* Nostra quidem Scripta cur ignibus meruerunt dari Cur immaniter Conventicula dirui in quibus Summus oratur Deus Pax cunctis venia postulatur Magistratibus Exercitibus Regibus Familiaribus Inimicis adhuc vitam degentibus resolutis corporum viâ—ctione lib. 4. suo fi But tho' this might be sufficient yet have we further Evidence to trace it even through the more troublesome times of the Churches so near to the Apostles that no Man without Disparagement to his Judgment or his Honesty can question its Original to be indeed Apostolical For tho' those troublesome times have left us so few Monuments of the Primitive Christianity in comparison that all will hardly equal the Writings of some one of the Writers of after-Ages yet among those few have we what is sufficient Arnobius an eminent Professor of Rhetorick who had been a bitter Enemy against the Christians even in the time of Persecution under Dioclesian turned Christian and wrote Seven Books against the Gentiles in the fourth of which he expostulates with them in this manner Why have our Scriptures deserved to be cast into the Fire Why our Meeting-Places to be cruelly destroyed in which the Great God is prayed to Peace and Pardon is besought for all for Magistrates Armies Kings our Familiars and Enemies for those yet living and those released from the Bond of their Bodies Where he speaks of Prayers for these last as as common as for any of the rest About 50 years before this was S. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage a Person of great Worth and most deserved Reputation in the Church and at last a Holy Martyr He in his LXVI Epistle with his Collegues in Council tells the Clergy and People to whom he wrote that their Predecessors upon religious Consideration as a necessary Provision had decreed That no Christian Brother at his Departure should name a Clergy-Man for Guardian or Executor and that if any one should do this there should be * Si quis hoc fecisset non offeretur pro â—o nec sacrificium pro Doâ—mitione ejas celebretur Neque enim c. no Offering for him nor Sacrifice celebrated for his Departure for he doth not deserve to be named at the Altar of God in the Prayer of the Priests who would call away the Priests and Ministers from the Altar And therefore since one Victor †Contra formam nuper in Concilio à sacerdotibus datam contrary to the Order lately made in Council by the Priests had presumed to constitute a certain Presbyter for a Guardian ‖ Non est quod pro Dormitione ejas apud vos fiat Oblatio aut Deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus in Ecclesia frequentetur there should no Oblation be made among them for his Departure or any Deprecation commonly used in the Church in his Name that the Decree of the Bishops religiously and necessarily made might be observed by them and Example given to others c. This Prohibition of those things to be done by way of Punishment is a plain Evidence of what was accustomed and should have been done if there had been no Prohibition and an Evidence not of a single Person but of a Council and not of Matter of Opinion but of plain Matter of Fact and that so notorious as was well known to all and of such Importance in the Opinion of all as the Prohibition was adjudged a competent Punishment for such a Crime as they all thought no little one It was a kind of Excommunication Another fifty years before this lived Tertullian a Man of very great and universal Learning very acute Parts and very strict for Discipline and for the Orders of the Church He mentions this Practice in divers of his Writings not only as common and usual but also as delivered by Tradition and so well known and unquestionable as to be it self an undeniable Instance and Proof of unwritten Traditions This he doth in his Book de Corona Militis § 3. where amongst the Instances which he alleadgeth for proof of the Authority of unwritten Traditions this is one Oblationes pro Defunctis pro Natalitiis annua die facimus We make Oblations for the Dead upon the Annual day of their Departure which the Ancient Christians called their Natalitiae or Birth-Days And after all concludes * Harum aliarum ejusmodi discipiinarum si Legem expostules Scripturarum nullam invenies Traditio tibi praetenditue auctrix Consuetudo confirmatrix Fides observatrix If of these and other Matters of Discipline you seek for a Rule of Scriptures you shall find none Tradition is alleadged for the Author Custom for the Confirmer and Faith for the Observer But of Traditions in general he hath other Discourses elsewhere and of this particular Tradition which he does but only mention here as an instance of Fact not to be denied we have farther mention in other of his Writings In his Book de Monogamia against second Marriages speaking of the Custom of the Widow's praying for her deceased Husband he says * Et pro anima ejus orat Refrigerium interim adpostulat ei in prima Resurrectione Consortium offert annuis diebus dormitionis ejus § 10. She prays for his Soul and intreats for Refreshment for him in the interim and Consort in the first Resurrection and offers for him on the Annual days of his Departure Again in his Book de Exhortatione Castitatis he thus upbraids him who had had several Wives †Et jam repete apud Deum pro cujus Spiritu postules pro qua Oblationes Annuas reddas Stabis ergo ad Deum cum tot Uxoribus quot illa oratione commemoras offeres pro duabus commemoras illas duas per sacerdotem de Monogamia ob pristinum de virginitate sanctitum circumdatum virginibus univiris ascendet sacrificium tuum iibera fronte inter cete ras voluntates bonae mentis postulabis tibi uxori castiatem◠§ 11 Say before God for whose Spirit thou dost pray for which thou dost make thy Annual Oblations Wilt thou therefore stand before God with so many Wives as thou dost in that Prayer remember and offer for two and commemorate those two by a Priest once married by reason of the ancient Sanction of Virginity incompassed with Virgins and once married Women And will thy Sacrifice ascend with Confidence and amongst other Habits of a good Soul wilt thou pray for Chastity for thy self and thy Wife This I think is plain and full for the common Practice both in private and in publick by the Priest at the Altar and for the Tradition But it is objected that Tertullian when he wrote these Books was a Montanist and wrote them against the Church And it is as easily answered that it is not Matter of Opinion but Matter of Fact for which they are here alleadged and it is certain he was no Fool which he must have
Practice and set up themselves against the Authority of the whole Catholick Church I come now to consider the Opposition it self their Allegations and Reasons Such is the Wit of Man and the Subtilty of Satan that scarce any Truth is so evident but they can find out some specious Appearances to set up against it But such is the Mercy and Wisdom of God that he hath provided sufficient means for Direction for all such as keep within the Bounds of Humility and Obedience that is in Subjection not only of their Wills but also of their Intellects and Understandings to his Orders Ordinances and Prescriptions the very Business of their Lives in this World for Preparation for another And to such besides the Common Means he will kindly vouchsafe a special Guidance sufficient for their Circumstances Of the Danger our Saviour and his Apostles have given to all fair Warning and great Caution acquainting us with the End why the most Wise and Gracious God permits it for Tryal and Exercise the Danger and Subtilty of the Ministers of Satan such as should deceive if it were possible the very Elect the special Marks to know and avoid them viz. Their Fruits specious Pretences Sheeps Clothing and Distraction and Disagreement among themselves crying Here is Christ and There is Christ and special Directions Believe them not Go not out after them All this Provision hath the Devil attempted to undermine partly by raising real Scandals and Offences and partly by strongly representing Imaginary ones But against all this Humility and Charity will fortifie us and the Grace special Guidance and Mercy of God will preserve us if we be careful to continue in those Graces It was Pride and Arrogance and Discontent in Aerius which gave the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiphan p. 905. a. Devil Advantage to instigate him to the first Opposition of such a Catholick Practice It was Pride Vanity and Ostentation of Parts by which he set Gobarus to work to shew his Learning and Acuteness in finding out Differences of Opinions among them who perhaps in many of those things differed no more than the Writers of the Sacred Scriptures seem to do For I do not find that he made any special Opposition against this Practice But I doubt it was not imaginary but real Scandal and gross Abuses of a good Practice by which Waldo and his Followers and the Albigenses were moved to oppose all without Distinction tho' there seems to have been in him with a Zeal for God but without Knowledge a Mixture of Pride and Conceitedness And it was real and not imaginary Scandal by which Luther was at first moved to oppose Indulgencies and his Followers at first to oppose even this innocent and commendable Practice But in such Men as Vsher and Bucer it was the Reputation of the Cause they had espoused in gross and Compliances with the Times and their particular Interests by which they were moved But let us but carefully follow our Saviour's Admonitions and Directions wisely distinguish the Ingredients of the Composition of Truth and Falsehood and honestly imbrace hold fast and own the Truth when we have the Opportunity and we shall not want sufficient Light and Evidence to find it The specious Appearances set up against this Catholick Practice of the Church of Christ are these 1. That there is no Scripture Authority for it 2. That the Ancient Practice was to Pray for all such as were at Rest 3. That the Ancients were not agreed in their Opinions concerning the State of Separate Souls or the general Intention of the Church in those Prayers To detect the Fallacy Falsity and Impertinence of these Allegations as briefly as may be To the first I say it is a meer Fallacy and grounded upon a false Supposition that nothing is to be admitted in Doctrine or Worship but what there is Scripture Authority for if it be understood of a special Authority and their usual Pretences of not Adding or Diminishing are to be understood of those particular Parts or Books of the Scripture as is plain by the Additional Writings and Practices of Holy Men afterwards 2. It is inconsistent with the Tradition of the Doctrine and Institutions of the Gospel and of the Ordinances of the Apostles which were all by Word and Deed without Writing as the Common Laws of this Nation were at first settled and much of what was written was written upon special Occasions and much with that Brevity and Conciseness by the special Providence of God as was sufficient for them for whom it was intended and yet so as should need an Authentick Explication to preserve the Authority of the Catholick Church 3. It is contrary to the express Directions of the Scripture to contend for the Doctrine once delivered to the Saints in general and to hold the Traditions they had received whether by Word or Epistle c. And if it be understood of a general Authority the Allegation it self is false For it is contrary to all those Scriptures which declare the Authority of the Church and require Obedience to Superiors And either way it is contrary to the Sentiments Testimony and Practice of the Ancient Christians who in Questions of Difficulty and Contests with Hereticks always inquired not only what was written by the Apostles but also or principally what was delivered by them to the Churches which they founded in all Parts of the World of which the Catholick Church doth consist which the Scripture it self stiles the Pillar and Basis of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 v. Grot. not only for the Sense and Meaning of the Scripture as Lawyers with good reason do when in doubts about the Construction of Writings they inquire how the Usage hath gone for in that case the Writing is the Principal Evidence but in this case what was delivered to the Churches which were compleatly and plainly instructed and ordered by the Apostles was the principal Inquiry and the Scriptures but an accessory Evidence as our Year-Books are of the Common Law in Questions concerning the Common Law But I doubt not but there was a special Providence in it that so much was written and no more and that it was written in such a manner Lastly This hath been the Practice and Pretence of Hereticks and Schismaticks in all Ages to the intent with the better colour to set aside the Authority of the Catholick Church that they might so make way to set up their own private Opinions and Conceits in the Place thereof but never more grossly nauciously and scandalously than by some of the Principal of the late Reformers Calvin especially on the one side inculcating and crying up The Pure Word of God The Pure Word of God and on the other abusing it by straining wresting it to serve their own turns and eluding and evading what is plainly contrary to them which is now past all doubt not only by the Confessions of Mr. Baxter and Le Blank but the many of all
living amongst us or they who were Witnesses before us and who held the same Tradition in the Church before us which they had received from their Parents and their Parents had learned from their Ancestors as the Church to this day observes the true and sincere Faith which it received with the Traditions from the Fathers In all this we may observe 1. The Practice of the Church both in the General Commemorations and in the Prayers agreed on both Sides 2. The End and Intendment of the Church that it was the Profit and Benefit of the Deceased also agreed 3. The Question between them Whether the Prayer of the Living could profit or benefit the Dead as the Church intended 4. That this was what Aerius did principally deny and therefore that the Practice was reasonable as a necessary consequence 5. His only reason was that it would make Piety and good Life needless 6. Epiphanius his Answer 1. from Reason 1. as it is a seasonable and excellent Declaraction of the Faith and Hope of the Church 2. as an Act of Charity for the Benefit of the Deceased 2. from Authority as received in the Church by Tradition from our Saviour and the Holy Spirit And now how does our great Man elude this Epiphanius saith he doth not Name this viz. That Prayers and Sacrifice profiteth not the depa ted in Christ an Heresie 2. Nor doth it appear that himself did hold that they bring such Profit to the Dead as these Men Dream pag. 236. 3. He doth not at all charge him with forsaking the Doctrine of the Scripture or the Faith of the Catholick Church but with rejecting the Order p. 237. 4. Aerius his Argument would have been in force indeed if the whole Church had held as many did That the Judgment after Death was suspended until the General Resurrection and that in the mean time the Sins of the Dead might be taken away by the Suffrages of the Living But he should have considered as Gobarus as great an Heretick as himself did that the Doctors were not agreed upon the Point p. 238.5 It was a foolish part in him to confound the Private Opinion of some with the Common Faith of the Universal Church 6. That he reproved this particular Error he did well but that thereupon he condemned the General Practice of the Church he did like himself headily and perversly ibidem As to the first of these I must refer the Reader to Epiphanius himself for the Character he gives of the Person and Opinions of Aerius a very Vile man a thorough-pac'd Arian and who exceeded Arius himself in his new Opinions which he imputes to the operation of the Devil though he doth not particularly name them Heresies yet it is plain he and S Austin too accounted them such and of the rest the Reader may judge by what is here laid plainly before him S. Ephraem was not much before these but because he was neither Greek nor Latin but a Syrian and a Man of Parts and extraordinary Sanctity greatly esteemed by the most excellent Persons of that time and of so great Reputation that his Writings were read publickly in divers Churches after the Holy Scriptures I cannot pass him by without taking notice of his Testament his Discourse to his Disciples upon his Death-Bed wherein he tells them he is Dying and desires to be mentioned in the Commemoration of their Holy Prayers and bewailing his Sins and declaring his Sense of the terrible Judgment of God he doth admonish exhort and strictly enjoyn them to remember him constantly after his exit and passage in their Prayers and after some Admonitions to them and account of himself he again desires to be remembred in their Prayers Then he strictly forbids his being Buried under the Altar or in the House of God all Solemn Pomp and Funeral Orations and Encomiums and all cost of rich Vestments of Grave Cloaths of Spices of Odors of Candles and the like but desires that all that Cost may be bestowed upon the Poor and for himself that in the place of all such Pomp and Funeral Orations they will accompany him with Psalms and help and assist him with their Prayers and Bury him in the Church-yard where the contrite in heart are Buried Then he bids them come near and imbrace him for his Spirit fails him and again intreats them diligently to make Oblations for him and prettily represents the Communion of Saints by a Simile of the Sympathy of things in Nature the Wine which flowers in the Cellar when the Vine Buds in the Vineyard and the like And tells them that the Oblations of Priests under the Law were effectual for those who were slain in their Sins and how much more the Priests of Christ under the New Testament And gives great caution that when they come to his Memory I suppose he means the Thirtieth Day which he expressly mentioned before and his Anniversaries ne quisquam in Sancta peccet that none commit any thing unmeet for holy things by any Excess but that the Vigil be kept attentively and reverently and humbly and holily and purely for it would be a miserable thing for him if by occasion of his Memory he should be accountable to his God for their inordinate Actions Thus this Holy Man an Instance equal to a very ample Testimony of the Practice in those parts About the same time was S. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem He in his Mystagogick Catechism concludes all with a Description and Scheme of the Liturgy then in use wherein after mention of the Holy Trisagium Hymn * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore saith he do we recite this Seraphick Theology delivered to us that in that Coelestial Hymnody we may communicate with the supra-mundain Militia the Heavenly Host and thus by such kind of Hymns sanctisying our selves we pray the most benign God that he will send out his Holy Spirit upon the proposited Elements that it may make the Bread the Body of Christ and the Wine the Blood of Christ. For certainly whatever the Holy Spirit doth touch it is sanctified and transmuted Then after that Spiritual Sacrifice that unbloody Worship is done that is after the Consecration and Oblation in Commemoration of the Passion of Christ over that very Host of Propitiation do we obsecrate God for the common Peace of the Churches for the Tranquility of the World for Kings for their Armies and Confederates for the Sick and Afflicted and in sum for all who need Help We commemorate also those who have fallen asleep before us First the Patriarchs Prophets Apostles Martyrs that God at their Prayers and Deprecations would accept ours Then we pray for the Holy Fathers and Bishops deceased and lastly for all who are deceased amongst us believing it to be a very great Help to the Souls for whom the Obsecration of that tremendous Sacrifice which is placed on the Altar is offered I will add but one instance more for the flourishing times of the Church