unclean thing should enter into Heaven if the guilt and the stain be remov'd what uncleanness can there be left behinde Indeed Simon Magus as Epiphanius reports Haeres 20. did teach That after the death of the body there remain'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a purgation of souls But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an authentick Doctor themselves can best tell 3. It relies upon this also That God requires of us a full exchange of Penances and Satisfactions which must regularly be paid here or hereafter even by them who are pardon'd here which if it were true we were all undone 4. That the Death of Christ his Merits and Satisfaction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye nor as it may happen of a long time after All which being Propositions new and uncertain invented by the School Divines and brought ex postfacto to dress this opinion and make it to seem reasonable and being the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace of the righteousness of Faith and the infinite value of Christs Death must needs lay a great prejudice of Novelty upon the Doctrine it self which but by these cannot be supported But to put it past suspition and conjectures Roffensis and Polydore Virgil affirm That whoso searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers shall finde that none or very rarely any one of them ever makes mention of Purgatory and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it But for the Catholick Church it was but lately known to her But before we say any more in this Question we are to premonish That there are Two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity The first is That the Ancient Churches in their Offices and the Fathers in their Writings did teach and practice respectively prayer for the Dead Now because the Church of Rome does so too and more than so relates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory and for the souls there detain'd her Doctors vainly suppose that when ever the H. Fathers speak of prayer for the dead that they conclude for Purgatory which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable For it is true the Fathers did pray for the dead but how That God would shew them mercy and hasten the resurrection and give a blessed sentence in the great day But then it is also to be remembred that they made prayers and offered for those who by the confession of all sides never were in Purgatory euen for the Patriarchs and Prophets for the Apostles and Evangelists for Martyrs and Confessors and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary So we finde it in Epiphanius S. Cyril and in the Canon of the Greeks and so it is acknowledged by their own Durantus and in their own Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of S. Leo Of which because by their latter doctrines they grew asham'd they have chang'd the prayer for him into a prayer to God by the intercession of S. Leo in behalf of themselves so by their new doctrine making him an Intercessor for us who by their old doctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him of which Pope Innocent being asked a reason makes a most pitiful excuse Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed and indeed generally for all it is not now seasonable to discourse but to say this onely that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd the Church of England did never condemn by any express Article but left it in the middle and by her practice declares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead and her interest in the communion of Saints and that the Saints departed are a portion of the Catholick Church parts and members of the Body of Christ but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead infers the belief of Purgatory every man may satisfie himself by seeing the Writings of the Fathers where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place Which thing is so certain that in the very Roman Offices we mean the Vigils said for the dead in which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture speaking of the miseries of this World Repentance and Reconciliation with God the bliss after this life of them that dye in Christ and the resurrection of the Dead and in the Anthemes Versicles and Responses there are prayers made recommending to God the soul of the newly defunct praying he may be freed from Hell and eternal death that in the day of Iudgement he be not judged and condemned according to his sins but that he may appear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection but not one word of Purgatory or its pains The other cause of their mistake is That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of judgement and it is such a fire that destroyes the Doctrine of the intermedial Purgatory We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it and S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion for it was no more so does S. Basil S. Hilary S. Hierome and Lactaâ—tius as their words plainly prove as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis affirming that all men Christ onely excepted shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgement even the B. Virgin her self is to pass thorow this fire There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers which greatly destroyes the Roman Purgatory Sixtus Senensis sayes and he sayes very true that Iustin Martyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthymius and S. Bernard did all affirm that before the day of Judgement the souls of men are kept in secret receptacles reserved unto the sentence of the great day and that before then no man receives according to his works done in this life We do not interpose in this opinion to say that it is true or false probable or improbable for these Fathers intended it not as a matter of faith or necessary belief so far as we finde But we observe from hence that if their opinion be true then the Doctrine of Purgatory is false If it be not true yet the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory which is inconsistent with this so generally receiv'd opinion of the Fathers is at least new no Catholick Doctrine not believ'd in the Primitive Church and therefore the Roman Writers are much troubled to excuse the Fathers in this Article and to reconcile them to some seeming concord with their new Doctrine But besides these things it is certain that the Doctrine of Purgatory before the day of
is publikely avowed and practis'd in the Church of Rome to rely upon the Saints Intercession and this intercession to be made valid by the Merits of the Saints We pray thee ô S. Iude the Apostle that by thy Merits thou wouldst draw me from the custom of my sins and snatch me from the power of the Devil and advance me to the invisible powers and they say as much to others And for their Satisfactions the treasure of the Church for Indulgences is made up with them and the satisfactions of Christ So that there is nothing remaining of the honour due to Christ our Redeemer and our Confidence in him but the same in very kind is by the Church of Rome imputed to the Saints And therefore the very being and Oeconomy of Christianity is destroyed by these prayers and the people are not cannot be good Christians in these devotions and what hopes are laid up for them who repent to no purpose and pray with derogation to Christs honour is a matter of deepest consideration And therefore we desire our charges not to be seduc'd by little tricks and artifices of uselesse and laborious distinctions and protestations against evidence of fact and with fear and trembling to consider what God said by the Prophet My people have done two great evils they have forsaken me fortem vivum the strong and the living God fontem vivum so some copies read it the living fountain and have digged for themselves cisterns that is little phantastick helps that hold no water that give no refreshment or As S. Paul expresses it they worship and invocate the Creature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the Creator so the word properly signifies and so it is us'd by the Apostle in other places And at least let us remember those excellent words of S. Austin Tulius jucundius loquar ad meum Iesum quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum Dei I can speak safer and more pleasantly or chearfully to my Lord Jesus than to any of the Saints and Spirits of God For that we have Commandment For this we have none for that we have example in Scriptures for this we have none there are many promises made to that but to this there is none at all and therefore we cannot in faith pray to them or at all rely upon them for helps Which consideration is greatly heightned by that prostitution of Devotion usual in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to every Upstart to every old and new Saint And although they have a story among themselves that it is ominous for a Pope to Canonize a Saint and he never survives it above a twelve-moneth as Pierre Mathieu observes in the instances of Clement the IV. and Adrian the VI. yet this hinders not but that they are tempted to do it too frequently But concerning the thing it self the best we can say is what Christ said of the Samaritans They worship they know not what Such are S. Fingare S. Anthony of Padua S. Christopher Charls Borromaeus Ignatius Loyola Xaverius and many others of whom Cardinal Bessarion complain'd that many of them were such persons whose life he could not approve and such concerning whom they knew nothing but from their parties and by pretended revelations made to particular and hypocondriacal persons It is a famous saying of S. Gregory That the bodies of many persons are worshiped on earth whose souls are tormented in Hell and Augustinus Triumphus affirms that all who are Canoniz'd by the Pope cannot be said to be in Heaven And this matter is beyond dispure for Prateolus tells that Herman the Author of the Heresie of the Fratricelli was for twenty years together after his death honour'd for a Saint but afterwards his body was taken up and burnt But then since as Ambrosius Catharinus and Vivaldus Observe if one Saint be called in question then the rest may what will become of the devotions which are paid such Saints which have been Canoniz'd within these last five Centuries Concerning whom we can have but slender evidence that they are in Heaven at all And therefore the Cardinal of Cambray Petrus de Alliaco wishes that so many new Saints were not Canoniz'd They are indeed so many that in the Church of Rome the Holidayes which are called their Greater Doubles are threescore and four besides the Feasts of Christ and our Lady and the Holidayes which they call half double Festivals together with the Sundays are above one hundred and thirty So that besides many Holidays kept in particular places there are in the whole year about two hundred Holidays if we may beleive their own Gavantus which besides that it is an intolerable burthen to the poor labourer who must keep so many of them that on the rest he can scarce earn his bread they do also turn Religion into superstition and habituate the people to idleness and disorderly Festivities and impious celebrations of the day with unchrististian merriments and licentiousness We conclude this with those words of S. Paul How shall we call on him on whom we have not believed Christ said Ye believe in God believe also in me But he never said Ye have believed in me believe also in my Saints No For there is but one Mediator between God and Man the Man Christ Iesus And therefore we must come to God not by Saints but onely by Jesus Christ our Lord. SECT X. THere is in the Church of Rome a horrible impity taught and practised which so far as it goes must needs destroy that part of holy life which consists in the holiness of our prayers and indeed is a conjugation of evils Of such evils of which in the whole world of Society of Christians should be least suspected we mean the infinite Superstitions and Incantations or charms us'd by their Priests in their exercising possessed persons and conjuring of Devils There was an Ecclesiastical Book called Ordo baptizandi cum modo visitandi printed at Venice A. D. 1575. In which there were damnable and diabolical charms in somuch that the Spanish Inquisitors in their Expurgatory Index printed at Madrid A. D. 1612. commanded deleatur tota exorcismus Luciferina cujus initium est Adesto Domine tui famuli that all that Luciferian Exorcism be blotted out But whoever looks into the Treasure of Exorcisms and horrible Conjurings for that is the very title of the Book printed at Colein A. D. 1608. shall finde many as horrid things and not censur'd by any Inquisitors as yet so far as we have ever read or heard Nay that very Luciferina or Devilish Exorcism is reprinted at Lyons A.D. 1614. in the institutio baptizandi which was restored by the Decree of the Council of Trent So that though it was forbidden in Spain it was allowed in France But as bad as that are allowed every where in the Church of Rome The most famous and of most publike use
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The end of all our agonies and affirms That the Holy men of God rest in joy and in never failing hopes and are come to the end of their holy combates S. Iustin Martyr affirms That when the soul is departed from the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserved but the souls of the just into Paradice where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels S. Ambrose saith That Death is a haven of rest and makes not our condition worse but according as it findes every man so it reserves him to the judgement that is to come The same is affirm'd by S. Hilary S. Macarius and divers others they speak but of two states after death of the just and the unjust These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgement of the great day the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of rest S. Gregory Nazianzen expresly affirms that after this life there is no purgation For after Christs ascension into heaven the souls of all Saints are with Christ saith Gennadius and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the Catholick Church In what place soever a man is taken at his death of light or darkness of wickedness or vertue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same Order and in the same degree either in light with the just and with Christ the great King or in darkness with the unjust and with the Prince of darkness said Olimpiodorus And lastly we recite the words of S. Leo one of the Popes of Rome speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord being interrupted by any obstacles falls from the gift of the present Indulgence viz. of Ecclesiastical Absolution and before he arrive at the appointed remedies that is before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfactions ends his temporal life that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd when he is devested of his body he cannot obtain He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory what they paid not here and of being cleansed there who were not clean here And how these words or of any the precedent are reconcileable with the Roman Doctrines of Purgatory hath not yet entred into our imagination To conclude this particular We complain greatly that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false is yet with all the faults of it pass'd into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent But besides what hath been said it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth even so saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours If all the dead that dye in Christ be at rest and are in no more affliction or labours then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory is as false as it is uncomfortable To these words we adde the saying of Christ and we relie upon it He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into judgement but passeth from death unto life If so then not into the judgement of Purgatory If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life then not from death to the terminable pains of a part of Hell They that have eternal life suffer no intermedial punishment judgement or condemnation after death for death and life are the whole progression according to the Doctrine of Christ and Him we chuse to follow Sect. V. THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being Primitive and Apostolick that we know the very time it began to be own'd publiquely for an opinion and the very Council in which it was said to be pass'd into a publick Doctrine and by what arts it was promoted and by what persons it was introduc'd For all the world knows that by their own parties by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not express'd in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of Faith till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third MCC years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest Teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Iohannes de Basselis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the primitive ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgement of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus says that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of faith as Bellarmine confesses and Henriquez affirms that Scotus says it was not ancient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory VII nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English Jesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there
the real and spiritual presence of Christs body and blood which we all believe as certainly as that it is not transubstantiated or present in a natural and carnal manner The same thing is also fully explicated by the good S. Ephrem The body of Christ received by the faithful departs parts not from his sensible substance and is undivided from a spiritual grace For even baptism being wholly made spiritual and being that which is the same and proper of the sensible substance I mean of water saves and that which is born doth not perish S. Gregory Nazianzen spake so expresly in this Question as if he had undertaken on purpose to confute the Article of Trent Now we shall be partakers of the Paschal supper but still in figure though more clear than in the old Law For the legal Passover I will not be afraid to speak it was a more obscure figure of a figure S. Chrysostom affirms dogmatically that before the bread is sanctified we name it bread but the Divine grace sanctifying it by the means of the Priest it is freed from the name of bread but it is esteemed worthy to be called the Lords body although the nature of bread remains in it And again As thou eatest the body of the Lord so they the faithful in the old Testament did eat Manna as thou drinkest blood so they the water of the rock For though the things which are made be sensible yet they are given spiritually not according to the consequence of Nature but according to the Grace of a gift and with the body they also nourish the soul leading unto faith To these very many more might be added but instead of them the words of S. Austin may suffice as being an evident conviction what was the doctrine of the primitive Church in this question This great Doctor brings in Christ thus speaking as to his Disciples You are not to eat this body which you see or to drink that blood which my crucifiers shall pour forth I have commended to you a sacrament which being spiritually understood shall quicken you And again Christ brought them to a Banquet in which he commended to his Disciples the figure of his body and blood For he did not doubt to say This is my body when he gave the sign of his body and That which by all men is called a sacrifice is the sign of the true sacrifice in which the flesh of Christ after his assumption is celebrated by the sacrament of remembrances But in this particular the Canon law it self and the Master of the Sentences are the best witnesses in both which collections there are divers testimonies brought especially from S. Ambrose and S. Austin which whosoever can reconcile with the Doctrine of Transubstantiation may easily put the Hyaena and a Dog a Pigeon and a Kite into couples and make Fire and Water enter into Natural and Eternal Friendships Theodoret and P. Gelasius speak more emphatically even to the nature of things and the very Philosophy of this Question Christ honour'd the symbols and the signs saith Theodoret which are seen with the title of his body and bloud not changing the nature but to nature adding grace For neither do the mystical signs recede from their nature for they abide in their proper substance figure and form and may be seen and touch'd c. And for a testimony that shall be esteem'd infallible we alledge the words of Pope Gelasius Truly the Sacraments of the body and bloud of Christ which we receive are a Divine thing for that by them we are made partakers of the Divine nature and yet it ceases not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine And truly an image and similitude of the body and bloud of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries Now from these premises we are not desirous to infer any odious consequences in reproof of the Roman Church but we think it our duty to give our own people caution and admonition 1. That they be not abus'd by the rhetorical words and high expressions alledged out of the Fathers calling the Sacrament The body or the flesh of Christ. For we all believe it is so and rejoyce in it But the question is after what manner it is so whether after the manner of the flesh or after the manner of spiritual grace and sacramental consequence We with the H. Scriptures and the primitive Fathers affirm the later The Church of Rome against the words of Scripture and the explication of Christ and the Doctrine of the primitive Church affirm the former 2. That they be careful not to admit such Doctrines under a pretence of being Antient since although the Roman error hath been too long admitted and is antient in respect of our days yet it is an innovation in Christianity and brought in by ignorance power and superstition very many ages after Christ. 3. We exhort them that they remember the words of Christ when he explicates the Doctrine of giving us his flesh for meat and his blood for drink that he tells us The flesh profiteth nothing but the words which he speaks are spirit and they are life 4. That if those antient and primitive Doctors above cited say true and that the symbols still remain the same in their natural substance and properties even after they are blessed and when they are receiv'd and that Christs body and blood are onely present to faith and to the spirit that then whoever tempts them to give Divine honour to these symbols or elements as the Church of Rome does tempts them to give to a creature the due and incommunicable propriety of God and that then this evil passes further than an error in the understanding for it carries them to a dangerous practise which cannot reasonably be excus'd from the crime of Idolatry To conclude This matter of it self is an errour so prodigiously great and dangerous that we need not tell of the horrid and blasphemous questions which are sometimes handled by them concerning this Divine Mystery As if a Priest going by a Bakers Shop and saying with intention Hoc est corpus meum whether all the Bakers bread be turned into the body of Christ Whether a Church Mouse does eat her Maker Whether a man by eating the consecrated symbols does break his fast For if it be not bread and wine he does not and if it be Christs body and blood naturally and properly it is not bread and wine Whether it may be said the Priest is in some sense the Creator of God himself Whether his power be greater than the power of Angels and Archangels For that it is so is expresly affirmed by Cassenaeus Whether as a Bohemian Priest said that a Priest before he say his first Mass be the Son of God but afterward he is the Father of God and the Creator of his body But against this