though this will produce a humane belief in the Hearers or Readers as by advantages it is most taking with them yet that fallible belief is all the Certainty that it can afford them Therefore I think it most ingenuous and reasonable to give men such arguments as they are capable of understanding and improving to certain satisfaction 2. Because they that can study such Authors as have gathered the sentences of the Antients in this Controversie may find it so fully done by Edmund Albertinus in his second Book that they can need no more P. You know that Albertinus is answered R. And I know that he is again Defended And who doubteth but you can answer me copiously if I did maintain that the Sun giveth light What is it that a man cannot talk for especially they that can hope to perswade all the Christian world that they must be damned unless they will believe that all mens senses are deceived and that God is the great Deceiver of the world P. But how can you think to please God and be saved if you be not of the same faith as the Church hath alwayes been of All the antient Fathers and Catholick Church were for Transubstantiation and are you wiser and in a safer way than they R. You have lost your credit with me so far as that your word is no oracle to me If I must not believe my own nor other mens senses I am not bound to believe you at least when I know you speak falsly But I pray tell me How know you that the Church and Fathers did so believe P. Because the present Church saith so which cannot err R. Do not your own Writers say that a General Council and Pope may err in matter of fact and that they did so in Condemning Pope Honorius and in other Cases P. Yes but this is a matter of faith R. Is it not a matter of fact what this or that man said and what doctrine the Church at such a time did teach and hold But how know you that the present Church doth say so that this was the faith of the antient Church P. By their testimony in a General Council R. Did you hear the Council say so P. No but the Church telleth me that the Council said so R. Who is it that you now call the Church which tells you so P. My Superiours who have it from the Pope and their Fathers R. Are your Superiours that told you so the Church Or is the Pope the Church If so What need you say a Council is the Church And how know you that the Pope and your Superiours err not in a matter of fact P. I know it by the Decrees of the Council yet extant R. 1. But if sense be deceitful how know you that you ever read such Decrees 2. How know you that they are not forgeries or since corrupted P. The Church is a safe keeper of its own Records R. Still what mean you by the Church The Vulgar neither keep nor understand your Councils The Council of Trent is long ceased No other General Council hath been since to tell you what are the true Decrees of that Council The Pope is not the Church And he may err in a matter of fact What then is the Church that tells you certainly what the Council of Trent decreed Tell me if you can P. We have such common historical Evidence and Tradition as you have for your Acts of Parliament when the Parliament is ended The present Governours preserve them R. Very good It is the Office of the Governours to take that Care but therein they are not indefectible and infallible but they and the published Laws and the notice of the whole Land and the Judicial proceedings by them in the Courts of Judicature make up a Certain Historical Evidence And so it may be in your Case And when you have talkt your utmost you can shew no more And have not we the same Writings of Fathers and Councils as you have You dare not deny it Why then may not we know what is in them as well as you And I pray you tell me Whether your Antiquaries such as Albaspinaeus Sixtus Senensis Petavius Sirmondus c. do prove what Cyprian Optatus Augustine c. held by the judgement of the Pope or Councils or by citing the words of the Authors themselves And do Crab Binnius Surius Caranza c. prove what one Council said by the authority of another or by the Records themselves yet visible to all P. Those Records themselves even the visible Writings of the Fathers and Councils are for Transubstantiation R. Till you have perswaded me out of my senses I will not believe you I pray you tell me if you can of any Author or Council that ever used the name Transubstantiation before Stephanus Aeduensis after the year 1100 de Sacram. Altar c. 13. P. Though the name be new the Doctrine is not R. Tell me next what General Council did ever determine it before the Council of Laterane under Innoc 3. an 1215. P. Not expresly for General Councils need not mention it till the Albigenses Hereticks gave them occasion by denying it R. Was it an Article of faith before If it were either the Councils are not the measure of your faith or it is very mutable P. Among all your questionings answer me this question if you can If that General Council decreed Transubstantiation what could move them so to do if it were not the faith of the Church before Were they not all of the same mind the day before they did it and so the day before that and the day before that c. Or do you think that they were against Transubstantiation the night before and awaked all of another mind the next morning What could make all the Pastors of the Church think that this was the true faith if they did not think it was the antient faith And what could make them think it the antient faith if it were not so Did not they know what their Fathers held And did not their Fathers know what their Fathers held The same I say of the Council of Trent also R. Thus men that must not believe the common sense of mankind can believe the dreaming conjectures of their brains and sit in a corner and thence tell the world what can and what cannot be done by publick assemblies at many hundred years and miles distance Who would not laugh at a Fryer that in his Cell would tell by moral conjectures all the thoughts and motions of an Army or Navy that never saw them and contrary to the experience of those that were on the ground and interessed in their Councils and actions Observe how many false suppositions go to make up your cheats 1. You suppose this a true General Council which is a pack of factious Prelates subject to the Pope and assembled at Rome in his own Palace under the awe of his presence and power And as if the small
of damnation to believe that there is no Bread and no Wine when all the soundest senses of any men in the world do perceive Bread and Wine by seeing it tasting it feeling it smelling it and by the notorious effects and all this built upon no Revelation of God no Reason at all nor any true consent of the Primitive Church but clean contrary to them all that I solemnly profess that I find it an utter Impossibility to believe it And it often puts me to a doubt Whether it be possible for any mortal man unfeignedly and fully to believe it and Whether there be really any such Papist in the world or Whether most do not for carnal respects take on them to believe it when they do not or rather the Vulgar understand their words as not really excluding the true being of Bread and Wine and the rest only somewhat overawing their own reason with a reverence of their Church so far as not to contradict or so far as notionally to own it when they do not from the heart believe the thing So many contradictions absurdities and impieties are to be by them believed with it that I am sure no man that understandeth them can possibly believe them all And all this must be done by Miracles stupendious miracles daily or common miracles which every Priest can do at his pleasure and never fail sober or drunken greater than raising a man from the dead so that every beastly sordid ignorant Priest shall do more miracles by far than ever Jesus Christ did in all his life on earth as far as we know by the holy Records if he live as long He that can believe all this may next believe that there is neither Earth under his feet nor the Firmament over his head nor Water nor Air nor any other Creature and that he hath no being himself II. Reason The Faith or Religion of the Papists as described by themselves is so far from Infallibility as that it is utterly uncertain unintelligible and meer contradiction and confusion and a changeable thing so that no man knoweth whether he have it or not and whether he have it all But whoever hath it he hath certainly a hodge-podge of truth and falshood III. Reason Their Papacy which essentiateth their Church is a horrid Usurpation of Christs own Prerogative and of an Office to do that which is incompaparably above the Natural Power or Capacity of any mortal man even to be the Apostle and Governour of the whole world of Christians at least To take Charge of all the souls on earth to teach and call those that are uncalled and to Rule those that are baptized even at the Antipodes and in all those unknown or inaccessible parts of the world which he hath no knowledge of A far more arrogant undertaking than to be the Civil Monarch of all the earth and utterly impossible for him to perform and which never was performed by him IV. Reason The said Papacy is an arrogant Usurpation of the Power of all the Christian Princes and Pastors upon earth or of a Power over them never given by Christ It setteth up a Kingdom in a Kingdom and taketh from Pastors the power which Christ gave them over their particular flocks V. Reason The said Papacy is a meer humane Institution They confess themselves that it is not of Divine faith that the Bishop of Rome is St. Peters Successor by Divine Right It is no article of their own faith But History fully assureth us that it was but in the Roman Empire that the Roman Bishop was made Supream as the Archbishop of Canterbury is in England And that he standeth on the same humane foundation as the other four Patriarchs of the Empire did And that their General Councils were called by the Emperours and were called General only with respect to that Empire And there never was such a thing as a General Council of all the Christian world nor ever can be And that there never was such is most notorious yet by the Names subscribed to all the Councils But they abuse the world and claim that power over all the Christians on earth which one Prince gave his subject-Prelates in his Empire As if the General Assembly of Scotland or France should pretend to be a General Council of the world and the Archbishop of Canterbury should call himself Archbishop of all the Church on earth and claim the government of it VI. Reason The said Papacy hold their claim of Supream Government as by Gods appointment though they confess as before said that it is not de fide that the Pope succeedeth Peter by Divine right and this notoriously Contrary to the Judgement and Tradition of the far greatest part of the Churches in the world General Councils such as they had and the sense of the greatest part of Christians have determined against the Papal claime And Tradition condemneth them to this day while they plead Tradition VII Reason It is Treason against Christ for the Papists who are but a Sect and not the third part of the Christians in the world to call themselves the whole Church and unchurch all the rest and seek to rob Christ of the far greatest part of his Kingdom by denying them to be such As if they would deny two third parts of this Kingdom to be the Kings They are Sectaries and Schismaticks by this arrogant dividing from all the rest and appropriating the name and priviledges of the Church to themselves alone VIII Reason By making an unlawful and Impossible Condition and Center of Church Vnion they are the greatest Schismaticks in all the world The greatest Dividers of the Church upon pretence of Vnity As he would be a divider of this Kingdom who would set up a Vice-King without the Kings authority and say that none that subject not themselves to him shall be taken for subjects of the King IX Reason They studiously brand themselves with Satans mark of malice or uncharitableness and cruelty to mens souls while they sentence to damnation two third parts of the Christian world because they will not be the subjects of their Pope And they think their way to Heaven is safest because they are bolder than us in damning other Christians Whereas Love is the mark by which Christs Disciples must be known to all X. Reason They are inhumanely cruel to mens bodies And this is their very Religion For the Council at the Laterane under Innocent the third decreed that those that believe not or deny Transubstantiation are Hereticks and all Temporal Lords shall exterminate them from their Dominions That is no man shall be suffered to live under any Christian Lord that will not renounce all his senses and profess that he believeth that they are all deceived by God himself which is not only to renounce their Humanity but their Animality or sense it self So that no men indeed are to be suffered to live but only such as deny themselves to be men What Heathens
if you make Gods own ordinary Natural Revelations or significations to be false how will you be able to disprove the Infidel about the rest 3. And then note that our Case is yet lower and plainer than all this For if the very Being of the Creatures which is the Matter of these Signs be uncertain to us and all our senses and minds deceived about it then we have no place for enquiry Whether this Creature be any sign of the mind of God As if the hearing of all men was deceived that thought they heard that voice This is my Beloved Son or Pauls that thought he heard Christ speak to him Saul Saul c. or if their Eyes and Intellects were deceived that thought they saw Christ and his miracles or that think now that they read the Bible and indeed there be no such thing as a Bible no such words c. then there is no room to enquire what they signifie For nothing hath no signification Truth and Goodness are affections or modes of Being And if we cannot by all our sound senses know the Being of things we can much less know that they are True or Good Therefore all knowledge and all faith and all Religion is overthrown by your denyal of the truth of our Senses and Intellects perception of things sensible Reason IV. And by this means you are not capable of being disputed with nor any Controversie between you and any others in the world of being decided while you deny sense For then you agree not with mankind in any one common principle And they that agree in nothing can dispute of nothing For this is the first principle Est vel non est is first to be agreed on before we can dispute any farther of a substance What will you do to confute an adversary but drive him to deny a certain principle And can you drive him to deny a lower fundamental Principle than the Being of a substance perceived by sense yea by all the sound senses of all men in the world Reason V. Yea it is specially to be noted that our difference is not only about the species of a sensible substance but about the very substance it self in genere Whether all our senses perceive any substance at all or not Suppose the question were Whether it be water or not which all mens senses see in Rivers If a Papist would deny it to be water doubtless he denyed the agreeing judgement of all mens Intellect by sense But if he should also say It is no substance which we call water or earth This were to deny the first Principle and most fundamental perception in nature Now that this is your case is undenyable For 1. You profess that Christs Body and Blood are not sensible there That it is not the quantity shape number colour smell weight c. of Christs Body and Blood which we perceive and that these Accidents are not the Accidents of Christ 2. And you believe that the Bread and Wine is gone that is changed into the body and blood of Christ so that no part of their substance matter or form is left And you put no third substance under these Accidents in the stead So that you maintain that it is the quantity of nothing the figure of nothing the colour the weight the scituation the smell the number c. of nothing which all mens Intellects by sense perceive So that the Controversie is Whether it be any substance at all which by those accidents we perceive And when we see handle taste smell it you believe or say you believe that it is none neither Bread or Wine or any other Now if by sense we cannot be sure of the very Being of a substance we can be sure of nothing in the world Reason VI. Yea it is to be noted that though Brutes have no Intellects yet their Sense and Imagination herein wholly agreeth with the common perception of man A Dog or a Mouse will eat the bread as common bread and a Swine will drink the Wine as common Wine and therefore have the same perception of it as of common bread and wine And so their senses must be all deceived as well as mans And Brutes have as accurate perfect senses as men have and some much more And meer natural operations are more certain and constant as we see by the worlds experience than meer Reason and Argumentation Birds and Beasts are constant in their perceptions and course of action being not left to the power of Mutable free-will Reason VII You hereby quite overthrow your own foundation which is fetcht from the Concord of all your party which you call all the Church You think that a General Council could not agree to any thing aâ— an Article of faith if it were not such when it is buâ— the Major Vote that agree You say that Traditioâ— is Infallible because All the Church agreeth in iâ— when it is perhaps but your Sect which is a Minoâ— part But do you not overthrow all this when yoâ— profess that All the senses of all the sound men in thâ— world and all the simple perceptions of their Intellectâ— by sense do agree that there is substance yea dâ— specie Bread and Wine after the Consecration No onâ— mans perception by sense disagreed in this from thâ— institution of the Sacrament to this day that can be proved or the least probability of it given And iâ— this Concord be no proof much less is yours For 1. The Intellect in Reasoning is more fallible than iâ— its Immediate perception of things sensed or perceived by sense 2. Yours is but the Consent of some men but ours is the Consent of all mankind Yours among your selves hath oft in Councils a Minor part of dissenters who must be overvoted by the rest But our Case hath never one dissenting sense or perception Reason VIII By this denyal of sense you overthrow the foundations of Humane Converse How can men make any sure Contracts or perform any duty on a sure ground if the Concordant senses of all the world be false Parents cannot be sure which are their own Children nor Children which are their own Parents Husbands cannot certainly know their own Wives from their neighbours No Subjects can certainly know their own Prince No man can be sure whether he buy or sell receive money or pay it c. No man can be sure that there is a Pope or Priest or man in the world Reason IX You seem to me to Blaspheme God and to make him the greatest Deceiver of mankind even in his holy Worship Whereas God cannot lye It is impossible And the Devil is the Father of lyes And you make God to tell all the world as plainly as if words told them even by demonstration to their sight smell feeling taste that here is Bread and Wine when there is none yea that it is at least some substance which they perceive when it is none at all Reason X. You thus fain
give them no peace or quietness in the World unless they will say that Gods Natural Revelations are false and that all mens senses are herein deceived by God as the great deceiver of the World CHAP. II. The Papists Answers to all this confuted P. IT is easie to make any cause seem odious till the accusations are answered which I shall confidently do in the present case I. All this is but argument from sense And sense must vail to faith Gods word must be believed before our senses R. It is easie to cheat fools and children into a dream with a sound of empty words To talk of senses vailing to faith and such like Canting and insignificant words may serve turn with that sort of men But sober men will tell you that sense is in exercise in order of Nature at least before Reason or faith and that we are Men and Animals before we are Christians And that the truth and certainty of faith presupposeth the Truth and Certainty of sense Tell me else if sense be false how you know that there is a Man or Pope or Priest in the World that there is a Book or Voice or any being And what possibility then have you of Believing P. Gods Revelation is surer than our senses R. This is the old song over and over Revelation without sense to you and ordinary Christians at least is a contradiction How know you that God hath any revelations If by preachers words How know you that there is a preacher or a word but by sense If by books How know you that there is a book but by sense P. II. We may trust sense in all other things where God doth not contradict it But not in this One Case because God forbiddeth us R. Say so of your Church too your Pope Council or Traditions that we may trust them in all cases save one or two in which it is certain that they do lye And will not any man conclude that he that can lye in one case can lye in more If one Text of Gods word were false and you would say You may believe all the rest save that how will you ever prove it For the formal object of faith is gone which is the Divine Veracity He that can lye once can lye twice So if all our senses be false in this instance how shall we know that they are ever true P. You may know it because God saith it R. 1. Where doth God say it 2. How shall I be sure that he saith it If you say that it is written in Scripture besides that there is no such word How shall I know that all mens senses are not deceived in thinking that there is a Scripture or such a word in it If you say that the Council saith it How shall I know that there is a man or ever was a Council or a Book in the world The certainty of Conclusions presupposeth the certainty of premises and principles And the certainty of faith and Reasoning presupposeth the certainty of sense And if you deny this you deny all and in vain plead for the rest P. I must believe my senses where I have no reason to disbelieve them But when God contradicteth them I have reason to disbelieve them R. 1. You vainly suppose without proof that God contradicteth them So you may say I may or must believe the Scripture or an Apostle Prophet or Miracle except God contradict them But if God contradict them he contradicteth his own word or revelation For we have no other from him but by man And if he contradict himself or his own word how can I believe him or know which of his words it is that 's true when one is false so here His Natural Revelation is his first nearest and most satisfactory revelation And if that be said to be false by his supernatural revelation which shall I believe and why P. III. You cannot deny but God can deceive our senses And therefore if he can will you conclude against all faith if once he do it R. 1. This is not once but as oft as God is worshiped in your Mass and our Sacrament 2. God can deceive us without a Lie but not by a Lie Christ deceived the two Disciples Luke 24. by carrying it as if he would have gone further but not by saying that he would go further God can do that from which he knoweth that man will take occasion of deceit God can blind a mans eyes or destroy or corrupt his other senses he can present an object defectively with unmeet mediums distance site c. In this case he doth not give us a FALSE SIGN nor doth he by the Nature of the Revelation oblige any man to believe it Yea Nature saith that a man is not to Judge by a vitiated sense or an unmeet medium or a too distant object or where the due qualification of the sense or object are wanting Nature there tells us that we are there to suppose or suspect that we are uncapable of certainty But Nature obligeth us to believe sound senses about duly qualified objects and to take sense for sound when all the senses of all the men in the world agree and the object to be a duly qualified object of sense when all mens senses in the world so perceive it For we have no way but by sense to know what is an object of sense 3. The question is not what God can do by his power if he will but what God will do and can will to do in consistency with his perfection and just and merciful Government of the World And God in making us men whose Intellects are naturally to perceive things sensible by the means of the perception of sense doth naturally oblige man and necessitate him also to trust his senses in such perception And in Nature man hath no surer way of apprehension Therefore if you could prove that sense is ordinarily fallible and Gods revelations to it false yet man were not only allowed but necessitated to use and trust it as having no better surer way of apprehension As among many knaves or lyars I must most trust the honestest and most trusty when I have no better to trust If I am not sure that it is a Sun or Light that I see yet I am sure that I must take my perception of it as a Sun or Light as it is For God hath given me no better If I am not sure that my sight feeling taste c. are infallible yet I am sure that I am made of God to use them and that I have no better senses nor a better way to be certain of their proper objects so that I must take and trust them as they are or cease to be a man P. IV. Christs Body and Blood are not sensible objects and therefore sense is no proper judge whether they be present R. This is one of your gross kind of cheats to change the question We are not yet come to the
and his own General Councils The Kings of France Spain c. may easily prove that they have more power to cast out the Pope than he hath to cast out half Christs Sacrament And they may better forbid their own Subjects to obey a forreign Usurper than he can forbid all the world to obey Christ 7. And for all this the wit of man can hardly devise What Reason they have to do it What point of their Religion What Interest of their own did engage them to it Unless it be their Interest to shew that they are Above Christ and the Scripture I do not yet discern their reason 8. And yet they have with Resolution and obstinacy persisted herein divers hundreds of years and denyed the requests of Emperours Nobles and great part of several Kingdoms in this point This and the leaving out the second Commandment seem to be of purpose to shew that they are above the Maker of the Ten Commandments and of the Gospel How long Lord shall Tyranny oppress the Nations of the Earth and the Honour and Domination and Wills of Rebels prevail to tread down Truth and Godliness and keep the notice of thy salvation from the sinful miserable world whilest yet we daily pray by thy Command that Thy Name may be Hallowed Thy Kingdome come and Thy Will be done on Earth as it is done in Heaven Whether the Pope be the Antichrist meant in the Scripture by that name or not you see that my passing it by doth shew my cautelousness in resolving as Zanchy and others before me have done because I am confessedly so far unstudyed or ignorant of the sense of the Revelations and some other Scripture Prophecies as that I must leave such cases to such as Bishop Downame and others that have deeper insight into them Every man should be best at that which he hath most studyed But I must needs say that though I take it to be indispensible duty to keep up all due charity to all professed Christians such instances as these which I have here opened do utterly disable me from confuting that man who shall assert that this pretended Vicar of Christ and King or Monarch of the world and so King of Kings and Lord of Lords is an abominable Usurper and insolent Traytor against God and the true King and Head of the Universal Church How long will Princes and Prelates Learned and Unlearned be deluded by him or fear Power And when shall he be restrained from hindering Christs Gospel and the Peace and Concord of the Christian world FINIS Johns Nov. Repr p. 426. Protestants formally such have not enough to be brought to the unfeigned Love of God above all things and special Love to his servants and unfeigned willingness to obey him I deny you have any certain knowledge or feeling that you love God or his servants or willingness to obey c. Knot against Chillingworth Ch. 2. p. 122. In no one doctrine Protestants would seem more unanimously to agree than in this That all things necessary to salvation are contained evidently in Scripture which they hold as the only foundation of the whole structure of their Faith and Religion Note this Confession See Dr. Holden Analys fidei Li. 1. c. 3. Lett. 1. He that would know what stress we lay on Tradition as the Medium may see it fully in my Reasons of Christ Relig. And Dr. Holden is more for us than for the Papists Cap. 3. Q. Was it from the Church that the first Church received it Or was it not the same Divine Religion which the first Church whether Council or Practicers received without the Tradition of Council or Practicers If so this cannot be essential to Religion If the Apostles words were to be believed their proved Writings are to be believed And their Writings were proved theirs before a General Council or Universal Practice witnessed it Even by each Church and person that received any Epistle from any one of them So that if the Doctors will but differ in their Expositions the Scripture is no more the sure Word of God or to be believed by Catholick faith Of the Pope without a General Council Mark then that it may be de fide divina though not of Catholick necessity without the proposal of Council or universal practice Johns Nov. Rep. p. 19. of the explication of Terms Know you not that Divines are divided what are the points necessary to be believed explicitely necessitate medii Some and those the more antient hold that the explicite belief of God of the whole Trinity of Christ his Passion Resurrection c. are necessary necessitate medii Others among the recentiors that no more than the belief of the Deity and that he is the rewarder of our works is absesolutely necessary with that necessary to be explicitely believed He doth better interpret the distinction of Explicite and Implicite on another occasion in another sense Holden l. 1. c. 9. p. 169. Queret an teneatur quispiam aâ— internum Divinae fidei actum quem nec semper fortasse in eius potestate situm novimus Quamdiu sane arbitretur quispiam hujusmodi fidei actum lumini naturali rationi oppositum contrarium esse nequaquam poterit ad illum eliciendum astringi Aquin. p. 3. q. 75. a. 5. ad 3. Fides non est contra sensum sed est dâ— eo ad quod sensus non attingit But doth not sense say Here is Bread and Wine Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 82. a. 7. c. Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 69. a. 9. Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 82. a. 8. 2 Cor. 12.12 Rom. 15.19 Act. 14.3 15.12 Matth. 21.15 So they do by forbidding to eat Flesh in Lent And yet say they eat Christs flesh in Lent When Irenaeus cited by Occumenius Com. in 1 Peâ— c. 3. bringeth in Blandina proving to the Heathens that Christians did not eat flesh and drink blood in the Eucharist because that they use even to abstain for exercise sake from Lawful flesh See my More Reasons for the Christian Religion and the Lord Herbert de Veritate Apply this to Mr. Johnsons Rejoynder on this Point and you will see his Vanity
now calling our Religion and disputing of though this Religion teach us to obey Parents Pastors and Princes and that obedience may be consequentially and reductively called Religious if you please But if really your Religion be not Divine but Humane let us know it For by the word Religion we essentially mean that which is Divine P. Men were the speakers and writers of the Scriptures and so far they are humane as well as the Decrees of the present Church R. The Decalogue was witten by God and delivered by the Ministry of Angels Christ was owned by a Voice from Heaven And himself spake and did most recited by the four Evangelists And the Prophets and Apostles spake by the immediate Infallible Inspiration of the Holy Ghost So that the Holy Ghost is the Author of the Scriptures But the present Pastors of the Church instead of that Immediate Revelation from God by the Spirits Inspiration have but the ordinary help of the Spirit to understand those same Revelations and that proportioned to the measure of their diligence natural parts and helps of Art as the knowledge of Theologie is attained by other Students who are none of them perfect or free from error P. I will tell you what our Religion is It is Gods Word concerning things to be Believed and Done delivered partly in the Canonical Scriptures and partly by Oral Tradition and received by the Church and by it delivered to us The Trent Catech. Prefac q. 12. saith Omnis doctrinae ratio quae fidelibus tradenda sit verbo Dei continetur quod in Scripturam Traditionesque distributum est The Reason of every doctrine which is to be delivered to the faithful is contained in the Word of God which is distributed into the Scripture and Traditions Vide Concil Senonens in Bin. Decr. 5. p. 671. Concil Tridentini Sess 4. p. 802. Perspiciensque hanc Veritatem disciplinam contineri in libris sacris sine scripto Traditionibus quae ex ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae ab ipsi Apostolis Spiritu sancto dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt orthodoxorum patrum sententiam sequuta omnes libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti nec non Traditiones ipsas tum ad fidem tum ad mores pertinentes tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo vel a Spiritu sancto dictaâ—as continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu reverentia suscipit ac veneratur Bellarmin de Verbo Dei lib. 4. c. 2 3. sheweth the divers sorts of unwritten Traditions which are part of Gods Word some de side as the perpetual Virginity of Mary that there are but four Gospels c. and some of Manners as Crossing Fast-dayes c. Easter Whitsontide and other Festivals Veron de Reg. fid cap. 2. saith The total and only Rule of the Catholick faith to which all are obliged under pain of Heresie and Excommunication is Divine Revelation delivered to the Prophets and Apostles proposed by the Catholick Church in her General Councils or by her Universal practice to be believed as an Article of Catholick faith All that is of this nature is an Article or doctrine of faith And no other doctrine can be of faith if either the first Condition fail viz. Divine Revelation or the second which is a Proposal by the Universal Church p. 5. No doctrine grounded on Scripture diversly interpreted either by the antient Fathers or our Modern Doctors is an Article of faith For such a doctrine though it may be revealed yet the revelation is not ascertained to us nor proposed by the Church Nor any Proposition which can be proved only by consequence drawn from Scripture though the consequences were certain and evident and deduced from two propositions of Scripture Yet these doctrines are Certain when the premises are so Gratians decrees the Papal decrees contained in the body of the Canon Law none of them do constitute an Article of saith Nor that which is defined in Provincial Councils though the Pope preside in person for the second condition is alwayes wanting in this case and very often the first p. 11. I did not say that such definitions were not of faith but they are not of Catholick faith or which all as Catholicks are bound to hold as of faith and the contrary to which is heretical and removeth from the bosome of the Church p. 12 13. The Practice even of the Vniversal Church is no sufficient ground for an Article of Catholick faith by reason the object of faith is Truth and oft times the Church proceeds in matter of practice upon probable Opinions and this probability is sufficient to justifie the practice which the Church on just cause may change As e. g. as Vasquez teacheth the Church did antiently pray in the Mass for Infidels alive and Catechumens dead and the Sacrifice of the Mass was offered for them and yet he rather inclineth to the contrary that the Sacrifice of the Mass ought not to be offered but for the faithful living and dead by which Opinion the Church seemeth guided at present But Vasquez answers that the Church following a probable opinion did practise that which she did not declare to be of faith p. 15. So General Councils when they mention any thing in this manner by way of simple assertion and do not properly define For as Bellarmine affirms it is necessary that General Councils properly define the thing in question as a Decree which ought to be held as of Catholick faith Hence Bellarmine adds they are not properly Hereticks who hold the Pope not to be above all Councils though he say the last Laterane Council under Leo the tenth Ses 11. expresly and professedly teacheth that the Pope is above all Councils and rejects the contrary Decree of the Council of Basil because it is doubtful whether the Laterane Council defined that doctrine properly as a Decree to be believed with Catholick faith The same Bellarm. de Concil l. 2. c. 19. also requireth that the definition be made Conciliarly Pope Martin the fifth said he only confirmed those Decrees of faith which were made in the Council of Constance Conciliariter that is after the manner of other Councils the question being first diligently examined But its clear saith he that this Decree that a General Council hath immediate authority from Christ which all even the Pope are bound to obey was made without any examining p. 17. The object defined must be truly and properly an object of faith and a Decree ought to be on a thing universally proposed to the whole Church Vasquez holds It is not at all erroneous to affirm that a General Council may err in Precepts and in particular Judgements and p. 19. in framing Laws not necessary to salvation or making superfluous Laws Without all doubt a General Council may err in a question of fact which depends on testimony and
But they must be so many as are suited to every ones capacity and means during his life And no man living can know that he understandeth and believeth as much as his capacity and means were in their kind sufficient to Nay there is no man that hath not been culpably ignorant of somewhat which he might have known 2. Mens Sacramental receptions and comforts depend on the Intention of the Priest which no man knoweth 3. Almost all Godly men must expect the fire of Purgatory and consequently none of them can be rationally willing to dye Because this life is better than Purgatory and no man will desire to go from hence into the fire And so by making all men unwilling to dye it destroyeth a heavenly mind and killeth faith and hope and love and holy joy and tempteth men to be worldlings and to love this life better than the next Yea it tempteth men to be afraid of Martyrdom lest dying in Venial sins as all do they go to a Purgatory fire more terrible than Martyrdom XXIII Reason Their Doctrine is not only contrary to many express Texts of Holy Scripture but also contrary to it self One Pope and one Council having decreed one thing and another the clean contrary XXIV Reason All this evil is made more pernicious by that professed Impenitence which is included in the conceit of their Churches Infallibility For they that hold themselves Infallible do profess never to Repent of any thing in which they suppose themselves to be so And as Repentance is the great evidence of the pardon of sin so Impenitency is that mortal sign of an unpardoned soul without which no sin doth qualifie the sinner to be Excommunicated by man or damned by God And a sin materially less is more Mortal unrepented of than a greater truly lamented and forsaken XXV Reason Every honest godly Protestant may be as sure that Popery is false as he is that he is himself sincere and Loveth God and is truly willing to obey him And no man can turn Papist without self-contradiction who is a true Christian and an honest man For by turning Papist he confesseth himself to be before a false-hearted hypocrite who neither Loved God nor sincerely desired to obey him nor was true to his Baptismal Covenant For it is a part of Popery to believe that none are in a state of salvation but the Subjects of the Pope or members of the Papal Church And consequently that no others have true Faith Repentance or Love to God Or else that God is false in promising salvation to all that have true Faith Repentance and Love to God All therefore that know their own hearts to be truly devoted to God are safe from Popery And seeing it is agreed on both sides that none can or ought to turn Papists but ungodly hypocrites or Knaves no wonder if such are deluded by the most palpable deceits and forsaken of God whom they perfidiously forsook I will name you no more If I make these or any one of these good as I undertake to prove them all you will see that I refuse not my self to be a Papist without sufficient cause And yet by this charge you will see that I am none of their extream adversaries I pass by abundance of Doctrinal differences wherein by many they are most deeply charged Not as Justifying them against all or most so charged on them but 1. As giving you those Reasons which most move my self and which I am most able to make good and leaving every one to his proper work 2. And as one that have certainly found out that in many doctrinals seeming to be the matter of our widest difference we are thought by many to differ much more than we do 1. The difference lying most in Words and Logical Notions and various wayes of mens expressing their conceptions 2. And the animosity of men engaged in Parties and Interests against each other causing most to take all in the worst sense and to make each other seem far more erroneous than they are and to turn differing names into damnable heresies And 3. Few men having Will and Skill to state controversies aright and cut off mistaken seeming differences 4. And few having honesty and self-denyal enough to incurr the censure of the ignorant Zealots of their own party by seeming but impartial and just to their adversaries I mean in such points as 1. The Nature of Divine faith Whether it be a perswasion that I am pardoned c. 2. Of Certainty of salvation 3. And Certainty of perseverance 4. Of Sanctification 5. Of Justification 6. Of Good works 7. Of Merit 8. Of Predestination 9. Of Providence and the Cause of Sin 10. Of Free-will 11. Of Grace 12. Of Imputation of Righteousness 13. Of Universal Redemption 14. Of Original Sin and divers others In all which I cannot justifie them but am sure that the difference is made commonly to seem to be that which indeed it is not In the true impartial stating whereof Lud. Le Blanck hath begun to do the Christian Churches most excellent service worthy our great thanks and his bearing all the Censures of the ignorant PART IV. The First Charge made good against Transubstantiation In which Popery is proved to be the Shame of Humane Nature Contrary to SENSE REASON SCRIPTURE and TRADITION or the judgement of the Antient and Present Church devised by Satan to expose Christianity to the Scorn of Infidels CHAP. I. The First Reason to prove Transubstantiation false R. THe Papists Belief of Transubstantiation is that There is a change made of the whole substance of the Bread into the body of Christ and of the whole substance of Wine into his blood Their opinion called their faith hath two parts The first is that There is no more true Proper Bread and Wine after the words of Consecration Hoc est Corpus meum The second is that There is the true proper Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ under the species as they call them of Bread and Wine It is the first that I shall now prove false And you must not forget the state of the Question which is not Whether Christs Body and Blood be present But Whether there remain any Bread and Wine Arg. I. If there remain no Bread and Wine after the Consecration then all the senses of all the sound men in the world are deceived or all mens perception of these sensible things deceived though there be due magnitude site distance of the object a due abode and a due medium and no depravation of the sense or intellect But this Consequent is notoriously false as shall be proved Therefore Popery is false 1. That all mens senses perceive Bread and Wine or all mens Intellects by their senses will not be denyed Not only Protestants but Greeks Mahometans Heathens Papists all persons perception by sense is here the same Therefore it is sound senses or else there are none sound in the world 2. It is not one
order of nature Thou blindest the providence of God himself as if he had made mens lying and deceitful senses to be the Lords in understanding honouring dispensing and enjoying all his works Is not the whole Condition of man subadministred by these And after We may not call those senses into question lest Christ himself must deliberate of their certainty or must distrust them Lest it may be said that he falsly saw Satan cast down from Heaven or falsly heard the voyce of his Father testifying of him or was deceived when he touched Peters Wives Mother or perceived not a true taste of the Wine which he Consecrated in the memorial of his blood Many such places are in Tertullian 4. Origen is large and plain to the same purpose in Matth. 25. calling it Bread and a Typical and Symbolical Body which profiteth none but the worthy receivers and that according to the proportion of their faith and which no wicked man doth eat c. Many more such places Albertinus vindicateth 5. Cyprians Epistle to Magnus is too large this way to be recited As Even the Sacrifices of the Lord declare the Christian Vnanimity connexed by firm and inseparable love For when the Lord calleth Bread his body or his body bread made up of many united grains c. And when he calleth the Wine his Blood c. So Epist ad Caecil 6. Eusebius Caesar demonstr Evang. l. 1. c. 10. Celebrating daily the memorial of the body and blood of Christ Seeing then we receive the memorial of this Sacrifice to be perfected on the Table by the symbols of his body and most precious blood And l. 8. He delivered to us to use Bread as the symbol of his own body 7. Athanasius's words are recited by Albertinus l. 2. p. 400 401 c. 8. Basil de Spir. Sanct. saith Which of the Saints hath left us in Writing the words of invocation when the Bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of blessing are shewed 9. Ephrem in Biblioth Photii p. 415. Edit August saith The body of Christ which believers receive loseth not his sensible substance and is not separated from the intelligible grace And ad eos qui filii Dei c. Take notice diligently how taking Bread in his hands he blessed it and brake it for a figure of his immaculate body and he blessed the Cup and gave it to his Disciples as a figure of his pretious blood 10. Cyrillus vel Johan Hierosol Catech. Mystag calls the bread indeed Christs body but fully expounds himself de Chrysmate Cat. 3. pag. 235. For as the Bread of the Eucharist after the invocation of the Holy Ghost is no more Common Bread but is the Body of Christ So also this Holy Oyntment is no more meer Oyntment nor if any one had rather so speak common now it is consecrated but it is a Gift or Grace which causeth the presence of Christ and the Holy Ghost that is of his Divinity As the Oyntment is Grace or the Holy Ghost just so the Bread is the body of Christ as he saith after Cat. 4. It is not only what we see Bread and Wine but more 11. Hierom cont Jovinian l. 2. The Lord as a type or figure of his blood offered not water but wine 12. Ambrose de Sacram. l. 4. c. 4. This therefore we assert How that which is Bread can yet be the body of Christ And If Christs speech had so much force that it made that begin to be which was not how much more is it operative that the things that were both Be and be changed into something else And As thou hast drunk the similitude of death so thou drinkest the similitude of pretious blood 13. Theodoret in Dialog Immutab dealeth with an Eutychian Heretick who defended his Error by pleading that the bread in the Eucharist was changed into the body of Christ To whom saith Theodoret The Lord who hath called that meat and bread which is naturally his Body and who again called himself a Vine did honour the visible signs with the appellation of his body and blood not having changed their Nature but added Grace to Nature And in Dialog 2. In confus he saith The divine Mysteries are signs of the true body And again answering the Eutychians pretence of a change he saith By the net which thou hast made art thou taken ☞ For even after the Consecration the Mystical signs change not their nature For they remain in all their first SVBSTANCE figure and form and are Visible and to be Handled as before But they are understood to be the things which they were made and are believed and venerated as made that which they are believed to be Would you have plainer words 14. Gelasius cont Nest Eutych saith Verily the Sacraments of the body and blood of Christ which we take is a Divine thing for which and by which we are made partakers of the divine nature ☞ And yet it ceaseth not to be the Substance and Nature of Bread and Wine And certainly the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the Mysteries What can be plainer 15. Cyril Alexandr in John 4. cap. 14. saith He gave to his believing disciples fragments of Bread saying Take Eat This is my body 16. Facundus lib. 9. cap. 5. pag. 404. as cited by P. Molin de Novitate Papismi We call that the body and blood of Christ which is the Sacrament of his body in the consecrated Bread and Cup. ☞ Not that the Bread is properly his body and the Cup his blood but because they contain the Mysterie of his body and blood But I am so weary of these needless Transcriptions that I will trouble my self and the Reader with no more Albertinus will give him enow more who desireth them And no doubt but with a wet finger they can blot out all these and teach us to deny the sense of words as well as our senses D. But you said also that the Present Church and its Tradition is against Transubstantiation as well as the Antient How prove you that R. Just as I prove that the Protestants are against it By the present Church I mean the far greater part of all the Christians in the world The Greeks with the Muscovites the Armenians the Syrians the Copties the Abassines and the Protestants and all the rest who make up about twice or thrice as many as the Papists That they hold that there is true Bread and Wine after Consecration all impartial Historians testifie both Papists and Protestants and their own several Countreymen and also Travellers who have been among them And their Liturgies even those that are in the Bibliotheca Patrum put out by themselves do testifie for those Countreys where they are used Though as Bishop Vsher hath detected by one words addition they have shamelesly endeavoured to corrupt the Ethiopick Liturgy about the Real presence But I need no more proof of that which
saved whatsoever else he want But it is as true that he that Receiveth the Essentials will from the same principles and obligations receive more when it is aptly notified to him And he that truly Covenanteth will honestly keep the Covenant he maketh which bindeth him still to learn of Christ But if any man be saved without the Essentials he must be saved without Christianity D. But you know that they distinguish of faith Explicite and Implicite He may be Implicitely a Christian that believeth not the Essentials Explicitely as long as he believeth that which would infer them if they were made known to him to be indeed the Word of God R. Thus do Words abuse and cheat the ignorant Could you but read their own Dr. Holden before cited in his Analys fid you would find this distinction justly rendred by him shameful and ridiculous according to their common sense and use of it and the truer sense delivered and vindicated An Implicite faith or Knowledge we confess to be true as it is opposed to 1. A distinct or 2. To a well-expressed faith or Knowledge For it is Implicite ☞ 1. As to the Object when a man knoweth the whole matter but not by distinct parts As a man may know a Cup of water and not know how many drops or drams it is or he may know a sentence and not know how many letters are in it 2. Or it is Implicite as to the Act when it is yet but a crude imperfect conception and the thing is really known but not the Logical notions or Grammatical names either the verba oris or mentis by which it should be expressed So that the man cannot notifie his knowledge to another These two are called Implicite the first signifieth Confused and General Knowledge and the other Imperfect and undigested But to call that Implicite faith or knowledge which extendeth only to some Principles and not to the Conclusions themselves is 1. To Call No-knowledge and faith by the name of knowledge and faith 2. And by their application to confound the World and the Church and to make all the Infidels and Heathens to be Christians and every Fool a Philosopher For 1. All men of Reason know these two Principles who own a God 1. That God is not a lyer but all his Word is True 2. That all the Truths in the world are God's some way or other revealed by him Therefore if they knew that the Gospel were Gods word they would believe it or if they knew it to be one of those Truths that are in the world they would take it to be of God And thus all Infidels and Turks and Pagans may by such abuse be called Implicite Christians But why then do the Papists burn the Protestants when if their Religion were true we are all Implicitely Papists For we believe 1. That all Divine Revelations are True 2. And that all those are Infallible whom God hath promised to make Infallible 3. And that all those must be believed and obeyed whom God hath commanded us to believe and obey 4. And that we must not forsake that Church which God hath commanded us to adhere to 5. And that all our Lawful Pastors must be reverenced and submitted to 6. And all their lawful Precepts obeyed 7. And all Gods Sacraments holily used 8. And all Traditions from the Apostles to the Churches received with many more such Only we know not that the Pope is our Pastor or that his Councils are the Church or have a promise of Infallibility and so of the rest And yet we must burn for it if they can procure it And yet he is a true believer Implicitely who believeth not the Essentials of Christianity But the Design which is predominant here is too visible when this Implicite faith cometh to be described For it is not a Belief in God or in Christ only that will serve the turn but it must be a belief in the Church and their Church and their Pope too or else it will not do The Implicite faith is the explicite belief of these three Articles 1. All Gods Word is true 2. All that is Gods Word which the Church tells us is Gods Word 3. The Pope and his Council and Subjects are this Church And yet this man must be supposed if he know no more per impossibile not to know that there is a Christ or who he is as to his Person or Office or what he hath done or will do for us And yet that he hath a Vicar and a Church Or else they may know Christ and Christianity before they know that there is any Pope or Church and then the Pope hath lost the Game D. But if Popery be so senseless a thing as you make it how come so great a number of persons of all ranks and qualities Kings Nobles Learned men and Religiously-disposed persons to embrace it Have not they souls to save or lose as well as you and do they not lay all their hopes of Heaven upon it and can such persons and so many be so mad and senseless R. Do we need thus to ramble round about as if we would doubt of the thing till we know the Causes of it when we see and they all confess that they deny all our senses Will you not believe that there is a Sun till you know what it is made of Or whether the Sea ebb and flow till you know the Causes of it I pray you tell me Q. 1. Do you think that the Mahometan's is not a very foolish Religion and their foundation the pretended Mission of their Prophet without any shew of truth and his Alcoran if ever you read it a heap of Non-sense and Confusion D. Yes I think it deserveth no better thoughts R. And do you not know that though it arose not till about six hundred years after Christ much more of the world is Mahometan than Christian And are there not far Greater Emperours and Princes Mahometans than any that are Christians And have not all these souls to save or lose And do they not all venture their souls upon that Religion Why then is not your argument here as good for Mahometanism as for Popery D. Though the Emperours of Constantinople the Great Mogul the Persian Tartarian Mahometans c. be all Great as to their vast Dominions yet they are barbarous and unlearned in comparison of the Papists R. 1. It is not because they have not as much wit as we but because they think that our laborious wordy kind of learning is an abuse of wit and against true Policy ludicrously or contentiously diverting mens minds and time from those employments which they think more manly and profitable to the Common-wealth Though no doubt but they do err more unmanly on that extream But I further ask you Q. 2. Do you not think that the Common Religion of the Heathens is very unworthy for any wise man to venture his soul upon If you have but read