England our Laws would be but sorrily kept and obeyed and executed 2. If all the world had such miraculous memories yet men are apt to be negligent either in learning or keeeping of holy doctrine All have not that zeal that should excite them to such wonderfull diligence without which such a treasure could not be preserved 3. When matter and so much matter is commited to bare memory without a form of unalterable words new words may make an alteration before men are aware The change of one word sometimes doth make a whole discourse seem to have another sense 4. There are so many carnal men in the world that love not the strictness of that doctrine which they do profess and so many hereticks that would pervert the Holy Doctrine that it would purposely be altered by them if it could be done and it might much more easily be done if it lay all upon mens memories For one party would set their memory against the others and as it was about Easter a publick matter of fect tradition would be set against tradition especially when the far greater part of the Church turn Hereticks as in the Arrians dayes then Tradition would be most at their keeping and interpretation and if we had not then had the unalterable Scriptures what might they not have done 5. A whole Body of Doctrine kept only in Memory will be soon disjoynted and dislocate and if the matter were kept safe yet the method and manner would be lost 6. And there could not be such satisfactory Evidence given to another of the Integrity or Certainty of it as when it is preserved in writing We should all be diffident that the Laws of England were corrupted or that Lawyers might combine to do it at their pleasure if there were no Law Books or Records but all lay in their memories If they were never so faithfull yet they could not give us such evidence of it I do not think any man of common reason can heartily believe that all the holy Truths of God Historical Doctrinal Practical Prophetical c. could without a course of miracles or extraordinary means have been kept through all ages as well without writing as with it 7. And if writing be not necessary why have we so many Fathers Histories and Canons And why do they fetch their Tradition from these and ridiculously call them unwritten verities Are they unwritten when they turn us to so many volumes for them And if mans writing be necessary for their preservation me thinks men should thankfully acknowledge that God hath taken the best way in giving it us in his own unalterable phrase 3. If they do prove that some matters of fact are made known to us by Tradition that are not in the Scripture or that any Church Orders or Circumstances of worship then used are so made known to us which yet we wait for the proof of it will not follow that any of these are therefore Divine Institutions or universal Lawes for the unchangable obligation of the whole Church If there be some things Historically related in the Scripture that were obligatory but for a season and ordained occasionally and ceased when the occasion ceased as the Love-feasts the Kiss of Love the washing of feet the abstaining from things strangled and blood the anointing the sick the Prophesyings one by one mentioned 1 Cor. 14. 31. miraculous gifts and their exercise c. then it will not follow if they could prove that the Apostles fasted in the Lent or used the sign of the Cross in Baptisme or holy Ordinances or confirmed with a Cross in Chrysme c. that therefore they intended these as universal Laws to the Church though I suppose they will never prove that they used the things themselves 4. We will never take the Popes Decision or bare word for a Proof of Tradition nor will we receive it from pretended Authority but from rational Evidence It is not their saying we are the authorized keepers of Tradition that shall go with us for proof 5. And therefore it is not the Testimony of the Papists alone who are not only a lesser part of the Church but a part that hath espoused a corrupt interest against the rest that we shall take for certain proof of a Tradition but we will prefer the Testimonie of the whole Catholick Church before the Romish Church alone 6. They that can produce the best Records of Antiquity or rational proof of the Antiquity of the thing they plead for though they be but a few Learned Antiquaries may yet be of more regard in the matter of Tradition then millions of the vulgar or unlearned men so that with us universal Tradition is preferred before the Tradition of the Romish sect and Rational proof of Antiquity is preferred before ignorant surmises But where both these concur both universal consent and records or other credible evidence of Antiquity it is most valid And as for the Romish Traditions which they take for the other part of Gods word 1. In all Reason they must produce their sufficient proof that they came from the Apostles before we can receive them as Apostolick Traditions And when they have done that they must prove that it was delivered by the Apostles as a perpetual universal doctrine or Law for the whole Church and when they have well proved both these we shall hearken further to them 2. Either these Traditions have Evidence to prove them Apostolical or no Evidence If none how can the Pope know them If they have Evidence why may not we know it as well as the Pope at least by the helps that his charity doth vouchsafe the world 3. If there be any Proof of these Traditions it is either some Antient Records or Monuments and then our Learned Antiquaries may better know them then a multitude of the unlearned Or it is the Practice of the Church And then 1. How shall we know how long that practice hath continued without recourse to the writings of the ancients The reports of the people is in many cases very uncertain 2. But if it may be known without the search of Antient Records then we may know it as well as they 4. If the Pope and Clergy have been the keepers of it have they in all ages kept it to themselves or declared it to the Church I mean to all in common If they have concealed it 1. Then it seems it belonged not to others 2. Or else they were unfaithfull and unfit for the office 3. And then how do succeeding Popes and Clergy know it If they divulged it then others know it as well as they We have had abundance of Preachers from among the Papists that were once Papists themselves as Luther Melancthon Zuinglius Calvin Beza Peter Martyr Bucer c. and yet these knew not of your truly Apostolical Traditions 5. And it mars your credit with us because we are able to prove the beginning of some of your traditions or a time
when they had no being since the death of the Apostles 6. And also that we are able to prove the death and burial of many things that have gone long under the name of Traditions 7. And when we find so lame an account from your selves of the true Apostolical Traditions You are so confounded between your Ecclesiasticall Decrees and Traditions and your Apostolical Traditions that we despair of learning from you to know one from the other and of seeing under the hand of his Holiness and a General Council a Catalogue of the true Apostolical Traditions And sure it seems to us scarce fair dealing that in one thousand and five hundered years time if indeed there have been Popes so long the Church could never have an enumeration and description of these Traditions with the proofs of them Had you told us which are Apostolick Traditions but as fully and plainly as the Scriptures which you accuse of insufficiency and obscurity do deliver us their part you had discharged your pretended trust 8. And it is in our eyes an abominable impiety for you to equal your Traditions with the holy Scripture till you have enumerated and proved them And it makes us the more to suspect your Traditions when we perceive that they or their Patrons have such an enmity to the Holy Scriptures that they cannot be rightly defended without casting some reproach upon the Scriptures But this we do not much wonder at for it is no new thing with the applauders of Tradition We find the eighth General Council at Constantinople Can. 3. decreeing that the Image of Christ be adored with equal Honour with the Holy Scripture But whether that be an Apostolical Tradition we doubt 9. And if General Councils themselves and that of your own should be for the sufficiency of Scripture what then is become of all your Traditions Search your own Binnius page 299. whether it past not as sound doctrine at the Council of Basil in Ragusii Orat. Sup. 6. that faith and all things necessary to salvation both matters of belief and matters of practice are founded in the literal sense of Scripture and only from that may argumentation be taken for the proving of those things that are matters of faith or necessary to salvation and not from those passages that are spoken by allegory or other spiritual sence Sup. 7. The Holy Scripture in the literal sense soundly and well understood is the infallible and most sufficient Rule of faith Is not here enough against all other Traditional Articles of faith A plain man would think so Yea but Binnius noteth that he meaneth that explicitely or implicitely it is so Well! I confess the best of you are slippery enough but let us grant this for indeed he so explaineth himself afterward yet that 's nothing for Tradition He there maintaineth that Scripture is the Rule of faith not part of the Rule For saith he when the intellect hapneth to err as in hereticks its necessary that there be some Rule by the deviation or conformity to which the intellect may perceive that it doth or doth not err Else it would be still in doubt and fluctuate it appeareth that no humane science is the Rule of faith It remaineth therefore that the Holy Scripture is this Rule of faith This is the Rule John 20. where be saith these things are written that you might believe that Jesus is the son of God and believing might have life in his name And 2 Pet. 2. You have a more sure word of prophecy to which ye do well that ye attend as to a light c. And Rom. 15. Whatsoever things were written were written for our learning c. And its plain that the foresaid authorities are of holy Scripture and speak of the holy Scripture c. The second part also is plain because if the holy Scripture were not a sufficient Rule of faith it would follow that the Holy Ghost had insufficiently delivered it who is the author of it which is by no means to be thought of God whose works are all perfect Moreover if the Holy Scripture were wanting in any things that are necessary to salvation then those things that are wanting might lawfully and deservedly be superadded from some thing else aliunde or if any thing were superfluous be diminished But this is forbidden Rev. 22. From whence its plain that in Scripture there is nothing defective and nothing superfluous which is agreeable to its author the Holy Ghost to whose Omnipotency it agreeeth that nothing deminutely to his Wisdom that nothing superfluously and to his Goodness that in a congruous order he provide for the Necessity of our salvation Prov. 30. 5 6. The word of God is a fiery buckler to them that hope in him Add thou not to his words lest be reprove thee and thou be found a lyar How like you all this in a Popish General Council and in an Oration against the Sacrament in both kinds Well! but perhaps the distinction unsaith all again No such matter you shall hear it truly recited He proceeds thus But for the further declaration of this Rule as to that part it must be known that the sufficiency of any doctrine is necessarily to be understood two wayes one way Explicitely another way Implicitely And this is true in every Doctrine or science because no doctrine was ever so sufficiently delivered that all the Conclusions contained in its principles were delivered and expressed explicitely and in the proper terms and so it is in our purpose because there is nothing that any way or in any manner N.B. pertaineth to faith and salvation which is not most sufficiently contained in the holy Scripture explicitely or implicitely Hence saith Austin every truth is contained in the Scriptures latent or patent as in other sciences Speculative or Moral and Civil the Conclusions and determinations are contained in their principles c. and the deduction is by way of inference or determination This is the plain Protestant Doctrine There is nothing any way necessary to faith or salvation but what is contained in the Scriptures either expresly or as the Conclusion in the premises Good still we desire no more Let holy Reason then discern the Conclusion in the premises and let us not be sent for it to the Authority of Rome nay sent for some thing else that is no Conclusion deducible from any Scripture principles we grant Tradition or Church practices are very useful for our better understanding of some Scriptures But what is this to another Traditional word of God Prove your Traditions but by inference from Scripture and we will receive them Yet let us hear this Orator further clearing his mind Adding to a Doctrine may be understood four wayes 1. By way of explication or declaration 2. By way of supply 3. By way of ampliation 4. By way of destruction or contrary The first way is necessary in every science and doctrine and specially in Holy Scripture not for it self
would have the causes taken away What! When I recite his very words Or was I deeply silent of the particular causes Do you mean Here or Throughout If Here so I was deeply silent of ten thousand things more which either it concerned me not to speak or I had not the faculty of expressing in one sentence If you mean Throughout you read without your eyes or wrote either with a defective Memory or Honesty Read again and you shall find that I recite the causes 3. But did I not all that my task required by reciting the Negation of the causes It was not saith Grotius the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome according to the Canons And I shewed you partly and the Canons shew you fully that that Primacy is the Universall Headship which Protestants I mean not Roman Grotian Protestants have ever used to call Popery But saith Mr. P. Grotius chargeth the Papists with it Answ 1. True but the Protestants much more as making many more faults by their withdrawing from Rome then they mended 2. And he chargeth not that which we have called Popery with it though he charge the Papists with it That some sins of the Papists did occasion it he confesseth and all the Papists that ever I spoke with of it do confess But I am referred for these causes charged on the Papists to Grot. Votum pag. 7 8. and thither I 'le follow Mr. P. that I may know how much he chargeth on the Papists himself And there I find that the things that Grotius found faulty in the Papists were but these two 1. That to the true and ancient doctrine many quirks of the Schoolmen that were better skli'd in Aristotle then the Scriptures were introduced out of a liberty of disputing not out of the Authority of Universal Councils And the Opinions stablisht in the Church were less fitly explicated 2. That Pride and Covetousness and manners of ill example prevailed among the Prelates c. And really did you think that he is no Papist that is but against the Schoolmens Opinions and the Prelates Pride Covetousness and Idleness and holdeth all that they call the Decrees of General Councils Hath not the Council at Lateran and Florence decreed that the Pope is above a General Council and the Council at Lateran decreed that Princes are to be deposed and their Subjects absolved from their fidelity if they exterminate not Hereticks such as Protestants out of their Dominions Is he no Papist that holds all that is in the Council of Trent if he be against some School-points not determined and against the Prelates Pride Well Sir I understand you better then I did And though you thought meet that your words might be conform to one another and not to truth to say that I called you Arminian and Pelagian I purpose if I had done so to call you an Arminian no more But I beseech you cry not out of persecution till the men of your mind will give us leave to be Rectors of Churches in their Dominions as you and others of your mind are allowed to be in these And demand not of Mr. Hickman the bread he eats nor the money he receives as if it were yours till we can have license to be maintained Rectors or at least to escape the Strappado in your Church But I promised you some more of Grotius in English to stop your mouth or open it whether you see cause and you shall have it Discus pag. 14. Grotius distinguisheth between the Opinions of Schoolmen which oblige no man for saith Melchior Canus our School alloweth us great liberty and therefore could give no just cause of departing as the Protestants did and between those things that are defined by Councils even by that of Trent The Acts of which if any man read with a mind propense to peace he will find that they may be explained fitly and agreeably to the places of the holy Scriptures and of the ancient Doctors that are put in the Margin And if besides this by the care of Bishops and Kings those things be taken away which contradict that holy doctrine and were brought in by evil manners and not by authority of Councils or Old Tradition then Grotius and many more with him will have that with which they may be content This is Grotius in English Reader is it not plain English Durst thou or I have been so uncharitable as to have said without his own consent that Mr. Pierce would have defended this Religion and that we have Rectors in England of this Religion and that those that call themselves Episcopal Divines and seduce unstudied partial Gentlement are crept into this garb and in this do act their parts so happily If words do signifie any thing it here appears that Grotius his Religion is that which is contained in the Council of Trent with all the rest and the reformation which will content him is only against undetermined School-Opinions and ill manners that Cross the doctrines of the Councils I 'le do the Papists so much right as to say I never met with a man of them that would not say as much Especially taking in all Old Tradition with all the Councils how much together by the ears now matters not as Grotius doth Yet more Discus p. 185. He professeth that he will so interpret Scripture God favouring him and pious men being consulted that he cross not the Rule delivered both by himself and by the Council of Trent c. Pag. 239. The Augustine Consession commodiously explained leath scarce any thing which may not be reconciled with those Opinions which are received with the Catholicks by Authority of Antiquity and of Synods as may be known out of Cassander and Hoffmeister And there are among the Jesuites also that think not otherwise Pag. 71. He tels us that the Churches that join with Rome have not only the Scriptures but the Opinions explained in the Councils and the Popes Decrees against Pelagius c. They have also received the Egregious Constitutions of Councils and Fathers in which there is abundantly enough for the correction of vices but all use them not as they ought They lye for the most part hid in Papers as a Sword in the Scabbard And this is it that all the lovers of piety and peace would have corrected And gives us Borromaeus for a president Pag. 48. These are the things which thanks be to God the Catholicks do not thus believe though many that call themselves Catholicks so live as if they did believe them but Protestants so live by force of their Opinions and Catholicks by the decay of Discipline Pag. 95. What was long ago the judgement of the Church of Rome the Mistris of others we may best know by the Epistles of the Roman Bishops to the Africans and French to which Grotius will subscribe with a most willing mind Rome you see is the Mistris of other Churches Pag 7. They accuse the Bull of Pius Quintus that it
is impossible to most of the world as is before shewed and were it possible it would be so tedious and laborious a course that its ridiculous in most to mention such Appeals Argum. 9. The Soveraign or Head of the Church as of every Body Politick hath power to deprive and denude any other of their power The Pope or General Council hath not power to do so therefore they are not of the Head or Soveraigns of the Church The Major is a known principle in polity He that giveth power can take it away And it 's confessed by the Opponents in this case The Minor I prove 1. Because else it would be in the power of the Pope or Council whether Christ shall have any Ministry and Church or not They may at least make havock of it at pleasure But that 's false 2. As is before said we receive not our power from them therefore they cannot take it from us 3. The Holy Ghost doth make us Over-seers of the flock Act. 20. 28. and lay a Necessity on us and denounce a woe against us if we preach not the Gospel and hath no where given us leave to give over his work if the Pope or a Council shall forbid us 4. And they can shew no Commission from Christ that giveth them such a power Arg. 10. If it were the form or Essence of the Church to have a humane visible Head then our Relation to such a head would be essential to our Membership or Christianity But the Consequence is false therefore so is the Antecedent The falseness of the consequent is apparent 1. In that it cruelly and ungroundedly unchristeneth all that do not believe in such a visible Head That is the greatest part by far of the Christians in the world And 2. By the ensuing argument And the necessity of the consequence is evident of it self Argum. 11. If such a visible Head were essential to the Church and so to our Christianity then should we all be Baptized into the Pope or a General Council as truly and necessarily as we are baptized into the Church But we neither are nor ought to be so baptized into the Pope or a General Council therefore they are not essential to the Church or our Christianity The Major viz. the Consequence is clear and not denyed by the Papists who affirm that Baptism engageth the baptized to the Pope He that is united to the body is united to the head he that is listed into the Army is listed to and under the General He that is entred into the Common-wealth is engaged to the Soveraign thereof But that we are not baptized to the Pope or a General Council is proved 1. Because neither the form of Baptism nor any word in Scripture doth affirm such a thing 2. No persons in Scripture times were so baptized Men were baptized before there was a Pope at Rome or a General Council And afterward none were baptized to them at least for many hundred years otherwise then as they were entred into the particular Church of Rome who were Inhabitants there 3. Never any was baptized to Peter or Paul or any of the Apostles saith Paul 1 Cor. 1. 13. was Paul crucified for you or were ye baptized in the name of Paul They must be baptized into the name of no visible Head but him that was crucified for them 4. The Apostle fully resolveth all the doubt 1 Cor. 12. describing the body into which we are baptized ver 13. And he entitleth it from the head Christ vers 12. but acknowledgeth no other head either co-equal with Christ or subordinate The highest of the other members are called by Paul but eyes and hands and thus Apostles Prophets Teachers Miracles gifts of healing helps Governments are only said to be set in the Church as eyes and hands in the body but not over the Church as the Head or Soveraign Power ver 17 18 19 28 29. so that though he that is baptized into the Church is baptized into an Organical body and related to the Pastors as to hands and eyes yet not as to a head nor as to a representative body neither And me thinks neither Pope nor Council should pretend to be more then Apostles Prophets and Teachers and Governments If the form of baptism had but delivered down the authority of the Pope or a Council as it did the authority and name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Tradition would have been a tolerable Argument for them though Scripture had been silent But when the Baptismal Tradition it self is silent and it is a doctrine so monstruously strange to the Primitive Church that all the baptized are baptized to the Pope or a General Council I know no remedy but they must both put up their pretenses Argum. 12. The Essence of the Church into which they were baptized was part of the doctrine which the Catechumeni were taught and all at age should learn before their baptism The Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was no part of the Doctrine which by the Primitive Church the Catechumeni were taught and ought to learn before their baptism Therefore the Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was not then taken to be of the Essence of the Church The Major is evident 1. In that the Catholick Church was in the Creed and it's essentials there briefly expressed in those terms Holy Catholick Church and Communion of Saints 2. In that Church History fully acquainteth us that it was the practice of the Catethists and other Teachers to open the Creed to them before they baptized them and therein the Article of the Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints The Minor is proved by an induction of all the Records of those times which in gross may now suffice according to our present intended brevity to be mentioned There is no one Writer of many hundred years no not Origen Tertullian Irenaeus or any other that purposely recite the Churches belief which the Catechumeni were taught nor Cyril or John Hierosol or any other who open those Articles to the Catechumens that ever once mention the Doctrine of the Headship of the Pope or Council when they open the Article of the Catholick Church nor yet at any other time If they affirm that they did let them prove it if they can Argum. 13. As it is high Treason in a Republick to deny the Soveraign and to be cut off from him is to be cut off from the Common-wealth so it would be a damning unchristening sin to deny the Headship of the Pope or General Council if they were indeed the Head of the Church But it is no such damning unchristening sin Therefore they are not the Head of the Church The Major is plain from the Nature of Soveraignty The Minor is certainly proved 1. Because it is never mentioned in Scripture nor any ancient Writer for many hundred years as a state of Apostasie nor as a damning sin nor as any sin to deny
many others so like to the Arguments and Language of the Seekers and Infidels that we can scarcely know whom we hear when they speak to us For the discovery of their desperate fraud in this point and the right confuting of them 1. You must distinguish them out of their confusion 2. You must grant them all that is true and just which we shall as stiffly defend as they 3. You must reject their errors and confute them And 4. You may turn their own principall weapon against them to the certain destruction of their cause Of all these briefly in course 1. For the first two I have spoke at large in the Preface to the second part of the Saints Rest and in the determination in the first part of my Book against Infidelity But briefly to touch some of the most necessary things here 1. We must distinguish the Tradition of the Scriptures or the Scripture doctrine from the Tradition of other doctrines pretended to be the rest of the word of God 2. We must distinguish between a certain proved Tradition and that which is unproved and uncertain if not grosly feigned 3. We must distinguish between the Tradition of the whole Catholick Church or the greater part and the Tradition of the lesser more corrupted selfish part even the Roman part 4. We must distinguish between a Tradition of necessary doctrine or practice and the Tradition of mutable Orders 5. And we must distinguish between Tradition by way of Testimony or History or by way of Teaching Ministry and Tradition by way of Decisive Judgement as to the Universal Church suffer them not to jumble all these together if you would not be cheated in the dark 2. And then concerning Tradition we grant all these following Propositions so that it is not all Tradition that we deny 1. We grant that the Holy Scriptures come down to us by the certain Tradition of our fathers and Teachers and that what the seeing and hearing of the Apostles was to them that lived with them that Tradition and belief of certain Tradition is to us by reason of our distance from the time and place So that though the Scripture bear its own evidence of a Divine author in the Image and superscription of God upon it yet we are beholden to Tradition for the Books themselves and for much of our knowledge that these are the true writings of the Apostles and Prophets and all and not depraved c. 2. We thankfully acknowledge that the Essentials of the faith and more hath been delivered even from the Apostles in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures as 1. In the Professions of the Churches faith 2. In the baptismal Covenant and signs and whole administration 3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 4. In Catechisms or Catechizings 5. In the prayers and praises of the Church 6. In the hearts of all true believers where God hath written all the Essentials of the Christian saith and Law So that we will not do as the Papists perversly do when God delivereth us the Christian Religion with two hands Scripture compleatly and Verbal Tradition in the essentials they quarrell with the one hand Scripture on pretence of defending the other so will not we quarrell with Tradition the other hand but thankfully confess a Tradition of the same Christianity by unwritten means which is delivered more fully in the Scripture and this Tradition is in some respect subordinate to Scripture and in some respect co-ordinate as the spirits left hand as it were to hold us out the truth 3. We confess that the Apostles delivered the Gospel by voice as well as by writing and that before they wrote it to the Churches 4. By this preaching we confess there were Christians made that had the doctrine of Christ in their hearts and Churches gathered that had his ordinances among them before the Gospel was written 5. And we confess that the Converted were bound to teach what they had received to their children servants and others 6. And that there was a setled Ministry in many Churches ordained to preach the Gospel as they had received it from the Apostles before it was written 7. And that the said ordinances of Baptism Catechizing Professions Eucharist Prayer Praise c. were instituted and in use before the Gospell was written for the Churches 8. And that when the Gospel was written as Tradition bringeth it to us so Ministers are commissioned to deliver both the Books and the doctrine of this Book as the Teachers of the Church and to preach it to those without for their conversion 9. And that Parents and Masters are bound to teach this doctrine to their children and servants yea if a Minister or other person were cast into the Indies or America without a Bible he must teach the doctrine though he remembred not the words 10. We grant that to the great benefit of the Church the writers of all ages have in subserviency to Scripture delivered down the Sacred Verities and Historians the matters of fact 11. And that the unanimous Consent of all the Churches manifested in their constant professions and practices is a great confirmation to us 12. And so is the suffering of the Martyrs for the same truth 13. And the Declarations of such consent by Councils is also a confirming Tradition 14. And the Confessions of Hereticks Jews and other Infidels are Providentiall and Historical Traditions for confirmation 15. And we profess that if we had any Certain proof of a Tradition from the Apostles of any thing more then is written in Scripture we would receive it All this we grant them for Tradition 3. But in these points following we oppose them 1. We take the holy Scriptures as the Compleat universal Rule or Law of faith and Holy living and we know of no Tradition that containeth another word of God Nay we know there is none such because the Scripture is true which asserteth its own sufficiency Scripture and unwritten Tradition are but two wayes of acquainting the world with the same Christian doctrine and not with divers parts of that Doctrine so as that Tradition should add to Scripture yea contrarily it is but the substance of greatest verities that are conveyed by unwritten Tradition but that and much more is contained in the Scripture where the Christian doctrine is compleat 2. The manner of delivery in a form of words which no man may alter and in so much fullness and perspicuity is much to be preferred before the meer verbal delivery of the same doctrine For 1. The Memory of man is not so strong as to retain as much as the Bible doth contain and preserve it safe from alterations or Corruptions Or if one man were of so strong a memory no man can imagine that all or most should be so Or if one Generation had such wonderfull memories we cannot imagine that all their posterity should have the like If there were no statute Books Records or Law-books in
which is most sufficient and most cleare in it self but for us This we all yield The second way is necessary to sciences diminutely and insufficiently delivered by their authors for their supplement so Aristotle is supplemented by Albertus Magnus c. The third way specially if it be not excessive is tolerable to the well being though it be not necessary The fourth way assertively is to be rejected as Poyson Thus are the authorities to be understood that forbid to add to or diminish from the Scripture Deut. 12 32. Well! by this time you may see that when such doctrine as this for Scripture sufficiency and perfection as the Rule of faith and life admitting no addition as necessary but explication nor any other as tolerable but moderate ampliation which indeed is the same I say when this doctrine past so lately in a Popish General Council you may see that the very Doctrine of Traditions equaled with Scripture or being another word of God necessary to faith and salvation containing what is wanting in Scripture is but lately sprung up in the world And sure the Traditions themselves be not old then when the conceit of them came but lately into the world 4. Well I have done the three first parts of this task but the chief is yet behind which is to shew 1 How little the Papists get by their Argument from Tradition 2. And how â—uch they lose by it even all their cause 1. Two things they very much plead Tradition for the one is their private doctrines and practices in which they disagree from other Christians and here they lose their labour with the judicious 1. Because they give us no sufficient proof that their Tradition is Apostolical 2. Because the dissent of other Churches sheweth that it is not universal with other Reasons before mentioned 2. The other Cause which they plead Tradition for is the Doctrine of Christianity it self And this they do in design to lead men to the Church of Rome as if we must be no Christians unless we are Christians upon the credit of the Pope and his Subjects And here I offer to their Consideration these two things to shew them the vanity of their arguing 1. We do not strive against you in producing any Tradition or Testimony of Antiquity for the Scripture or for Scripture Doctrine we make as much advantage of such just Tradition as you What do such men as White Vane Cressy c. think of when they argue so eagerly for the advantage of Tradition to prove the Scripture and Christian faith Is this any thing against us Nothing at all We accept our Religion from both the hands of Providence that bring it us Scripture and Tradition we abhor the contempt which these partial Disputers cast upon Scripture but we are not therefore so partial our selves as to refuse any collateral or subordinate help for our faith The more Testimonies the better The best of us have need of all the advantages for our faith that we can get When they have extolled the Certainty of Tradition to the highest we gladly joyn with them and accept of any certain Tradition of the mind of God And I advise all that would prove themselves wise defenders of the faith to take heed of rejecting Arguments from Providences or any necessary Testimony of man especially concerning matter of fact or of rejecting true Church History because the Papists over value it under the name of Tradition left such prove guilty of the like partiality and injuriousness to the truth as the Papists are And whereas the Papists imagine that this must lead us to their Church for Tradition I answer that in my next observation which is 2. We go beyond the Papists in arguing for just Tradition of the Christian faith and we make far greater advantage of it then they can do For 1. They argue but from Authoritative Decision by the Pope under the name of Church-Tradition excepting the French party whereas we argue from true History and certain Antiquity and prove what we say Where note 1. That their Tradition is indeed no Tradition for if it must be taken upon the credit of a man as supposed Infallible by supernatural if not miraculous endowment this is not Tradition but Prophesie And if they prove the man to be such a man it s all one to the Church whether he say that This was the Apostles doctrine or This I deliver my self to you from God For if he were so qualified he had the power and credit of a prophet or Apostle himself And therefore they must prove the Pope to be a Prophet before their kind of Tradition can get credit and when they have done that there is no need of it this their honest Dr. Holden was ware of upon which he hath so handsomely canvassed them 2. Note also that such as Dr. Holden Cressy Vane White and other of the French way that plead for Tradition mean a quite other thing then the Jesuited Italian Papist meanes and while they plead for universal Tradition they come nearer to the Protestants then to their Brethren if they did not contradict themselves when they have done by making meer Romish Tradition to be universal 3. Note also that when Papists speak of Tradition confusedly they give us just reason to call them to Define their Tradition and tell us what they mean by it before we dispute with them upon an ambiguous word seeing they are so divided among themselves that one party understands one thing by it and another another thing which we must not suffer these juglers to jumble together and confound 2. Another advantage in which we go beyond the Papists for Tradition is that as we argue not from the meer pretended supernatural Infallibility or Authority of any as they do but from rational Evidence of true Antiquity so we argue not from a sect or party as they do but from the Universal Church As far as the whole Church of Christ is of larger extent and greater credit then the Popish party so far is our Tradition more Credible then theirs And that is especially in three things 1. The Papists are fewer by far then the rest of the Christians in the world And the testimony of many yea of all is more then of a part 2. The Papists above other parties have espoused an interest that leads them to pretend and corrupt Tradition and bend all things to that interest of their own that they may Lord it over all the world But the whole Church can have no such Interest and Partiality 3. And the Papists are but one side and he that will judge rightly must hear the other sides speak too But the Tradition that we make use of is from all sides concurring yea Papists themselves in many points Yea our Tradition reacheth further then the Universal Church for we take in all rational Evidence even of Jews Heathens and Hereticks and Persecutors that bear witness to the matters of fact
Professors of our Religion therefore c. But all this will not serve them without a Catalogue and telling them where our Church was before Luther To this we further answer we have no peculiar Catholick Church of our own for there is but one and that is our Church Wherever the Christian Church was there was our Church And where-ever any Christians were congregate for Gods worship there were Churches of the same sort as our particular Churches And wherever Christianity was there our Religion was For we know no Religion but Christianity And would you have us give you a Catalogue of all the Christians in the world since Christ Or would you have us as vain as H. T. in his Manuall that names you some Popes and about twenty professors of their faith in each age as if twenty or thirty men were the Catholick Church Or as if those men were proved to be Papists by his naming them This is easie but silly disputing In a word Our Religion is Christianity 1. Christianity hath certain Essentials without which no man can be a Christian and it hath moreover many precious truths and duties necessary necessitate praecepti and also necessitate medii to the better being of a Christian Our being as Christians is in the former and our strength and increase and better-being is much in the latter From the former Religion and the Church is denominated Moreover 2. Our implicite and actuall explicite Belief as the Papists call them must be distinguished or our General and our particular Belief 3. And also the Positives of our Belief must be distinguished from the implyed Negatives and the express Articles themselves from their implyed Consectaries And now premising these three distinctions I shall tell you where our Church hath been in all Ages since the birth of Christ 1. In the dayes of Christ and his Apostles our Church was where they and all Christians were And our Religion was with them in all its parts both Essential and perfective That is we now Believe 1. All to be true that was delivered by the Apostles as from God with a General faith 2. We believe all the Essentials and as much more as we can understand with a Particular faith 3. But we cannot say that with such a particular faith we believe all that the Apostles believed or delivered for then we must say that we have the same degree of understanding as they and that we understand every word of the Scriptures 2. In the dayes of the A postles themselves the Consectaries and implied Verities and Rejections of all Heresies were not particularly and expresly delivered either in Scripture or Tradition as the Papists will confess 3. In the next ages after the Apostles our Church was the one Catholick Church containing all true Christians Headed by Jesus Christ and every such Christian too many to number was a member of it And for our Religion the Essential parts of it were contained both in the Holy Scriptures and in the Publick Professions Ordinances and Practices of the Church in those ages which you call Traditions and the rest of it even all the doctrines of faith and universal Laws of God which are its perfective parts they were fully contained in the holy Scriptures And some of our Rejections and Consectaries were then gathered and owned by the Church as Heresies occasioned the expressing of them and the rest were all implyed in the Apostolical Scripture doctrine which they preserved 4. By degrees many errors crept into the Church yet so that 1. Neither the Catholick Church nor one true Christian in sensu composito at least did reject any essential part of Christianity 2. And all parts of the Church were not alike corrupted with error but some more and some less 3. And still the whole Church held the holy Scripture it self and so had a perfect General or Implicite belief even while by evill consequences they oppugned many parts of their own profession 5. When in process of time by claiming the universall Soveraignty Rome had introduced a new pretended Catholick Church so far as their opinion took by superadding a New Head and form there was then a two fold Church in the West the Christian as Christian headed by Christ and the Papal as Papal Headed by the Pope yet so as they called it but one Church and by this usurped Monarchy as under Christ endeavoured to make but one of them by making both the Heads Essential when before one only was tolerable And if the Matter in any part may be the same and the same Man be a Christian and a Papist and so the same Assemblies yet still the forms are various and as Christians and part of the Catholick Church they are one thing and as Papists and members of the separating sect they are another thing Till this time there is no doubt of our Churches Visibility 6. In this time of the Romish Usurpation our Church was visible in three degrees in three severall sorts of persons 1. It was visible in the lowest degree among the Papists themselves not as Papists but as Christians For they never did to this day deny the Scriptures nor the Ancient Creeds nor Baptism the Lords Supper nor any of the substance of our Positive Articles of Religion They added a New Religion and Church of their own but still professed to hold all the old in consistency with it Wherever the truth of holy Scriptures and the ancient Creeds of the Church were professed there was our Religion before Luther But even among the Papists the holy Scriptures and the said Creeds were visibly professed therefore among them was our Religion And note here that Popery it self was not ripe for a corruption of the Christian faith professed till Luthers opposition heightned them For the Scripture was frequently before by Papists held to be a most sufficient Rule of faith as I shewed before from the Council of Basil and consequently Tradition was only pleaded as conservatory and expository of the Scripture but now the Council of Trent hath in a sort equalled them And this they were lately driven to when they found that out of Scripture they were unable to confute or suppress the truth 2. At the same time of the Churches oppression by the Papacy our Religion was visible and so our Church in a more illustrious sort among the Christians of the most of the world Greeks Ethiopians and the rest that never were subject to the usurpation of Rome but only many of them took him for the Patriarch primae sedis but not Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae or the Governour of the Universall Church So that here was a visibility of our Church doubly more eminent then among the Romanists 1. In that it was the far greatest part of the Catholick Church that thus held our Religion to whom the Papists were then but few 2. In that they did not only hold the same Positive Articles of faith with us but also among their Rejections
a Catholick Christian Communion in several Assemblies under several Pastors acknowledging each other the true Churches of Christ and joining in Synods when there is need or at least giving each other as Christian Brethren the right hand of Fellowship 3. If that may not be attained the next Degree desirable is That we may take one another for Christians and Churches of Christ though under such corruptions as we think we are bound to disown by denying the present exercise of Communion as we do with particular Offendors whom we only suspend but not condemn 4. If this much may not be had but we will needs excommunicate each other absolutely the next degree of Peace desirable is That we may at least so far regard the common truths that we are agreed upon and the souls of the people as to consult on certain terms on which we may most peacably mannage our differences with the least hatred and violence and disturbance of the Peace of Christendom and with the least impediment to the generall success of those common truths that we are all agreed in 5. If this may not be attained the lowest Degree desirable is That at least we may take each other for more tolerable adversaries then Mahometans and Infidels are and therefore may make a common Agreement to cease our wars and blood-shed and turn all our Arms against the great and common enemy of the Christian name Were it not for the Devill and wicked minds all these might be attained but if men be not themselves incarnate Devils we may expect the last And understand that the terms of the lowest Degrees are all implyed in the Higher And now for the Highest and most desirable Degree of Peace viz. That we may meet in the same Assemblies under the same Pastors there is so little probability that ever it should be accomplished and withall the various apprehensions of Christians doth make it so necessary to bear with one another in this that I shall say but little of it as knowing that I am like to lose my labor Only this much concerning the terms If you will impose no more in point of Belief as necessary to Salvation but what is contained in the holy Scriptures yea and in the three Creeds and four first General Councils and will leave the Pastors of the particular Churches to worship God according to the Rule of the holy Scriptures prudentially themselves determining of meer Cireumstances left to their determination according to the general Rules of Order Decency and Edification and bearing with a difference herein according to the different state of the Churches or judgement of the Pastors this is the only probable way to bring us to this highest degree of Peace Though according to this course men should be left to some liberty to joyn with what particular Congregation they see best and so would most commonly joyn with those that are neerest to their own judgement yet the minds of most would be so mollified by mutual forbearance and by being satisfied in the way that is thus commonly agreed on that they would not scruple to joyn with one another in worship in the several Assemblies And here I shall further add that if these terms cannot be yielded to yet all that will yield to the terms of the next Degree of Peace may be admitted into our Assemblies though we cannot joyn with them in theirs For the Papists have much more in the manner of their worship to keep us back then we have in ours to keep them back For their errors lie in Excess and they suppose ours to lie but in Defect Now Conscience may well yield to perform one part of a duty when it cannot perform the rest But it can never yield to commit one actual sin by doing what is forbidden by God E. G. If the Papists think that we sinfully omit the Sacrament of extream unction they may nevertheless be present at the Sacrament of Baptism If they think we preach not all the truth that we ought they may nevertheless hear and receive that which we do preach But in their Assemblies we must do those positive actions which our Consciences tell us are sins against God And therefore unless they will yield as they will not to the above mentioned terms we cannot joyn in their Assemblies but upon the terms in the next Chapter we can admit them into ours But if the Churches have not a necessary Liberty in this they will never agree but be still breaking into pieces or persecuting one another to force men to joyn with such Assemblies as best please them that bear the Sword Though we readily grant that to hear and learn the principles of Religion and submit to the state and duty of Catechumens men may with less inconvenience be forced and ordinarily should so be CHAP. LII THe second Degree of Peace desirable below the former is That if we cannot live under the same particular Pastors and joyn in the same Assemblies yet we may hold a distant Catholick Communion in several Assemblies without condemning or persecuting one another and may afford the special Love of Christians to each other This will not be done as long as we take each other for Hereticks and therefore the causes of those censures must be removed partly by a neerer agreement in our Principles and partly by a greater Moderation in our Censures of one another And this a man would think among Christians might be obtained The terms on which it must be had are these Suffer us to confine our selves in Worship and Church-government to the Word of God and the Determination of our particular Churches or Pastors about meer Circumstantials left to their determination and do you confine your selves accordingly or not extending your practise beyond the Canons of the four first General Councils and the rest called Canones Ecclesiae Universalis published by Justellus Tillius or the Codex Dionysii Exigui and for matters of Faith we will all profess to receive the Scripture and what ever is contained in the said Councils and the three Creeds and to insist upon no more as necessary And on these terms we may live in Love as Brethren Here note 1. That in matter of Faith we will not be bound to take more then is in the Scripture and yet we will take all as aforesaid that is in the Creeds because we are perswaded that there is no more then is in the Scripture 2. We will not tie each other to profess on what Grounds we receive the Doctrine of these Creeds and Councils If you receive it as Tradition superadded to Scripture and if we receive it as being the same with Scripture Doctrine or a meet Exposition of it we will leave each other in this without examination to their liberty as long as it is the same things that we believe 3. In matters of Worship and Government we may not be compelled to take in all that is in all these Councils but only
false So that here we must break with a Papist even where we might join in dispute with a heathen And how will Papists deal with Heathens if they will deny the proofs from sense and reason 3. But will they stand to the Validity of Proofs from Scripture No For 1. They take it to be but part of Gods word so that we may nor argue Negatively It is not in the holy Scripture therefore it is not an Article of faith or a Law of God For they will presently appeal to Tradition 2. And even so much as is in Scripture though they confess it to be true yet they confess it not to be by us intelligible and will not admit of any proof from it but with this limitation that you take it in that sense as the Church takes it For they are sworn by the Trent Oath to take it in that sence as the Holy Mother Church doth hold and hath held it in and never to take or interpret it but according to the unanimous sense of the Fathers So that they must know what sense all the Fathers are unanimous in before they can admit a proof from Scripture And before that can be done above a Cart-load of books must be read over or searched and when that 's done they will find that most texts were never medled with by most of those Fathers in their writings and in those that they did meddle with they disagreed in multitudes and where they disagree they are not unanimous and there the Papists are sworn to believe no sense at all And if they would have come down to a Major vote it is no short or easie matter to gather the votes And if they know the Fathers unanimous consent yet must they have the sense of the present Church too And is it not all one to make your adversary the Judge of your cause as the Judge of your Evidences and all your proofs 4. Well but at least may we not hope that they will stand to the Judgement of the Catholick Church And if so we will not take it for our adversary No they will not do so neither For 1. When they deny proof from sense and reason they must needs deny all that 's brought from the Church For the Church cannot judge it self but on supposition of the infallibility of sense 2. And when you argue from the judgement and practice of the greater part of the Church they presently disclaim them all as Hereticks or Schismaticks and will have no man be a Valid witness but themselves The Greeks the Aethiopians the Armenians the Protestants all are Hereticks or Schismaticks save they and therefore may not be witnesses in the case So that you see upon what terms we stand with the Papists that will admit of no proofs upon the Infallibility of Sense or Reason or the sufficiency of Scripture or the testimony of the Catholick Church but only from themselves CHAP. XIII Detect 4 UNderstand what the Papists mean when they are still calling to you for a Judge of Controversies If you would dispute with them they are presently asking you Who shall be the judge and perswading you that it is in vain to dispute without a living Judge for every man will be the Judge himself and every mans cause will be right in his own eyes and all the world will be still at odds till we are agreed who shall be the Judge To help you to see the sense of this deceit and then to confute it 1. You may easily observe that this is the plain drift of all to perswade you to make them your judges and yield the cause instead of disputing it For it is no other judge but themselves that they will admit Yield first that the Pope or his Council is the judge of all controversies and then its folly to dispute against them so that if you will yield them the cause first they will then dispute with you after 2. But what is to be said to the pretence of the Necessity of a Judge I answer 1. It s against all reason and experience to think that all enquiries or disputes are vain unless there be a Judge to decide the case A Judge is a Ruling decider not to satisfie mens minds so much as to preserve Order and Peace and Justice in the Society But there are thousands of cases to be privately discussed that we never need to bring to a Judge Every Husbandman and Tradesman and Navigator and other Artificer doth meet with doubts and difficulties in his way which he laboureth to Discern and satisfieth himself with a Judgement of Discretion without a Ruling Judge We eat and drink and clothe our selves and follow our daily labours without a Judge though we meet with controversies in almost all what meat or drink is best for quality or quantity and a hundred like doubts Men do marry and build and buy and sell and take Physick and dispatch their greatest worldly business without a Judge Judges are only for such controverted cases as cannot well be decided without them to the attaining of the Ends of Government 2. Is it not against the daily practice of the Papists to think or say that all disputes and controversies must have a Judge Who is the Judge between the Nominals Reals and Formalists the Dominicans Franciscans and Jesuites in all those controversies which have Cartloads of Books written on them Their Pope or Councils dare not Judge between them Do they not daily dispute in their Schools among themselves without a Judge and still write books against one another without a Judge 3. Understand well the use and differences of Judgement The sentence is but a means to the execution and Judges cannot determine the mind and will of man but preserve outward Order if men will not see the truth themselves Me thinks the Jesuits that are so eager for free will should easily grant that the Pope by his definition cannot determine the Will of man And they see that Hereticks remain Hereticks when the Pope hath said all that he can And if he can cure them all by his determinations he is much too blame that he doth not And if a mans mind be to be settled an Infallible Teacher is fitter then a Judge Judgement then being for Execution when you ask Who shall be the Judge I answer that Judgement is either total absolute and final or it is only to a certain particular end limited and subordinate from which there is an Appeal In the former case there is no Judge but Christ and the Father by him No absolute decision can be made till the great Judgement come and then all will be fully and finally decided And for the limited present Judgements of men they are of several sorts according to their several Ends. When the question is Who shall be corporally punished as an Heretick the Magistrate is Judge For coercive punishment being his work the Judgement must be his also But when the question is Who
of necessity to the Reception of the form then cause them to put it down And then 1. It is either true Godliness and then farewell Papacy 2. Or it is common honesty and sobriety and then still farewell Papacy 3. Or it is learning and knowledge and then Alphonsus à Castro and others of their own will bear witness that some Popes understood not their Grammar and one good man being saith Wernerus rudis literarum was fain to get another Compope to say his offices though it happened that they could not agree and so a third was chosen and his choice disliked and a fourth chosen till there was six chosen Popes alive at once 4. If age be necessary then the Children Popes one at least have interrupted the succession 5. Yea if the Masculine Gender be but Necessary Pope Joan hath interrupted the succession unless between forty or fifty of their own Historians deceive us 6. but all this is the smallest part the Question is whether faith in Christ be of Necessity to a Pope If so then what will you say to John the twenty third that denyed the life to come and to those that have been guilty of Heresie So that by that time they have put the necessary Qualification of a Pope into their Definition you shall find them hard put to it 3. But yet the worst is behind They be not agreed about the very form of the Papacy For some say He is the Head of all the Catholick Church But others with the General Councils of Constance and Basil say that he is the Head only of the singular members but a subject to the Catholick Church represented in a Council which receiveth its power immediately from Christ so that you may see what a case they will be in if they be but forced to tell you what they mean by a Pope and to Define him too 3. And if they use the name of a General Council call them to Define what they mean by a General Council some of them will say It must be a true Representative of the whole Catholick Church so that Morally they are all Consenting to what is there done But then the doubt remaineth whether there be a Necessity of any certain Number of Bishops If not it seems the whole Church may agree that twenty or ten or two or one shall represent them and be a general Council But if this must not hold then Must All the Bishops of the world be there or only some and how many Binnius saith Vol. 1. pag. 313. that a General Council is that where all the Bishops of the whole world may and ought to be present unless they be lawfully hindred and in which none but the Pope of Rome by himself or his Legates is wont to preside And vol. 3. pag. 229. It is when all the Church is morally Represented the Pope presiding But what a loss are we here at 1. How prove they that only Bishops should be members of a Council and not Presbyters 2. But if that were granted them without proof and contrary to practise yet we are at a far greater loss to know what a Bishop is that must here be a member Is he only the Primus Presbyterorum in a presbyterie Or is he the Ruler of a Presbyterie they Ruling the people Or is he the sole Ruler of Presbyters and people And is he to be in every Parish where are divers presbyters or only in every Classâ—s or lesser Synod or only in every County or Province Or shall the old Rule stand that every City must have one If so then are not all our Corporations true Cities And so by any of these Rules there have been few General Councils in the world And what word of God is there why London Worcester Canterbury should have Bishops and Shrewsbury Ipswich Plimouth and hundreds such should have none so that if the very matter of your Councils be so humane and disordered what is the Council composed of such As most of them use the term Bishop you would put them as hard to it to Define a Bishop almost as to define a Pope 3. But suppose they help you over this rub yet by their Definition they null many General Councils because the Pope presided not there even the first General Council it self at Nice whatsoever they boldly feign to the contrary 4. And by this Rule either we never had a General Council or but few For instance At the first Session of the Council of Trent the last and most famous Council there were but four Archbishops and twenty two Bishops taking in the Titular Bishops of Upsal Armach and Worcester And at divers other Sessions after but eight or nine or very few more In the fourth Session which Decreed to receive Tradition with equal pious affection and reverence as the holy Scriptures and which gave us a false Catalogue of the Canonical Books there were but the Popes Legates two Cardinals nine Archbishops titular and all and forty one or forty two Bishops titular and all Now we would fain know whether this was the whole Church morally represented and whether these twenty two or forty one were all the Bishops of the world or the hundreth part of them Yea whether all the Bishops of the African Asian and other Churches could and ought to have been there If they say that most of the Bishops of the world are Hereticks or Schismaticks and had nothing to do to be there we are sure that this is but the impudent censure of a sect that unchurcheth most of Christs Church for far less faults then it self is guilty of But how is this heavy censure proved 5. Nay to make short of it its plain by this Definition that a General Council is but a name at least since the daies when the Church lay in a narrow room and that no such thing is to be expected in the world For 1. If all Bishops or half come thither what shall their poor flocks do the while 2. How many years must they be travailing from America Ethiopia and all the remote parts of the Christian world 3. So much shipping and provision and so many thousand pound a man is necessary for the Convoy of many that alas the poor Bishops be not able to defray the hundreth part of the charge 4. Abundance of them are so aged and weak that they are unfit for the journey 5. Their Princes are some of them Infidels and some at wars and will never give them leave to come 6. They must pass through many Kingdoms of the enemies or that are in wars that will never suffer them to pass 7. The tediousness and hazards of the journey with change of air is like to be the death of most of them and so it s but a plot to put an end to the Church 8. The length of General Councils is such some of them being ten years and some as that at Trent eighteen years that so many Bishops to be so long
at Anatolius his rising and the equaling him with Rome but they never excepted one word that ever I found against the saying that it was because of the Empire that Rome by the Fathers had the Primacy given it And the Reason given by themselves Concil Constant Can. 5. is because Constantinople is new Rome But Binnius saith that Rome receiveth not the Canons of this Council neither but only their condemnation of Macedonius And he saith that every Council hath just so much strength and authority as the Apostolick seat bestoweth on it For saith he unless this be admitted no reason can be given why some Councils of greater numbers of Bishops were reprobated and others of a smaller number confirmed Bin. Vol. 2. p. 515. What would you have more Sirs Do you not see yet what the Popish Catholick Church is and what they mean when they mouth it out to you and ask you whether your private Judgement be safer or wiser then that of the whole Church or of all the Christian world You see they mean all this while but one man whom Gretser and others plainly confess they call the Church So that indeed it is General Councils and all the Christian world or Church that are the ignorant fallible and oft erring part and it is one man that sometime is reputed an incarnate Devil by a General Council too that is the unerring Pillar of the Church and wiser then all they Do you not see that they make a meer nothing or mockery of General Councils any further then they please the Pope And can you expect that any thing should please them that is against his Greatness or as Julius the second calls it his holding the place of the great God the Maker of all things and all Laws What a vile abuse is it then of the Pope to trouble the world by the meetings and Consultations of General Councils when he can sit at Rome and contradict them infallibly and Good man is fain to save the Catholick Church from the Errors that General Councils the Representative Catholick Church would else lead them into and therefore could he not with less ado infallibly make us Laws Canons and Scriptures without them For sure that which the Pope can do against a General Council he can do without them If he can Infallibly contradict a General Council and Infallibly Rule us contrary to their Judgement he may no doubt Infallibly Rule us without them And therefore of late times they have learnt so much wit that you may look long enough before you see a General Council And I think the Council of Constance were no better Prognosticators then William Lilly nor no more effectuall Lawgivers then Wat Tyler when they Prognosticated or Ordained Decennial Councils And I will be judged by all the world And here also you may see what account the Papists make even of the first General Councils It s all one with them to judge others Hereticks for contradicting especially the four first General Councils compared to the four Evangelists as the Scripture it self and yet who would have thought it they profess themselves to reject the Canons or Decrees of both these the first of Constantinople and that of Calcedon in part And now I think on it by this priviledge I cannot see but the Pope is priviledged from all possibility of being an Heretick personally But these things are on the by I return to the point in hand which is to prove to you that not only the Romish Universal Monarchy and Vice-godhead but even its Patriarchal Primacy was no Apostolical Tradition but an Humane Institution founded on this Consideration that Rome was the Imperial Seat and City 5. And Humane it must needs be 1. For we find that Councils did not declare it as any part of the Law of God but Ordain it as an act of their own 2. We find them adding the Patriarchate of Constantinople which was a new seat neither Patriarch nor Bishop residing there in the Apostles dayes or long after 3. Yea we find them giving this new Patriarch the second place and once making him equal with old Rome which they would never have presumed to do if they had thought that the Patriarchship of Alexandria Antioch or Rome had been of Divine Institution for what horrible arrogancy would that have been when the Holy Ghost by the Apostles had made Alexandria second and Antioch third and Rome first for a Council to set Constantinople before two of them and equal with the first 6. And therefore we have reason to think that if Patriarchs be desirable creatures there may more and more new ones now be made as lawfully as Constantinople was 7. And we do not think that a General Council or Pope can make a man of one Nation to be Patriarch of the Church in another Nation that perhaps may be in wars with the Prince of the first Nation but that each Prince with the Church under their Power hath more to do in it then either Pope or Council And if Portugal and France set up Patriarchs at home they do as lawfully as the Patriarch of Constantinople was set up 8. And therefore we must needs judge that to disobey the Pope or withdraw from his subjection if he had never forfeited his Patriarchship by the claim of an Universal Headship were no greater a sin then to disobey or withdraw from the Patriarch of Alexandria Antioch or Constantinople either the Government by Patriarchs and Arch-bishops is of Gods ordaining and approving or not if not as most of the Protestants hold then it is no sin to reject any of them If it be of God then to reject any of them though in simple error is a sin of disobedience through ignorance but is far from proving a man to be no member of the Catholick Church for sure Patriarchs are far from being Essential parts of the Catholick Church For 9. We conclude as in the Papists own Judgement the Catholick Church may be without the Patriarch of Constantinople Alexandria or Antioch so may it therefore without the Pope of Rome CHAP. XX. Detect 11. THE great endeavour of the Papists is to advance Tradition The Council of Trent Ses 4. hath equalled it with the Scriptures as to the pious affection and reverence wherewith they receive it On pretence of this Tradition they have added abundance of new Articles to the faith and accuse us as Hereticks for not receiving their Traditions And this is a principall difference betwixt us that we take the Scriptures to be sufficient to acquaint us with the will of God as the Rule of faith and holy living and they take it to be but part of the word of God and that the other part is in unwritten Tradition which they equal with this as afore For the maintaining of Tradition it is that they write so much to the dishonour of the holy Scripture as you may find in Rushworths Dialogues and Tho. Whites Defence of them and
Popes and Councils Their own Polidore Virgil de Inven. Rerum p. 410. lib 8. c. 4. calling us a Sect doth give you a just description of us Ita licentia pacta loquendi c. i. e. Having once got leave to speak that sect did marvailously increase in a short time which is called Evangelicall because they affirm that no Law is to be received which belongeth to salvation but what is given by Christ or the Apostles Mark what they confess themselves of our Religion And yet these very men have the face to charge us with Novelty as if Christ and his Apostles were not of sufficient Antiquity for them Our main quarrel with them is for adding new inventions in Religion and their principal business against us is to defend it and yet they call theirs the old Religion and ours the new Our Argument lieth thus That which is most conform to the Doctrine and Practice of Christ and his Apostles is the truly Antient Religion and Church But our Religion and Church is most conform to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles therefore it is the truly antient Religion and Church The Major they will yield For no older Religion is desirable further then as the Law of Nature and Moral Determinations of God are still in force I suppose they will not plead for Judaism For the Minor we lay our cause upon it and are ready to produce our evidence for the Conformity of our Religion and Churches to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles That Religion which is most conform to the Holy Scriture is most conform to the doctrine and practice of Christ and his Apostles But our Religion and Churches is most conform to the holy Scriptures therefore c. They can say nothing against the Major but that the Scripture is Insufficient without Tradition But for that 1. We have no Rule of faith but what is by themselves confessed to be true They acknowledge Scripture to be the true word of God So that the Truth of our Rule is Justified by themselves 2. Let them shew us as good Evidence that their Additional Articles of faith or Laws of life came from the Apostles as we do that the Scriptures came from them and then we shall confess that we come short of them Let them take the Controversies between us point by point and bring their proof and we will bring ours and let that Religion carry it that is Apostolicall But we are sure that by this means they will be proved Novelists For 1. Their Traditions in matter of faith superadded to the Scripture are meer Hereticall or Erroneous forgeries and they can give us no proof that ever they were Apostolicall 2. The Scripture affirmeth its own sufficiency and therefore excludeth their Traditions 3. I shewed you how in their own General Council at Basil the Scripture sufficiency was defended 4. I have shewed you in my Book called the Safe Religion that the ancient Fathers were for the sufficiency of Scripture 5. Their Traditions are the opinions of a dividing sect contrary to the Traditions or doctrine of the present Catholick Church the far greater part of Christians being against them 6. We are able to shew that the time was for some hundred years after Christ when most of their pretended Traditions were unknown or abhorred by the Christian Church and no such things were in being among them 7. And we can prove that the chief points of Controversie mantained against us are not only without Scripture but against it and from thence we have full particular evidence to disprove them If the Scriptures be true as they confess them to be then no Tradition can be Apostolicall or true that is contrary to them For example the Papists Tradition is that the Clergy is exempt from the Magistrates judgement But the holy Scripture saith Let every soul be subject to the higher power Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4 5. The Papists Tradition is for serving God publickly in an unknown tongue But the holy Scripture is fully against it Their Tradition is against Lay mens reading the Scripture in a known tongue without special License from their ordinary But Scripture and all antiquity is against them The like we may say of many other Controversies So that these seven wayes we know their Traditions to be deceitfull because they are 1. Unproved 2. Against the sufficiency of Scripture 3. Against their own former confessions 4. Against the concent of the Fathers 5. Contrary to the judgement of most of the Catholick Church 6. We can prove that once the Church was without them 7. And they are many of them contrary to express Scripture And if Scripture will but shew which of us is neerest the doctrine and practice of the Apostles then the controversie is ended or in a fair way to it For we provoke them to try the cause by Scripture and they deny it we profess it is the Rule and test of our Religion but they appeal to another Rule and test And thus you may see which is the old Religion which will be somewhat fullyer cleared in that which followeth II. And that our Church and Religion hath been continued from the dayes of Christ till now we prove thus 1. From the promise of Christ which cannot be broken Christ hath promised in his word that that Church and Religion which is most conform to the Scripture shall continue to the end But our Church and Religion is most conform to the Scripture therefore Christ hath promised that it shall continue to the end 2. From the event The Christian Religion and Catholick Church hath continued from the dayes of Christ till now But ours is the Christian Religion and Catholick Church therefore ours hath continued from the dayes of Christ till now The Major they will grant the Minor is proved by parts thus 1. That Religion which hath all the Essentials of Christianity and doth not deny or destroy any Essential part of it is the Christian Religion but such is ours therefore c. 2. That Religion which the Apostles were of is the Christian Religion But ours is the same that the Apostles were of therefore c. 3. That Religion which is neerer the Scripture then the Romish Religion is certainly the Christian Religion But so is ours therefore c. 4. They that believe not only all that in particular that is contained in the Ancient Creeds of the Church but also in generall all that is besides in the holy Scripture are of the Christian Religion But thus do the Reformed Churches believe c. 2. And for our Church 1. They that are of that one holy Catholick Church whereof Christ is the head and all true Christians are members are of the true Church For there is but one Catholick Church But so are we therefore c. 2. They that are Sanctified Justified have the love of God in them are members of the true Catholick Church But such are all that are sincere
not the subject of the Pope as universal Monarch Nor can any other be saved as being without the Church 3. And that the Church of Rome is by Gods appointment the Mistris of all other Churches 4. And that the Pope of Rome is Infallible 5. That we cannot believe the Scriptures to be the word of God or the Christian doctrine to be true but upon the Authoritative Tradition of the Roman Church and upon the knowledge or belief of their Infallibility that is we must believe in the Pope as Infallible before we can believe in Christ who is pretended to give him that infallibility 6. That no Scripture is by any man to be interpreted but according to the sence of the Pope or Roman Church and the unanimous consent of the Fathers 7. That a General Council approved by the Pope cannot err but a General Council not approved by the Pope may err 8. That nothing is to us an Article of faith till it be declared by the Pope or a General Council though it was long before declared by Christ or his Apostles as plain as they can speak 9. That a General Council hath no more validity then the Pope giveth it 10. That no Pastor hath a valid Ordination unless it be derived from the Pope 11. That there are Articles of faith of Necessity to our Salvation which are not contained in the Holy Scriptures nor can be proved by them 12. That such Traditions are to be received with equal pious affection and reverence as the holy Scriptures 13. That Images have equal honour with the Holy Gospel 14. That the Clergy of the Catholick Church ought to swear obedience to the Pope as Christs Vicar 15. That the Pope should be a temporal Prince 16. That the Pope and his Clergy ought to be exempted from the Government of Princes and Princes ought not to judge and punish the Clergy till the Pope deliver them to their power having degraded them 17. That the Pope may dispossess Princes of their Dominions and give them to others if those Princes be such as he judgeth hereticks or will not exterminate Hereticks 18. That in such cases the Pope may discharge all the subjects from their allegiance and fidelity 19. That the Pope in his own Territories and Princes in theirs must burn or otherwise put to death all that deny Transubstantiation the Popes Soveraignty or such doctrines as are afore expressed when the Pope hath sentenced them 20. That the people should ordinarily be forbidden to read the Scripture in a known tongue except some few that have a license from the ordinary 21. That publick Prayers Prayses and other publick worship of God should be performed constantly in a language not understood by the People or only in Latine Greek or Hebrew 22. That the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist is Transubtantiate into the very body and blood of Christ so that it is no more true Bread or Wine though our eyes tast and feeling tell us that it is 23. That the consecrated host is to be worshipped with Divine worship and called our Lord God 24. That the Pope may oblige the people to receive the Eucharist only in one kind and forbid them the Cup. 25. That the sins called venial by the Papists are properly no sins and deserve no more but temporal punishment 26. That we may be perfect in this life by this double perfection 1. To have no sin but to keep all Gods Law perfectly 2. To supererogate by doing more then is our Duty 27. That our works properly merit salvation of God by way of Commutative Justice or by the Condignity of the works as proportioned to the Reward 28. That Priests should generally be fordidden Marriage 29. That there is a fire called Purgatory where souls are tormented and where sin is pardoned in another world 30. That in Baptism there is an implicite vow of obedience to the Pope of Rome 31. That God is ordinarily to be worshipped by the Oblation of a true proper propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead where the Priest only shall eat and drink the body and blood of Christ while the Congregation look on and partake not 32. That the Canon of Scripture is the same that is declared by the Council of Trent I will pass by abundance more to avoid tediousness And I will not stay to enquire which of these are proper to the Papists But I am resolved so to receive many of them as they can prove a Catholick succession of that is that they were in all ages the Doctrine of the Universal Church And I crave the charity of such a proof from some Papist or other if they have any charity in them and that they will no longer keep universal Tradition in their purses And I would desire H. T. to revise his Catalogue and instead of twenty or thirty dead and silent names that signifie no more then Blanks or Cyphers he would prove that both those persons and the Catholick Church did in every age hold these thirty two forementioned doctrines And when hath done then let him boast of his Catalogue Till they will perform this task let them never more for shame call to us for Catalogues or proof of succession But if they are so unkind that they will not give us any proof of such a Catholick succession of Popery we shall be ready to supererogate and give them full proof of the Negative That there hath been no such succession of these thirty two points as soon as we can perceive that they will ingeniously entertain it though indeed it hath been often done already But certainly it belongeth to them that superinduce more Articles of Faith to prove the continuation of their own Articles through all ages of which anon Well! but one of these Articles at least the Popes Soveraignty H. T. will prove successively if you will be credulous enough In the first age he proves it from Peters words Act. 15. 7 8 9 10. God chose Peter to convert Cornelius and his company therefore the Pope is the Universall Monarch Are you not all convinced by this admirable argument But he forgot that Bellarmine Ragusius in Concil Basil and others of them say that no Article can be proved from Scripture but from the proper literall sence To say somewhat more he unseasonably talks of the Council of Sardis and Calcedon an 400. 451. lest the first age have but a blank page In the second age he hath nothing but the names of a few that never dreamt of Popery and a Canon which you must believe was the Apostles that Priests must communicate Of which we are well content In the third Age he nameth fifteen Bishops of Rome of whom the last was deposed for offering incense to Saturn Jupiter c. But not a syllable to prove that one of these Bishops was the universal Monarch Much less that the Catholick Church was for such Monarchy But to excuse the matter he tells you that
the second and third Age produced no Councils the greater deceivers then are the Papists that have found us Councils then and so you have no Catholick succession proved Yea but he saith they have successions of Popes Martyrs and Confessors which is sufficient for their purposes See the strength of Popery Any thing is sufficient for your purposes it seems Rome had Bishops therefore they were the Universal Rulers of the Church A strong consequence Rome had Martyrs and Confessors therefore it was the Mistris of all Churches Who can resist these arguments But why did you not prove that your Confessors and Martyrs suffered for attesting the Popes Soveraignty If they suffered but for Christianity that will prove them but Christians and not Papists Thus you see to the confusion of the Papists that they have nothing to shew for the succession or antiquity of Popery for the three first Ages Yea worse then nothing For here he comes in with some of the Decretals forsooth of some of their Bishops Decretals unknown till a while ago in the world brought out by Isidore Mercator but with so little cunning as left them naked to the shame of the world the falshood of them being out of themselves fully proved by Blondell Reignolds and many more and confessed by some of themselves Here you see the first foundation of Papal succession even a bundle of fictions lately fetcht from whence they please to cheat the ignorant part of the world But in the fourth and fifth ages H. T. doth make us amends for his want of proof from the three first But suppose he do what 's that to a succession while the three first ages are strangers to Popery Well! but lets hear what he hath at last His first proof after a few silent names is from the Council of Nice And what saith that why 1. It defined that the Son of God is consubstantiall to his Father and true God And what 's that to Popery 2 But it defined the Popes Soveraignty But how prove you that Why it is in the thirty ninth Arab. Canon O what Consciences have those men that dare thus abuse and cheat the ignorant As if the Canons of the first General Council had never been known to the world till the other day that Alphonsus Pisanus a Jesuite publisheth them out of Pope Julius and I know not what Arabick book These men that can make both Councils and Canons at their pleasure above a thousand years after the supposed time of their existence do never need to want authority And indeed this is a cheaper way of Canon-making in a corner then to trouble all the Bishops in the world with a great deal of cost and travail to make them But if this be the foundation the building is answerable Their Bishop Zosimus had not been acquainted with these new Articles of an old Council when he put his trick upon the sixth Council of Carthage where for the advancement of his power though not to an universall Monarchy yet to a preparative degree he layeth his claim from the Council of Nice as saying Placuit ut si Episcopus accusatus fuerit c. which was that If an ejected Bishop appeal to Rome the Bishop of Rome appoint some of the next province to judge or if yet he destre his cause to be heard the Bishop of Rome shall appoint a Presbyter his Legate c. In this Council were 217. Bishops Aurelius being president and Augustine being one They told the Pope that they would yield to him till the true copies of the Council of Nice were searched for those that they had seen had none of them those words in that Zosimus alledged Hereupon they send abroad to the Churches of the East to Constantinople Alexandria Antioch c. for the ancient Canons From hence they received several copies which all agreed but none of them had either Zosimus forgery in nor the forged clause which Bellarmine must have in much less the eighty Canons of Pisanus the Jesuite or this one which H. T. doth found his succession on but only the twenty Canons there mentioned which have not a word for the Popes Soveraignty And here note 1. That Zosimus knew not then of Pisanus Canons or else he would have alledged them nor yet of Bellarmines new part of a Canon for the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome 2. That Zosimus himself had not the faith the wit or the memory to plead either Scripture Apostolical Institution or Tradition for his priviledge but only a false Canon of the Council of Nice as looking no higher it seems for his authority 3. How early the Roman Bishops begun both to aspire and make use of forgeries to accomplish it 4. That there was no such Apostolick or Church Tradition for this Roman power as our Masters of Tradition now plead for which all the Catholick Church must know For the whole Council with all the Churches of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch c. that is in a manner all save Rome were ignorant of that which Zosimus would have had them believe and Bellarmine and H. T. would have us to believe 5. Note also how little the Church then believed the Popes infallibility 6. Yea Note how upon the reception of the several Copies of the Nicene Canons they modestly convicted Zosimus of falshood And how the Council resolved against his usurpation See in the African Councils the Epistle of Cyril and Alexandria and Atticus of Constantinople and the Epistles of the Council to Boniface and Celestine In their Epistle to Boniface before they had received their answers from other Churches about the Nicene Canons they tell him that they believed they should not suffer that Arrogancy non sumus istum typhum passuri But to Celestine they conclude more plainly though modestly Presbyterorum quoque sequentium c. i. e. Let your holiness as beseemeth you repell the wicked refuges of Presbyters and the Clergy that follow them because this is not derogate or taken from the African Church by any Definition of the Fathers and the Nicene Decrees most plainly committed both the inferiour Clergy and Bishops themselves to the Metropolitans For they did most prudently and most justly provide that all businesses N. B. all should be ended in the very places where they begun and the Grace of the holy Ghost will not or should not be wanting to each province which equity should by the Priests of Christ be prudently observed and most constantly maintained Especially because it is granted to every one to appeal to the Councils of their own Province or to a Universall Council if he be offended with the judgement of the Cognitors Unless there should be any one that can think that our God can inspire a justice of tryall into any one man N. B. and deny it to innumerable Priests that are congregated in Councill Or how can that judgement that 's past beyond sea be valid to which the necessary persons of the witness
And they extoll Cyril equally with Celestine Novo Paulo Celestine they forgot Peter Novo Paulo Cyrillo Unu◠Celestinus Unus Cyrillus c. The next witness brought is the Council of Calcedon as caling Leo Universal Archbishop and Patriarch of old Rome and sentence is pronounced against Dioscorus in the names of Leo and Saint Peter Answ 1. This is but one of your common frauds It was not the Council that called him universall Archbishop but two Deacons in the superscription of their Libels viz. Thedodorus and Ischirion And were they the Catholick Church 2. By Universal Archbishop it s plain that they meant no more then the chief in dignity and order of all Archbishops and not the Governour of all 3. I have shewed you before that this very Council in its Canons not only give the Bishop of Constantinople equal priviledges with the Bishop of Rome but expresly say that Rome received this primacy of order à patribus from a Council because it was Sedes Imperii the seat of the Emperour I thought I had given you enough of this Council before Sure I am when Bellarmine comes to this Canon he hath nothing to say for his cause but plainly to charge this famous fourth General Council with lying or falshood and to say that the Pope approved not this Canon But approved or not approved if this was the Catholick Church representative sure I am that their testimony is valid to prove that there was then no Catholick reception of the Roman Monarchy as of God but contrarily a meer primacy of Dignity and Honour given it newly by men In the sixth age he had not one Council to pretend it seems for the Roman Soveraignty for he cites none but about other matters of which anon In the seventh age which he calls the sixth though then the Soveraignty was claimed by Boniface he citeth no Council for it niether In the eighth age from the year seven hundred he cites the second Council of Nice as approving an Epistle of Pope Adrian wherein he saith that the Roman Church is the Head of all Churches Answ 1. But whether Adrian himself by the Head meant the chief in Dignity or the Governour of all is a great doubt 2. But whatever he meant the Synods approving his Epistle for Images is no proof that they approved every word in it 3. Yea Tharasius seems to imply the contrary calling him only Veteris Romae primas testatorum principum successor as if his Sea had the Priviledge only of being the Primate of Rome and not the Ruler of the world 4. But if this Council did as it did not openly own the Papal Soveraignty it had been no great honour to him For as in their decrees for Images they contradicted two Councils at Constantinople and that at Frankford contradicteth them so might they as well contradict the Church in this Even as they defined Angels to be corporeal which the Council of Laterane afterward contradicted But the plain truth is it was the scope of Adrians Epistle as for Images which they expressed themselves to approve And that their Image-worship it self hath no Catholick succession me thinks they should easily grant considering not only 1. That there is nothing in the first ages for them 2. And that Epiphanius and many before him speak expresly against it 3. But specially that there have been more General Councils of those ages against them then for them and that before this of Nice decreed for them the representative Catholick Church except still the Pope be the Catholick Church did condemn them I suppose by this time you will think it needless for me to follow H. T. any further in his Catalogue I am content that any impartial sober person judge whether here be a satisfactory proof of a Catholick succession of the Papal Soveraignty when through so many ages they bring not a word for any succession at all much less that it was owned by the Catholick Church and least of all that all the rest of Popery was so owned Object But at least some other points of Popery are proved by H. T. to have such a succession Answ Peruse his proofs and freely judge Two of the thirty two Articles which I mentioned before he speaks to The one is that Bishops Priests and Deacons should abstain from their Wives or be degraded But 1. The Council which he cites for this is but a Provincial Council in Spain in the fifth Age and what 's this to Catholick succession 2. The Evidences for the Antiquity of Priests marriages are so clear and numerous that I will not thank any of them to confess their doctrine a Novelty 1 Cor. 9. 5. Have we not power to lead about a Sister a Wife as well as other Apostles and as the brethren of the Lord and Cephas I hope they will not deny that Peter had a Wife 1 Tim. 3. 2 4. A Bishop must be blameless the husband of one Wife One that ruleth well his own house having his children in subjection with all gravity ver 12. Let the Deacons be the husbands of one wife ruling their children and their own houses well Tit. 1. 7. If any be blameless the husband of one Wife having faithfull children The Antient Canons called the Apostles say Can. 6. Let not a Bishop or Presbyter put away his own Wife on pretence of Religion And if he reject her let him be excommunicated but if he persevere let him be deposed Let Bellarmine perswade those that will believe him that this Canon speaks but of denying them maintenance Canons as well as Scripture are unintelligible to these men The Canons at Trull of the fifth and sixth Council do expresly expound this Apostolick Canon as I do here and they profess it was the Apostles concession then to the Bishops to marry and they themselves forbid any to separate Priests from their Wives and professedly oppose the Roman Church in it Can. 12 13. For this Bellarmine lib. 2. cap. 27. de Pontif. Rom. reproacheth them and that 's his answer Forsooth the Pope approved not these Canons 1. Let Adrians words be read and then judge 2. What if he did not Our enquiry is of Catholick Tradition and succession and not of the Popes opinion But it s easie to bring much more for this Another point that H. T. proves is The same Canon of Scripture which they own And for this he brings one Provincial Council Carth. 3. as in the sixth Age. An excellent proof of Catholick succession through all Ages But have we not better proof of the contrary Let him that would be satisfied peruse these records and judge Euseb Eccles Hist l. 3. cap. 9. vel 10. and there Joseph li. 1. cont Apion Constitut Apostol whosoever was the author lib. 2. cap. 57. Canon Apostult Dionys Eccl. Hier. cap. 3. Melet. in Euseb Eccl. Histor lib. 5. cap. 24. Origen in Niceph. hist Eccles lib. 5. cap. 16. Orig. Philocal cap. 3. Euseb Hist l. 6. cap.
of any Father whereby it may appear that any account at all was made of it Where he citeth the full express words of the Fathers of those first ages against praying to Saints as Origen in Jus. Hom. 16. And in Rom. lib. 2. cap. 2. And Contr. Celsum lib. 8. page 432 433 406 411 412. lib. 5. pag. 239. Tertullian Apol. cap. 30. Tertullian and Cyprian of Prayer Athanasius Orat. 4. Cont. Arrium pag. 259 260. Eccles Smyrn apud Euseb Hist lib. 4. c. I am loth to recite what is there already given you 3. And when Prayer to the dead did come in how exceedingly it differed from the Romish Prayers to the dead I pray you read there in the same Author 4. And also of those Adorations and Devotions offered by the Papists to the Virgin Mary I desire you to read in the same Author and Place enough to make a Christian tremble and which for my part I am not able to excuse from horrid Blasphemy or Idolatry though I am willing to put the best interpretation on their words that reason will allow 5. The Reason why in the old Testament men were not wont to pray to Saints Bellarmine saith was because then they did not enter into heaven nor see God Bellar. de sanct Beat. li. 2. cap. 19. So Suarez in the third part Tom. 2. disp 42. Sect. 1. But abundance of the chief Doctors of the Church for divers Ages were of opinion that the Saints are not admitted into Heaven to the clear sight of God before the day of Judgement as most of the Eastern Churches do to this day therefore they could not be for the Popish Prayer to Saints And here again observe that men may be of the same faith and Church with us that differ and err in as great a matter as this The Council of Florence hath now defined it that departed souls are admitted into Heaven to the clear sight of God And yet Stapleton and Francis Pegna à Castro Medina Sotus affirm that Irenaeus Justin Martyr Tertullian Clemens Romanus Origen Ambrose Chrysostome Austin Lactantius Victorinus Prudentius Theodoret Aretas Oecumenius Theophilact Euthymius yea and Bernard have delivered the contrary sentence See Staplet Defens Eccles author cont Whitak lib. 1. cap. 2. with Fran. Pegna in part 2. Director Inquisitor com 21. Now as all these must needs be against the Popish Invocation of Saints so they were against that which is now determined to be de fide Whence I gather on the by 1. That the Romish faith increaseth and is not the same as heretofore 2. That they had not this Article by Tradition from any of these Fathers or from the Apostles by them unless from the Scriptures 3. That men that err in such points as are now defined by Councils to be de fide are yet accounted by Papists to be of their Church and faith And therefore they may be of ours notwithstanding such errours as this in hand 4. And note also by this tast whether the Papists be not a perjured generation that swear not to expound Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers 6. The Council of Laodicea condemned them as Idolaters that prayed to Angels Can. 35. which Caranza Crab and other Papists have turned into Angulos whose falsification you may see fully detected by the said Bishop Usher ibid. pag. 470. 471 472. Read there also the full Testimonies of Greg. Nissen Athanasius Epiphanius c. against praying to Saints and Angels and the detection of Bellarmines fraud that pretendeth the Fathers to speak of the Gentiles Idolatry when they mention the Virgin Mary and the Saints and say expresly they were not to be adored But for all this H. T. Manual page 291 c. hath Fathers for this Adoration of Angels and Saints And who are they The first is Dionysius to which I answer 1. There is never a such a word in the place cited in Dionysius in the Book that I have at hand printed Lugdun 1572. 2. We are for praying the Saints to pray for us too that is those on earth And the words cited by him mention not the Saints in heaven 3. That Dionysius is not Dionysius but a spurious Apochryphal Book Not once known and mentioned in the world till Gregory the greats dayes six hundred years after Christ as Bellarmine himself saith Lib. de Scriptor Eccles de Dionys And lib. 2. de Monach. cap. 5. The second is Clem. Apostol Constit 5. Answ 1. The words speak only of honouring the Martyrs which is our unquestioned duty but not of Praying to them 2. It s an Apochryphal forgery and neither the Apostles nor Clements Work which he citeth but any thing will serve these men Let him believe Bellarmine de scriptor Eccles pag. 38 39. where he proveth it and saith that in the Latine Church these Constitutions are of almost no account and the Greeks themselves Canon 2. Trul. reject them as depraved by Hereticks and that the receiving of them is it that misleadeth the Aethiopians See more against them in Cooks Censurâ pag. 17 18 19. and Rivets Crit. Sac. Dalaeus in Pseudepigrap The third Testimony of H. T. is from Justins second Apol. Answ It is not Praying to Angels that Justin seemeth to intend but giving them due honour which we allow of His intent is to stop the mouths of Heathens that called the Christians impious for renouncing their Gods To whom he replyeth that we yet honour the true God and his Angels c. His Testimony for the third age is only Origen and yet none of Origen First in his Lament Answ 1. Origen there mentioneth the Saints but not the dead Saints It may be all the Saints in the Church on earth whose prayers he desireth 2. If this satisfie you not at least be satisfied with this that you cite a forgery that is none of Origens works Not only Erasmus saith that This Lamentation was neither written by Origen nor translated by Hierom but is the fiction of some unlearned man that by this trick devised to defame Origen But Baronius Annal. Tit. 2. ad an 253. p. 477. witnesseth that Pope Gelasius numbers it with the Apocryphals But H. T. hath a second testimony from Origen in Cantic Hom. 3. Answ 1. That speaks of the Saints prayer for us but not of our prayers to them one word which is the thing in question 2. But Erasmus and others have shewed that neither is this any of Origens works Sixtus Senensis saith that some old Books put Hieroms name to it And Lombard and Aquinas cite passages out of it as Ambroses You see now what Testimonies H. T. hath produced for the first three Ages even till above four hundred years after Christ And yet no doubt but this is currant proof with the poor deluded Papists that read his Book 2. The next exception to be considered is Praying for the Dead which they say the ancient Church was for Answ 1. We are for