know how when ye receive the Body of Christ ye keep it with all caution and Veneration that no part of the consecrated gift be let fall for ye think and that rightly that ye should be guilty of a fault if any of it should be let fall through your negligence And Christians have this care and Veneration of those consecrated Symbols of the Body and Blood of their Saviour of these wonderful Pledges of his Love that they would not willingly spill them or let them fall to the ground through their carelesness and neglect they that have that due regard to the Holy Bible which they ought would not trample it under their feet or shew any such disrespect to it it was this which Origen was recommending in that place from that example of their care and respect to the Sacrament Elements that they should give it also to the Word of God * Quod si circa corpus ejus tanta utimini cautela merito utimini quomodo putatis minoris esse praculi Verbum Dei neglexisse quam corpus ejus Ib. But if ye use such care and that very deservedly about keeping his Body how do ye think it to be a less fault to neglect the word of God then to neglect his Body The comparison here made between the Word of God and the Sacrament so plainly shews that he no way meant its Adoration that I wonder this person was not ashamed to pretend just before it that he †Alienum esse ab institutis meis ullum in medium adducere patrem quin conceptis verbis proprium Boil p 10. would bring no Authority but what was expresly for his Opinion and use none but †Animo decreverim argumenta invictissima concludere invincible Arguments but Roman Faith must be defended with Roman courage and confidence which is the only invincible thing they have The words of Theodoret are a great deal more plausible and seem at the first glance to look more fairly then any for their purpose The Elements are understood to be what they are made and they are beleived and reverenced as those things which they are beleived †Noeitai haper egeneto kai pisteuetai kai proskyneitai hos ekeina onta haper pisteuontai Theod Dialogâ— asygchyt apud Boil p 64. Here our Faith makes the Sacrament to be what it signifies to become to us the res Sacramenti as well as a sign and Representation of it and that thing is to be adored by us in the use of the Sacrament which is the true sense of Theodorets words and that he cannot mean in the Roman sense the substance of Christs Body is plain from what immediatly goes before and utterly destroyes what they would catch from half his words for he says That the Elements or the mysticall Signs do not after sanctification recede from their own but remain in their former substance †Oude gar meta tonhagiasmon ta mystica symbola tes â—oikeias existataiphyseos menei gar eiâ—eâ— proteros odfius Ibid. Thus their best Witness that seems to speak the most for them yet speaks that against them which destroys their whole cause as he must own whoever reads the Dialogue and considers the design of it which was to answer the pretence of those who said that the Body of Christ was after his Ascension turned into a Divine substance and lost the true nature of Body * hosper toinyn ta symbâ—la tu despotikon as the Symbols of Christs Body and Blood are changed say those Hereticks into what they were not before Yes sayes he Now ye are taken into your own net for they remain in their former nature and substance afterwards and so does Christs Body If then the change of these sacred Elements be only as to their use and vertue but not as to their substance according to Theodoret then he could not mean that they should be adored but only reverenced by the word proskyneitai just as the Holy Bible * is said to be reverenced and the Priests themselves by the very same word * Prosknesai met ' eulabei as to euaggelion Liturg. chrysost Hiepeis proskynetot proskynetoi Adelpboi proskynete synodos Acta concil Ephes 4. Some of the Fathers words imply that when we come to the Sacrament it should be with the greatest lowliness both of Body and Mind and as the Primitive Church used to do and as the Church of England does in a posture of Worship and Adoration in the form and manner of Worship as St. Cyril of Hieros speaks ‡ Kypton kai tropo proskyâ—eseâ—â— kaâ— sebasmatos Catech. Myst 5. or as St. Chrysottome In the form of supplicants and Worshippers †Schema hiketon kai proskyneton echomen Chrysost Homil 7. in Matth. epi to timesai kai proskynesai ton hyion tu Theu Ibid. prosenegke sy tapein ophrosynen kai tetapeinomenen kapdion Homil. de Phil. Dianastesomen toinyn heautous kai phrixomen kai pollo ton barbaron â—keinon pleiona epideixomethaâ—en eulabeian of Christ as the Magi were when they came to bring their presents to him do thou then present him with humility and a lowly and submissive heart and be not like Herod who pretended he would come to worship him but it was to murder him but rather imitate the Magi and come with greater fear and reverence to thy Saviour then they did This is the whole design and substance of what is produced out of St. Chrysostom †Boil c. 7. l. 1 And this is the plain meaning of Origen * Hom. 5. in N. T. Tunc Dominus sub tectum tuum in greditur tu ergo humilians teipsuâ—â— imitare hâ—nc Centurionem dicito Domine non sum digâ—â—s ut intres sub tecâ—â—◠〈◊〉 that when we come to receive Christ in the Sacrament we should do it with all Humility for consider sayes he That then the Lords enters under thy roof do thou therefore humble thy self and imitate the Centurion and say Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof When the Fathers would give us the Picture of a devout Communicant they draw him in the greatest Posture of Humility and Reverence looking upon and †Phrixomen toinyu proâ—iontes cachariste somen prospesomen
here undertake to make good which is accounted a difficult Province but the Council of Trent hath relieved us in that particular by founding the Institution expresly upon that one passage of the Gospel Joh. 20. 2z So that we shall not need to examine the whole Body of Scripture to discover what footsteps of Divine Institution may be found here or there for the Councill wholly insists and relies upon that Text of St. John and therefore if that fail them the whole Hypothesis falls to the ground Now for the clearing of this let us lay the words before us and they are these He breathed on them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained Here I appeal to any Man that hath Eyes in his Head or Ears to hear whither in this Text there be any one word of Auricular Confession or much less of such a circumstantiated one as they require And this is so manifest and notorious that their own ancient Canonists and several of their learned Divines are ashamed of the pretence of Divine Institution founded upon this or any other passage of Scripture and therefore are content to defend the practice of the Church of Rome in this particular upon the account of the Authority and general usage of the Church which we shall come to examine by and by in its due place In the mean time I cannot choose but admire the mighty Faith of a Romanist who can believe in spight of his own Eyes It seemed to us an unsuperable difficulty heretofore for a Man to perswade himself that in the Sacrament of the Eucharist Bread was transubstantiated into Flesh because it was against the express Testimony of Sense yea although for that there was the countenance of Five figurative but mistaken words to support the credulity but this of the Sacrament of Penance clearly out does it for here a Man must believe a thing to be when as there is not so much as one word for the ground of his Faith or the proof of the thing in question How many Sacraments may not such men have if they please What voluminous Creeds may not they swallow and digest What Mountains may not such a wonderful Faith remove But let us hear what they have to say for themselves perhaps in the first place they will plead the Authority of the Council of Trent which hath peremptorily determined the sense of the passage of the Gospel to the purpose aforesaid Indeed that Council in the third Canon of their fourteenth Session doth damne all those who deny that a Sacrament of Penance and Auricular Confession is prescribed in that Text of St. John or who apply it to any other purpose But in so doing they both usurp a Prerogative which was never pretended to or practised by any Council before them and withal they betray a consciousness that the Text it self yeilded no sufficient evidence of the thing which they designed to countenance by it for what Councils ever till now brought a Text and then imposed an Interpretation upon it contrary to the words And then back'd that Interpretation with an Anathema If the Text were plain or could be made so why was not that done And to be sure if that cannot be done by other means the curse will not do it at least to any but very obedient Roman consciences Besides if this course be allowed I see not but a Council may bring in what Religion they please having first made a Nose of Wax of the Holy Scripture and then writhed it into what shape they best phansy for in such a case if the words of the Gospel do not favour me I can govern the sense and if the letter be silent or intractable I can help that with an Interpretation and if I have authority or confidence enough to impose that under the peril of Anathema I am no longer an Interpreter or a Judge but a Law-giver and need not trouble my self with Scriptum est but may if I will speak plain say decretum est and the business is done But if neither the Letter of Scripture nor the Authority of a Council will do in this case then in the second place they think they have at least some colour of Reason to relieve them and if they cannot find Auricular Confession in the Text yet they will by consequence infer it thence for they say although indeed it is true it is not here expresly mentioned yet it is certain that our Saviour in the Text before us instituted a Sacrament of penance and therefore Auricular Confession must necessarily be implied because absolution cannot be without confession Here the Reader will observe that the point in Question between us is very much altered for we are now fallen from the consideration of the Divine Institution of Auricular confession in particular to that of a Sacrament of Penance in general i. e. from direct proof to a subintelligitur But we will follow them hither also and for the clearing of this matter we will briefly consider these three things 1. Whither that can properly be said to be of Divine Institution and necessary to salvation which depends on an inference and is proved only by an innuendo 2. Whither it can be reasonable to assert that our Saviour there institutes a Sacrament of Penance where not only Auricular confession but the whole matter of such a Sacrament is left undefined 3. Whither if our Saviour had done that which it is plain he hath not that is had here instituted and appointed all those things which by the church of Rome are required as the material parts of Penance yet this could have been a Sacrament 1. For the first of these we have no more to do but to consider the force and signification of this word Institution Now that in the common use of men especially of those which speak distinctly and understandingly implies a setting up de novo or the appointing that to become a duty which was not knowable or at least not known to be so before it became so appointed For this word Institution is that which we use to express a positive command by in opposition to that which is Moral in the strictest sense and of natural obligation Now it is very evident that all things of this Nature ought to be appointed very plainly and expresly or els they can carry no obligation with them for seing the whole Reason of their becoming matter of Law or Duty lies in the will of the Legislator if that be not plainly discovered they cannot be said to be instituted and so there can be no Obligation to observe them because where there is no Law there can be no Transgression and a Law is no Law in effect which is not sufficiently promulged Is it not therefore a very strange thing to tell us of an Institution by implication only and yet at the Sess 14. c. 2. same
time to tell us that the matter so pretended to be instituted is no less then absosolutely necessary to the Salvation of Sinners 2. The second of these will easily be resolved by considering what we observed before from the Sess 14. C. 3. Council of Trent viz. that this Sacrament of Penance consists of Matter and Form the Form is the Priests Absolution but the Matter or Materials of this Sacrament are Contrition Confession to a Priest and Satisfaction or Performance of the Penance enjoyn'd by him now it is evident that not only Auricular Confession of which we have spoken hitherto but also Contrition and Satisfaction are wholly omitted and past over in silence by the Evangelist in this passage of Scripture from whence they fetch their Sacrament of Penance and is it not a wonderfully strange thing that our Savionr should be supposed to institut a Sacrament without any Materials of it at all Surely therefore this must be either a very Spiritual Sacrament or none at all Let us guess at the probability of this in proportion to either of the other undoubted Sacraments Suppose our Saviour instead of that accurat form in which he instituted the Eucharist had only said I would have you my Disciples and all that shall believe on my Name to keep a Memorial of me when I am gone Or suppose he said onely as he doth John 6. 55. My Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed would any one have concluded here that our Saviour in so saying had appointed Bread and Wine to be consecrated to be received in such a manner and in a word that he had without more ado instituted such a Sacrament as we usually celebrate No certainly and therefore we see our Saviour is the most express and particular therein that can be for he takes Bread blesses it breakes it gives it to them saying Take eat this is my Body c. and after Supper he takes the Cup blesses it gives it to them saying Drink ye all of this for this is the New Testament in my Blood c. and then adds Do this in remembrance of Me. Now who is there that observes this accuracy of our Saviour in the Eucharist can imagine that he should intend to institute a Sacrament of Penance and that as necessary to Salvation in the Opinion of the Romanists as the other only with this Form of words Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted c. and without the least mention of Confession Contrition or any other Material or necessary Part or Circumstance of it 2. But in the third and last place let us suppose that our Saviour had in the Text before us instituted Penance and had appointed particularly all those things which they call the Material parts of it as it is evident he hath not yet even then and upon that Supposition Penance would not have proved to be a Sacrament properly so called I confess according to a loose acceptation of the word Sacrament something may be said for it for so there are many things have had the name of Sacrament applyed to them Tertullian somewhere calls Elisha's Ax the Sacrament of Wood and in his Book against Marcion he stiles the whole Christian Religion a Sacrament St. Austin in several places calls Bread Fish the Rock and the Mystery of Number Sacraments for he hath given us a general Rule in his Fifth Epistle viz. That all signs when they belong to divine things are called Sacramentâ— And in consideration hereof it is acknowledged by Cassander that the Number of Sacraments was indefinite in the Church of Rome it self until the times of Peter Lombard But all this notwithstanding and properly speaking this Rite of Penance taking it altogether and even supposing whatsoever the Romanists can suppose to belong to it cannot be reputed a Sacrament according to the allowed definitions of a Sacrament delivered by their own Divines Some of them define a Sacrament thus a Hugo de S. Vict. lib. de Sacram. Sacramentum est corporale elementum foris sensibiliter propositum ex similitudine repraesentans ex institutione significans ex Sanctificatione continens invisibilem gratiam And the b Magist Sent. lib. 4. dist 1. Master of the sentences himself describes it somewhat more brieflie but to the same effect in these words Sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae visibilis forma ejusdem gratiae imaginem gerens causa existens both which definitions are acknowledged and applauded by the Jesuite c Becanus Tract 2. de Sacramentis Becanus And the plain truth is a Sacrament cannot be better exprest in so few words then it is by St. d Aug. c. Faust Lib. 19. c. 16. Austin when he calls it verbum visibile a visible Word or Gospel For it pleased the Divine Wisdom and Goodness by this institution of Sacraments to condescend to our weakness and thereby to give us sensible Tokens or Pleges of what he had promised in his Written word to the intent that our dulness might be relieved and our Faith assisted forasmuch as herein our Eyes and other senses as well as our Ears are made Witnesses of his gracious intentions Thus by Baptismal washâ—ng he gives us a sensible token and representation of our regeneration and the washing away of our sins by the Blood of Christ and by the participation of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper we have a Token and Symbol of our Union with Christ our Friendship with God and communion with each other But now it is manifest there is no such thing as this in their Sacrament of Penance as even Bellarmine himself confesses For they do not say or mean that the Absolution of the Priest is a Token or Emblem of God's forgiveness but that the Priest actually pardons in God's stead by Vertue of a Power delegated to him So that according to them here must be a Sacrament not only without any material parts instituted but also without any thing Figurative Symbolical or Significative which seems to be as expresly contrary to their own Doctrine in the aforesaid definitions as to the truth it self Nay farther to evince the difference of this Rite of Penance from all other proper Sacraments it deserves observation that whereas in those other acknowledged Sacraments the Priest in God's Name delivers to us the Pledges and Symbols of Divine Grace Here in this of Penance we must bring all the material parts and Pledges our selves and present them to God or to the Priest in his stead My meaning is that whereas for instance in Baptism the Priest applies to us the Symbol of Water and in the Eucharist delivers to us the consecrated Elements in token of the Divine Grace contrary-wise here in Penance we must on our parts bring with us contrition confession and satisfaction too in which respect we may be rather said to give Pledges to God then he to us which is widely different from the Nature of other