His first call was for a fresh Bedfellow that was Carnal then he call'd for innocent Blood that was Tyrannical his other call was for Church-Goods and Lands that was a Sacrilegious call he had no scruples concerning the truth of his Religion neither alter'd he any thing of it but to gratifie his Lust and Covetousness Nullâ fere in re a fide Catholica discessit praeterquam libidinis luxuriae causâ as Sanders affirms of him And accordingly he ordered his Son to be brought up in the Catholick Religion excepting the Title of Head of the Church Edward the Sixth was too young to call for Truth he had most reason to call for it being early infected with the Zuinglian Heresie contrary to his Fathers Will by the Sacrilegious Protector who did call indeed but it was for the remains of the Goods of the Impoverish'd Church he likewise call'd for false Teachers to dilate the Gangren Martin Bucer a Dominican Peter Martyr a Canon-Regular Ochinus a Capuchin Apostate Monks and Sacerdotes Vxorati from such we were not like to have Truth who not only fell from the Catholick Church but flagitiously violated their Oath of Continency for which by the then establish'd Law they lay obnoxious to an infamous Death I shall say nothing of Queen Elizabeth she being a Woman and wholly unqualified to meddle with Church Affairs and to tamper in Articles of Faith neither shall I say any thing of the succeeding Princes who found the Schism begun and Religion alter'd to their Hands I know very well that in this case Truth is the Pretext but that is no more than what is in the Mouth of every Sectary This is the usual Mask to hide the ugly Face of a foul Action which without so fine a cover would affright those deluded Souls that are cheated with its beatiful Paint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there must be a plausible glittering Title a winning Frontispiece to a bad Enterprize but if the Origine of this unhappy Schism be examin'd we shall find that Revenge Haughtiness impure Flames and desire of Plunder were the Springs that mov'd the first Machin and nothing at all of Truth I do not find that Henry the Eighth did ever recant the Book he writ in defence of the Roman Church he hated both Lutheranism and Zuinglianism and fell out with the Church rather for its Booty and Prey than for its Doctrine and this was Tyndals Sense of it in his Letter to Frith where writing of King Henry the Eighth's intention against the Pope and Clergy saith thus Fox pag. 987. I smell a Council to be taken little for the Clergies profit in time to come but you must understand that it is not out of pure Heart and for love of Truth but to avenge himself and to eat the Whores Flesh and drink the Marrow of her Bones which because 't is somewhat enigmatically express'd Fox is pleas'd in the Margent thus to expound eating the Whores Flesh is to spoyl the Popes Church only for the Prey and Spoyl thereof not Religion Bishop Bramhall is very honest herein As for the suppression of Monasteries says he we fear that covetousness had a great Oar in the Boat and that sundry of the Principal Actors had a greater aim at the Goods of the Church than at the good of it Having premis'd thus much I shall now take notice how you acquit your Church of Schism even according to your own Distinction and Division of it You say she is not guilty of that Crime because she owns and performs Obedience to Christ and his Apostles Then because she pays Reverence to the Antient Fathers of the Church Thirdly Because she owns the first four General Councils c. This you think enough to clear her of Schism whereas 't is nothing at all to the purpose being a meer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and besides the Cushion you define Paternal Schism to be a renuntiation of Obedience and Communion to and with our Ecclesiastick Governours so how do any of these Reasons clear you of it You are accus'd by Catholicks of a voluntary departure out of the Catholick Church of a defection from the Government of your Occidental Patriarch under whose Spiritual Prefecture this Nation was for several hundred Years From this your Spiritual Governor you have revolted renouncing his Authority look'd on as of Divine Institution this being your Accusation the Reasons alledg'd for your acquittance are too weak and dilute for such a purpose Now tho' you come off with a scratch'd Face concerning your Paternal I must needs say you come off very fairly with your Fraternal Schism because you so courteously give the Right-hand of Fellowship to so many Churches and herein your obliging carriage is highly to be commended you extending your kindness to Lutheran Calvenist or Hugonot and indeed to any Church that will but joyn with you in separating from and defaming the Catholick The next thing I have to do is to see how you prove Rome guilty of Schism and the Method you take herein I found to be as improper as that by which you would clear your own Church of it For instead of proving Rome separating it self from any visible Society of Christians with whom she formerly held Communion which is properly Schism you accuse her of false Doctrine which Accusation could you be able to make good it would prove her to be rather Erroneous than Schismatical But I shall now descend to the Examination of those three Particulars by which you would prove your self not guilty of Schism The first is because you own and perform Obedience unto Christ and his Apostles and observe all the Rules and Ordinances they have left you in the Scriptures But how you can pretend to pay full Obedience to Christ and disobey his Spouse whom he enjoyns you to hear under penalty of being reputed an Ethnick or how you can fancy to be united to him when you fall off from his Mystical Body the Church of which he is the Head I know not or how you can be said to follow all the Rules of the Apostles when they recommend Tradition and you reject it when they tell you that the Church is the Pillar and Firmament of Truth and you make her Apostatical I could instance in many particulars how counter you run to the Scripture you so much pretend to but I shall wave them and only tell you that it is an unwarrantable way to fall off from the Church and then appeal to that Scripture which commands you to obey the Church yet this is your practice when you dispute with Catholicks but when you have to do with Sectaries who plead Scripture against you then you have recourse to Fathers and Tradition using the same Arguments against them as we do against you It was long ago observ'd by the Fathers That Hereticks were great pretenders to the Scriptures backing their false Opinions with it Omnes Haeretici ex sacris Scripturis falsas atque
Catholicks had the use of the Cup been frequent they being a sort of Hereticks who by the Principles of their Religion would not drink Wine abhorring it as a thing unlawful to be drunk as a Creature of the Devil as Fel Draconis and so superstitiously abstaining from the Chalice in detestation of which Heresie the Church Commanded Communion in both kinds not as if the other were either unlawful or imperfect but for the detection of those Hereticks pursuant to their Exclusion from Catholick Societies At that time the Bishops to crush and extirpate that Heresie highly extol'd and commended the use of the Chalice but that Error being extinct and in process of time another Heresie arising against the Essential Integrity of Christs Body under either kind as also avouching the absolute indispensable necessity of both the Church began universally to practice Communion under one kind and to confute this Error did not only declare and publish the Truth by her Decrees and Definitions but likewise by her Practice well knowing that as it was not unlawful in its self to Communicate under both sorts so it was likewise not necessary but in its own nature indifferent and so consequently determinable to one or both kinds according to the Discretion of the Church the Precinct and Line of whose Power extendeth it self to things Adiaphorous for things absolutely Commanded Man cannot forbid nor Command things absolutely forbidden This thing being thus of a middle nature was as such within the territory of the Churches Legislative Power which according to the differences of Place Time and Persons hath power to enjoyn both or command but one as the juncture of Affairs may be and the benefit of the Church may require and upon these accounts the Church may restore the Cup again having Power to dispence in this Point of Discipline according as may be most advantageous to its Peace and Unity and accordingly as a tender Mother for quietness sake she restor'd the Cup to the Bohemians and there is no question but that she would have granted it you upon that account had it been requested before your Revolt rather than see you perishing in Damnable Schism Now that the Church has this Power is acknowledged by the Council of Basil Sess 30. Ecclesia quae regitur Spiritu veritatis c. ordinare habet quomodo ipsis non conficientibus ministretur prout pro reverentia ipsius Sacramenti salute fidelium viderit expedire and accordingly the Council of Trent Sess 21. Declarat Synodus hanc potestatem perpetuo in Ecclesia fuisse ut in Sacramentorum dispensatione salvâ illorum substantia ea statueret vel mutaret quae suscipientium utilitati seu ipsorum Sacramentorum venerationi pro rerum temporum locorum varietate magis expedire judicaret Hence 't is that the Church varied from the first institution in reference to time which was then after Supper whereas 't is now taken fasting and before Dinner so I believe that Christ did not strictly tie us up to the first institution but left it to the discretion of the Apostles who afterward referr'd it to the Judgment of the Succeeding Church this seems to be St. Austins Sense of it Non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretur ut Apostolis per quos Ecclesias dispositurus erat servaret hunc locum 118 Epist ad Januarium and certainly 't is more fit that this Power should be lodg'd in the Hands of the Church than committed to the Arbitrement of Private Persons and you had better herein have acquiesced in her Determinations than in your own Elections for what have you gain'd by extorting this Cup but instead of a Cup of Salvation a baneful Potion your departure and Schism from the Church tainting your very Sacraments and poisoning the very Springs of your Holy Actions Omnia Sacramenta Christi non ad salutem sed ad judicium habentur sine charitate unitatis August Lib. 3. Con. Literas Petil. Neque sides neque Sacramenta ullis nisi persistentibus in Ecclesiae unitate sunt salutaria De Vnit Eccles Quid prodest homini vel sana fides vel sanum fortasse fidei Sacramentum ubi lethali vulnere Schismatis perempta est sanitas Charitatis De Baptismo con Donat. Lib. primo CHAP. VI. Concerning Publick Prayers in Latin and of several other Points THe Fourth Point by which you would prove the Roman Church guilty of Paternal Schism is her Publick Prayers in Latin This Point is highly opposed and fancied to be against the Word of God as contrary to the Sense of the 1 Corinth 14. which is generally brought against it and fully believ'd by your Flock tho' if rightly understood nothing to the purpose for this place do's not reprove the Practice of the Roman Church in having her Liturgy in Latin but prohibits Extemporary Prayers in Publick Meetings in an unknown Tongue according to the Inspir'd infus'd Devotion of the Speaker Here is not a Word concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common Liturgy which hath set known Offices for every Day If there were it would be an admirable place for you to confute Fanaticks and to establish your Common-Prayer against Sectaries I know no reason why the Western Church should not have the liberty to make use of the Latin in her Religious Worship which is her Sacred and Learned Language and in her extent the most generally known as well as the Jews use the Hebrew or the Eastern Churches the Greek which altho' consisting of several Nations that speak Languages as much different from Greek as ours is from Latin Nay altho ' the Grecians have lost their own Language which is now no more resemblant to the Learn'd Greek than French is to Latin yet they retain their Liturgy unalter'd in the pure Language of Chrysostom not understood but by the Learned St. Hierom in his Preface in Paralip says That in those Days all those Churches were serv'd in Greek using Basil's Liturgy And Alexander Ross will tell you in his Review of Religion That the Copthies Jacobites Georgians Circassians and others to whom you will give the Right-hand of fellowship use not their vulgar Language but an unknown Tongue to the Vulgar in their Divine Service Now you must understand that it is no Position of the Catholick Church that the Publick Service should be in an unknown Tongue but it being Compos'd at first ever since the Apostles days in Latin in the Western Church the Church did not think it expedient that it should be turn'd into the Vulgar Barbarous Language of every Nation This was not Englands case alone but France Spain Germany Poland c. far'd no otherwise nay most part of the World according to St. August in his Book de verâ Religione Quotidie per orbem universum humanum genus unâ pene voce respondet sursum corda se habere ad Deum And that the Divine Service was in Africa perform'd in the Latin and not in the Punic
pro omnibus unus pro multis unitas pro universis Domine ad quem ibimus Repellis nos a te da nobis alterum te Peter likewise spake for them all when he said Ecce nos reliquimus omnia secuti sumus te Hence Christ answers to them all in the Plural Number Dico vobis quod vos qui secuti estis me c. And likewise when in John 6. 69 he says We belive and know that thou art Christ the Son of the Living God Here he undertook by answering for the Rest to give an account of their Faith but he committed a great mistake therein for Christ told him that that was not the belief of all of them one of them being a Devil When they were all accused as warm'd with new Wine Peter makes an Apologetical Harangue in the defence and name of them all By these Passages 't is obvious and transparent that Peter herein was the Representative of the Apostolick Society venting in these his Responsals their joint and united Opinions so I shall supersede a further pursuit herein and make it my present business to inform my self in what Sense some of the Fathers entitle him Os Apostolorum whereas indeed they had as much liberty and freedom of speaking to our Saviour as he had The most Radiant and Plausible Opinion amongst them for their dubbing him their Speaker was because they look'd on him as their Prince and thus it may not improperly be said in a subordinate Sense that what was spoken by the chief of the Society was said by the whole Company he representing them all as their Head and Prince and in this Sense it is that Cyril acknowledges Peter to have answered for the Rest as is apparent in several places of his Comments on St. John Princeps Caputque caeterorum primus exclamat Tu es Christus c. Per unum qui praeerat omnes respondent Per Principem consortii haud dubitant exclamare Tu es Christus c. And accordingly 't is very familiar with Chrysost after he has styl'd him The Mouth of the Apostles to join another word with it which denotes him to be chief as in his 55th Hom. Matt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And again on the 87th Hom. on St. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was the Prince of the Apostles and Mouth of the Disciples the Supreme top of the Society 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peter the Prince of the Apostolick Quire the Mouth of the Disciples De occursu Domini Thus St. Hierom who acknowledges that Peter did profess this Truth ex persona omnium acknowledges him to be their Head St. Cyprian in his 55th Epistle declares that Peter answered for all of them but confesses he did this as the Representative of the Church Vnus pro omnibus loquens Ecclesiae voce Respondens St. Austin fancies he only answered to preserve Unity Vnus pro multis dedit responsum unitas in multis And in his 118 Tract de Temp. Ideo unus pro omnibus quià unitas in omnibus But in Serm. 13. Evang Matt. He gives Three chief Reasons why Peter is said to be their Speaker First Because he is the Type of the only Church Then because he was the Prince or Chief of the Apostles Lastly Because he was most ardent in his Affection towards Christ Petrus unicae Ecclesiae Typus ipse in ordine Apostolorum primus in Christi amore promtissimus saepe unus respondit pro multis 'T is customary with St. Austin to affirm that Peter represents sometimes the Church sometimes the Apostles the Church he represents as its Head and Rector the Apostles as their Primate as will hereafter be made out and in this Sense he is called their Speaker not as if he were their Atturney or Praeco but their Princeps CHAP. III. Whether the other Apostles knew Christs Divinity as soon as St. Peter Concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. John c. And concerning the Devils knowledge of Christ THe next thing I am oblig'd to Discuss is Whether or no the other Apostles had the same Sense of Christ's Divinity as St. Peter had when Christ propos'd this Question to them Vos autem quem me dicitis esse So that Peter herein may be said to have spoke but their Sense and that they knew and could have answered the Question as well as he This is in short what you affirm and what is attested by Modern Protestant Writers Dr. Cave in the Life of St. Peter says thus of him Do's he confess Christ the Son of God Besides that herein he speaks but the Sense of all the Rest this was no more than what others said as well as he Nathaniel expresly told him Thou art the Son of God This is likewise Dr. Barrow's Sense of it only he delivers it more Sportively and Comically in his Treatise of the Supremacy p. 43. But who say ye that I am up starteth Peter he skippeth forth and preventeth the other Apostles not ignorant of the Point they took Jesus for the Messias which according to the common notion of the Jews did imply his being the Son of God they had the same Faith he from a special alacrity of Spirit and expedition in utterance more forward in declaring it This Opinion seem'd to me very thin and silly That Christ should propound a Question to a Dozen Persons which he knew any of them could solve and make honorable Promises only to him that should speak first seem'd to me a childish fancy and beneath the Conceptions of a Doctor this being not to reward an Excellency of Faith but the promptitude of a nimble Tongue which has nothing of Merit in it Having now mentioned the two above cited Doctors I shall add something more to their Quotations Peter is said to answer for the Rest not as if he spake or knew their Opinion on this Point for the Question was ask'd by our Savior on a sudden and it do's no where appear that the Apostles had any Praecedaneous Conference or Consultation about it but because his Answer thereto was Orthodox they were oblig'd to own and embrace it as the Common Belief of the Church And I conceive that upon our Saviors asking the Question the rest being silent and suspending their Answer Peter first spake not their Common but his Particular Sentiment Suam fidem pro se professus est says Jansenius Pro se solo respondit says Abulensis and this he did as one made more knowing than the Rest being instructed in this Mystery by a particular Revelation from the Father He then being more fervid than the Rest inflam'd by this illumination from God and instigated thereto by a Divine impulse hastned with all speed to describe the Son as the Father had instructed him lest any of the Twelve should speak any thing beneath and unworthy of Christ and so be rebuked by him as they often were This is what St. Chrysost means when he says Peter
Pope acknowledging him the Prince and Head of Gods Holy Priests You make Laws in defiance of him pulling of him down as a Spiritual Usurper They made Laws which were according to his Approbation the Rules and Definitions of the Church backing the Spiritual with the Temporal Sword You make Laws in affront to him and against the Decrees of the Church Thus you see their proceedings herein have no affinity with Henry the Eighth's Headship nor with Edward the Sixth's Reformation of the Ecclesiastick Laws nor with Queen Eliz. New Articles and Canons But that you may more be convinc'd herein I shall give you a few Patterns of these Emperors Decrees which at your leisure you may confront with those of your party and see how they quadrate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justinian Novel 131. We enact that according to their own Sanctions the most Holy Pope of Old Rome be the Prince of High-Priests And in his Decrees about Justiniana he acknowledges therein to have followed the Definitions of Pope Vigilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Justin eod Lib. 7. he says thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither will we suffer any thing which belongs to to the State of the Church not to be referr'd to your Holiness as being the Head of all the Holy Priests of God As for Theodosius I find in Sozom. L. 7. C. 4. that he put out an Edict Commanding that Religion which Pope Damasus had preserv'd as deliver'd to him by St. Peter should be observ'd enjoining all his Subjects to embrace it I can find no Edict of his for reforming and altering it This he enjoyn'd those under him to be of under penalty of being reputed Hereticks and Infamous and deservers of Punishment Thus much Power in Church-Affairs is still granted every King and to speak the Truth 't is their Duty to defend the Church by their Temporal Power against Heresie and Schism By such Actions as these they purchase to themselves the glorious Title of Nursing Fathers and Propugnators not by usurping Authority over the Church depluming its Head of that Power which Christ invested him with and appropriating it to themselves changing Articles of Belief establish'd by General Councils and Antient Traditionary Truths handed down from Father to Son these are Actions unpresidented by any well instructed Christian Emperor who I find to be very cautious touching Church-Affairs as you may perceive by the Answer of the Emperor Valentinian to the Bishop of Heraclea Sozom. Lib. 6. C. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not lawful for me who am one of the Laity to concern my self about such things After this vagrancy of your Roving Fancy you begin to think of home and being return'd into your own Countrey you affirm of our English Kings that Church-Affairs were both de facto jure govern'd by them This if you shall ever be able to prove out of good Authors you will certainly deserve the Palm for an admirable Historian I have already prov'd that Church-Matters do belong to the Spiritual not to the Temporal Power and that these two Governments are distinct and for this I have the Authority of St. Chrysost who in his Hom. 4. de verbis Isaiae in Vidi Dominum says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There be other limits of a Kingdom and other limits of the Priesthood but this is greater than that As for Matter of Fact I will not deny but that some Princes before Henry the Eighth irritated either by their Passion or allur'd by a curiosity of intermedling with what did not appertain to them have intrench'd upon the Immunities of the Church and asserting a pretended Right have clashed with the Roman Bishop and medled de facto with Church-Matters but quo jure is the Question You cannot prove a right of Power by proving an exercise of Power unless it be allow'd of for granted That whatever a King do's is lawful Their Quarrels with the Pope were chiefly about Investitures and disposal of Bishopricks They did not deny his Supremacy in Spirituals or if they quarrelled with any particular Pope they did not attempt the abolishing of Papacy A Pope may be to blame and so may a King but neither of these Institutions as Sacred ought to be abrogated for the faults of Men. But to bring the parrallel home to your Case Did our Kings before Henry the Eighth make themselves absolute Heads of the Church immediately under Christ Did they challenge as innate to their Crowns Supreme Power in all Cases both Spiritual and Civil Did they rob the Pope of his Power and assume Papal Jurisdiction Did they vendicate to themselves Authority in Church Affairs ordering Laymen Vicar Generals in Spiritualities as Cromwell was who sat in the Convocation-House amongst the Bishops as Head over them This would to them have appear'd as new and monstrous a sight as ever was brought out of Africa Suppose they clash'd with the Church of Rome did they ever part from her and all other Christian Churches besides as you did in your Reformation making Laws to reverse Decrees of General Councils changing Religion and altering Articles of Belief Did they pick Quarrels with the Church and then Sacrilegiously seize on her Lands and Goods Sacrificing to their fury as many Churchmen as would not comply with their Nefarious Oaths Demolishing Religious Houses violating Sacred Orders Was any thing of this nature acted in the days of Henry the Seventh or of those brave Princes before him But I shall not proceed further on this Point we having at present a King granted us by the indulgent benignity of Heaven who well knows how to distinguish betwixt the Rights of the Church and his own Royal Right betwixt what belongs to God and what to Caesar what to the Miter and what to the Crown A most Religious Prince tracing the sure Footsteps of his Great Ancestors owning the Religion which his vast Kingdoms receiv'd at their forsaking Heathenism and Conversion to Christianity In a Right and proper Sense Defender of the true Catholick Apostolick Faith for defending whereof this Crown obtain'd that illustrious Title For this Prince Pietate insignis Armis no less Pious than Valiant no less Just than Good endued with all those Adorable Qualities which render him amongst Kings the most Conspicuous amongst Monarchs the most Renown'd we ought to be highly grateful to the Supreme God whose Lieutenant he is hoping that under so Gracious and Merciful a Prince we may be protected from our cruel inveterate Enemies and that now at length our Innocency may be a sufficient Shield to defend us from the false Oaths of Profligate Perjur'd Villains who have so long triumph'd over us bathing their wicked Hands in guiltless Blood And now having made mention of our Natural Liege Sovereign I shall conclude this Point with a Prayer for him according to the Platform of Tertullian wishing his Majesty Vitam prolixam Imperium securum Domum tutam Exercitus fortes Senatum fidelem Populum probum