mischief to Christianity as this one And under a vain pretence of preventing farther inconveniences endeavours to deprive all of this Spiritual comfort of this Divine Food of this Heavenly Light that so being kept in darkness they may be also preserv'd in ignorance and Damn'd Eternally HE believes it damnable in any one to think speak or do any thing irreverently towards the Scripture or by any means whatsoever to bring it into dis-repute or disgrace He holds it in the highest Veneration of all men living he professes it to be the Dew of Heaven Oracles of God Fountain of Eternal Life that to profane it is to incur the guilt of Damnation And that we are rather bound to lose our lives than concur any way to its profanation 'T is true he does not think it fit to be read generally by all without Licence or in the Vulgar Tongues Not for any disrespect to it But I. Because he understands that private Interpretation is not proper for the Scripture 2 Pet. 1.20 II. Because that in the Epistles of St. Paul are certain things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own perdition III. Because God hath given only some to be Apostles some Prophets other-some Evaâ—gelists and other-some Pastors and Doctors Eph. 4.11 For these Reasons he is taught That 't is not convenient for the Scripture to be read indifferently to all men but only such as have express Licence and good testimony from their Curates that they are humble discreet and devout persons and such as are willing to observe directions in the perusing this Sacred Volume That is take notice of all Godly Histories and imitable examples of Humility Chastity Obedience Mercy to the Poor c. and all such places as are apt to provoke and stir up the hatred of Sin fear of God's Judgments love of Virtue c. and in all Hard Obscure and Disputable Points to refer all to the Arbitrement of the Church to the judgment of those whom God hath appointed Pastors and Doctors Never presuming to contend controul teach or talk of their own Sense and Phansie in deep Questions of Divinity and high Mysteries of Faith but expecting the sense of these from the Lips of the Priest who shall keep knowledge and from whose mouth they shall require the Law Mal. 2.7 And this caution is used lest that the Scripture coming into the hands of a presuming sort of proud curious and contentious people be abused and perverted who make it their business to enquire into Dogmatical Mystical High and Hidden secrets of God's Counsels into Predestination Reprobation Election Pre-science and other such incomprehensible Mysteries and upon the presumption of I know not what Spirit immediately become Teachers Controllors and Iudges of Doctors Church Scripture and all and acknowledging no Authority left by Christ to which they are to submit under pretence of Scripture and God's Word make way for all sorts of Profaneness Irreligion and Atheism So that 't is not for the preserving Ignorance he allows a restraint upon the reading the Scriptures but for the preventing a blind ignorant Presumption And that it may be done to edification and not to destruction and without casting the holy to dogs or pearls to swine X. Of Reading the Holy Scripture 1. HE believes it damnable in any one to think speak or do any thing irreverently towards the Scripture or by any means whatsoever to bring it into disrepute or disgrace but not being contented with this he adds That he holds it in the highest Veneration of all Men living Now here we must desire a little better Representation of this Matter For certainly those who derive its Authority from the Church who set Traditions in equal esteem with it who complain so much of its Obscurity can never be said to hold in equal Veneration with those who maintain its independent Authority its Sufficiency and Perspicuity And these are known and material Points in Controversy between us and them therefore let them not say they hold it in the highest Veneration of all men living tho those thought themselves thorough Catholicks who have compared it to a Nose of Wax to a Lesbian Rule to a dead Letter unsensed Characters and to other things not fit to be repeated But we are well pleased to find them express such Veneration for it Wherefore then are the people to be kept from reading it 2. He saith It is not out of disrespect to it But why then 1. Because private Interpretation is not proper for the Scripture 2 Pet. 1.20 One would think the Scripture were not kept oâ—ly from the people by such a Sense being put upon it for any one that would but consider that place will find it must relate to the Prophets themselves and doth he think the Prophets were to be debarred from reading the Scriptures But this is playing with Scripture and not reasoning from it 2 Because in the Epistles of S. Paul are certain things hard to be â—nderstood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own Perdition 2 Pet. 3.16 Now in my Opinion such men deserve more to be debarred from medling with the Scripture who make such perverse Inferences from it than ordinary Readers And if they use all other places as they do this they cannot be excused from depraving it It is granted there were then unlearned and unstable men who misunderstood or misapplied the Writings of St. Paul and other Scriptures And what then There are men of all Ages who abuse the best things in the World even the Gospel it self and the Grace of God Doth it hence follow that the Gospel must not be preached to them or the grace of God made known to them for fear of mens making ill use of it If this had been the just consequence would not St. Peter himself have thought of this But he was so far from making it that he adviseth those persons he writes to to have a mighty regard to the Scriptures even to the Prophetical Writings as to a Light shiâ—ing in a dark place 1 Pet. 1.19 According to this way of deducing Consequences St. Peter should have argued just contrary The Prophetical Writings are dark and obscure therefâ—râ— meddle not with them but trust your Guides Whereas the Apostle after he had told them what the Apostles saw and heard he adds That they have a more sure Prophetical Word as the Rhemists translate it How could that be more sure to them unless they were allowed to read consider and make use of it 3. Because God hath given only some to be Apostles some Prophets other some Evangelists and other some Pastors and Doctors Ephes. 4.11 Doth it hence follow that the People are not to read the Scriptures In the Universities Tutors are appointed to interpret Aristotle to their Pupils doth it hence follow that they are not to read Aristotle themselves It is no
on our side as in the Worship of Images Invocation of Saints Papal Supremacy Communion in both kinds Prayer and Scripture in known Tongues and I may safely add the Sufficiency of the Scripture Transubstantiation Auricular Confession Publick Communions Solitary Masses to name no more But here lies the Artifice We must not pretend to be capable of judging either of Scripture or Tradition but we must trust their Judgment what is the Sense of Scripture and what hath been the Practice of the Church in all Ages although their own Writers confess the contrary which is very hard But he seems to argue for such a Submission to the Church 1. Because we receive the Book of Scripture from her therefore from her we are to receive the Sense of the Book An admirable Argument We receive the Old Testament from the Iews therefore from them we are to receive the Sense of the Old Testament and so we are to reject the true Messias But this is not all If by the Church they mean the Church of Rome in distinction from others we deny it if they mean the whole Christian Church we grant it but then the force of it is quite lost But why is it not possible for the Church of Rome to keep these Writings and deliver them to others which make against her self Do not Persons in Law-Suits often produce Deeds which make against them But there is yet a further Reason it was not possible for the Church of Rome to make away these Writings being so universally spread 2. Because the Church puts the difference between true and false Books therefore that must be trusted for the true Sense of them Which is just as one should argue The Clerks of the Rolls are to give an account to the Court of true Records therefore they are to sit on the Bench and to give Judgment in all Causes The Church is only to declare what it finds as to Canonical Books but hath no Power to make any Book Canonical which was not before received for such But I confess Stapleton saith the Church if it please may make Hermes his Pastor and Clemens his Constitutions Canonical but I do not think our Author will therein follow him XV. of Tradition HE believes the Scripture to be imperfect And for the supplying of what he thinks Defective in it he admits Humane Ordinations and Traditions of Men allowing equal Authority to these as to the Scriptures themselves thinking himself as much oblig'd to submit to these and believe them with Divine Faith as he does whatsoever is written in the Bible and confessedly spoken by the Author of all Truth God himself Neither will he admit of any one to be a Member of his Communion although he undoubtedly believes every Word that 's written in the Scripture unless he also assents to these Traditions and gives as great credit to them as to the Word of God although in that there is not the least footstep of them to be found HE believes the Scripture not to be imperfect nor to want Humane Ordinations or Traditions of Men for the supplying any defects in it Neither does he allow the same Authority to these as to the Word of God or give them equal credit or exact it of others that desire to be admitted into the communion of his Church He believes no Divine Faith ought to be given to any thing but what is of Divine Revelation and that nothing is to have place in his Creed but what was taught by Christ and his Apostles and has been believ'd and taught in all Ages by the Church of God the Congregation of all True Believers and has been so deliver'd down to him through all Ages But now whether that which has been so deliver'd down to him as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles has been by Word of Mouth or Writing is altogether indifferent to him he being ready to follow in this point as in all others the command of St. Paul that is To stand fast and hold the Traditions he has learn'd whether by Word or by Epistle 2 Thess. 2.15 And to look upon any one as Anathema That shall preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd Gal. 1.9 So that as he undoubtedly holds the Scripture to be the Word of God penn'd by Prophets and Apostles and inspir'd by the Holy Ghost because in all Ages from Moses to Christ and from Christ to this time it has been so Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd successively by the Faithful and never scruples the least of the truth of it nor sticks to assent to it with a stedfast and Divine Faith altho' they are not nor have not at any time been able to prove what they have thus taught and deliver'd with one Text of Scripture In the like manner he is ready to receive and believe all that this same Congregation has together with the Bible in all Ages successively without interruption Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assent to it with Divine Faith just as he does to the Bible and esteems any one Anathema that shall Preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd And although some may seriously endeavour to convince him that several Points of Faith and other Religious Practices which he has thus receiv'd and believes are not the Doctrine of Christ nor Apostolical Institutions but rather Inventions of Men and Lessons of Antichrist and should produce several Texts of Scripture for the proving it He is not any thing surpriz'd at it As well knowing that he that follows not this Rule of Believing all to be of Christ that has been universally taught and believ'd as such by the Church of Christ and of understanding the Scripture in the same sense in which it has in all Ages been understood by the same Church may very easily frame as many Creeds as he pleases and make Christ and his Apostles speak what shall be most agreeable to his Humour and suit best with his Interest and find plain proofs for all And make no more difficulty in producing Scripture against Christ's Doctrine than the Iews and the Devil did against Christ's Person who never wanted their Scriptum est It is written when 't was necessary to carry on their designs And if there were any thing in these sort of Arguments to make him doubt of the truth of any Point of Doctrine thus receiv'd he thinks it might make him call in question the Truth of the Scripture and the Bible it self as soon as any thing else They all standing upon the same foundation of the Church's Tradition which if it fail in one leaves no security in any XV. Of Tradition 1. THE Question is not about Human Traditions supplying the Defects of Scripture as he misrepresents it but whether there be an Unwritten word which we are equally bound to receive with the Written word Altho these things which pass under that Name are really but Humaâ—e Traditions yet we do not
deny that they pretend them to be of Divine Original 2. We do not deny but the Apostles might deliver such things by Word as well as by Epistle which their Disciples were bound to believe and keep but we think there is some difference to be made between what we certainly know they delivered in Writing and what it is now impossible for us to know viz. what they delivered by word without writing 3. We see no ground why any one should believe any Doctrine with a stedfast and divine Faith which is not bottom'd on the Written word for then his Faith must be built on the Testimony of the Church as Divine and Infallible or else his Faith cannot be Divine But it is impossible to prove it to be Divine and Infallible but by the Written word and therefore as it is not reasonable that he should believe the Written word by such a Divine Testimony of the Church so if any particular Doctrine may be received on the Authority of the Church without the Written word then all Articles of Faith may and so there would be no need of the Written word 4. The Faith of Christians doth no otherwise stand upon the Foundation of the Churches Tradition than as it delivers down to us the Books of Scripture but we acknowledg the general Sense of the Christian Church to be a very great help for understanding the true sense of Scripture and we do not reject any thing so delivered but what is all this to the Church of Rome But this is still the way of true Representing XVI Of Councils HE believes that the Faith of his Church may receive new Additions every day And that he is not only oblig'd to believe what Christ taught and his Apostles but also every Definition or Decree of any General Council assembled by the Command of the Pope So that as often as any thing is issued out by the Authority of any of these Church-Parliaments and order'd to be believ'd he thinks himself under pain of Damnation immediately bound to receive it and having added it to his Creed to assent to it with as Firm Stedfast and Divine a Faith as if it had been Commanded by Christ himself and Decreed in the Consistory of Heaven And by this means he never comes to understand his Religion or know what he is to Believe but by the continual Alterations Additions Diminutions Interpretations of these Councils he is preserv'd in a necessary Confusion and tho he changes often yet he fondly thinks himself always the same HE believes that the Faith of his Church can receive no Additions and that he is oblig'd to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defin'd and commanded to be believ'd even by Ten thousand Councils he believes it damnable in any one to receive it and by such Decrees to make Additions to his Creed However he maintains the Necessity and Right of General Councils lawfully Assembled whose business it is not to coin new Articles of Faith or devise Fresh Tenets but only as often as any Point of Receiv'd Doctrine is impugned or call'd in question to debate the matter and examine what has been the Belief of all Nations who are there present in their Prelates in that Point And this being agreed on to publish and make known to the World which is the Catholick Doctrine left by Christ and his Apostles and which the new-breach'd Error And by this means to prevent the loss of infinite number of Souls which might otherwise be deluded and carried away after new inventions not being capable by their own knowledge and abilities to distinguish betwixt Truth and Falshood and discover the subtilties of every crafty Deceiver And in this case he believes that he is oblig'd to submit and receive the Decrees of such a Council the Pastors and Prelates there present being by Christ and his Apostles appointed for the decision of such Controversies They having the care of that stock committed to them over which the Holy Ghost has made them Overseers to feed the Church of God Acts 20.28 and to watch against those men who should arise from among themselves speaking perverse things tâ— draw Disciples after them Ib. vers 30. And he having receiv'd Command as likewise the whâ—le Flock of Christ to obey their Prelates and to be subject to them who watch and are to render an account for their Souls Heb. 13.17 with an assurance That He that heareth them hearch Christ and he that despiseth them despiseth Christ Luke 10.16 And withal being taught that as this way of the Ancients of the Church and Prelates meeting in case of any danger threatning their Flock or any new Doctrine arising was the means instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles in the first planting of the Church for the preventing Schisms and preserving Vnity among the Faithful and that they should speak and think the same thing and be perfectly joyn'd together in the same mind and same judgment 1 Cor. 1.10 So it ought to be the means in all succeeding Ages for the preventing Divisions and conserving Vnity among the Faithful And that therefore as that Controversy concerning the necessity of Circumcision Act. c. 15. arising in the Apostles times was not decided by any private Person nor even by Paul and Barnabas who nevertheless had received the Holy Ghost and one would have thought might have pretended to the Spirit and a Heavenly Light but by a General Meeting of the Apostles and Elders of the Church at Ierusalem who were consulted by Paul and Barnabas about this Question So all other Disputes and Difficulties of Religion arising in succeeding Ages ought to be referr'd to the Successors of the Apostles whose Charge Dignity and Office is to continue to the end of the World tho' they are dead in Person who are to consider of the matter Acts 15.6 as the Apostles did while all the Multitude keeps silence ver 12. without any one presuming on any Learning Gift Virtue Prayers or Inspiration to intermeddle in the Dispute or put an end to the Question This being none of their business or obligation but only with all Patience and Humility to expect the Determination of their Prelates and Elders and receive it with the same expressions as those good Christians did heretofore who rejoyced for the Consolation Acts 15.31 And unless this that the Apostles did and their Obsequious Flock be taken as a Pattern in all Ages for the ending such-like difficulties he believes 't is impossible that Believers should stand fast in one Spirit with one Mind Philip. 1.27 and be not carried away with divers and strange Doctrines Hebr. 13.9 XVI Of Councils 1. WE are glad to find so good a Resolution as seems to be expressed in these words viz. That he is obliged to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defined
of the Bible before any other and not allowing any Translations into a Mother-Tongue to be ordinarily read 14. In believing that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular Person 15. In relying upon the Authority of the present Church for the sense of Scripture 16. In receiving and believing the Churches Traditions as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assenting to them with Divine Faith just as he doth to the Bâ—ble 17. In believing that the present Guides of the Church being assembled in Councils for preserving the Unity of the Church have an Infallible Assistance in their Decrees 18. In believing the Pope to be the Supreme Head of the Church under Christ being Successor to S. Peter to whom he committed the care of his Flock 19. In believing that Communion in both Kinds is an indifferent thing and was so held for the first four hundred years after Christ and that the first Precept for Receiving under both Kinds was given to the Faithful by Pope Leo I. and confirmed by Pope Gelasius 20. In believing that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded on Scripture Authority and Reason 21. In believing that to the saying of Prayers well and devoutly it is not necessary to have attention on the Words or on the Sense of Prayers 22. In believing that none out of the Communion of the Church of Rome can be saved and that it is no Uncharitableness to think so 23. In believing that the Church of Rome in all the new Articles defined at Trent hath made no Innovation in mat ters of Faith Our Reasons against it in the several Particulars 1. THou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image or any likeness of any thing in Heaven or Earth c. Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them Which being the plain clear and express Words of the Divine Law we dare not worship any Images or Representations lest we be found Transgressors of this Law Especially since God herein hath declared himself a Iealous God and annexed so severe a Sanction to it And since he that made the Law is only to interpret it all the Dictinctions in the World can never satisfy a Mans Conscience unless it appear that God himself did either make or approve them And if God allow the Worship of the thing Represented by the Representation he would never have forbidden that Worship absolutely which is unlawful only in a certain respect 2. We have an Advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous 1 John 2.1 And one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Iesus 1 Tim. 2.5 For Christ is entered into Heaven it self now to appear in the Presence of God for us Heb. 9 24. And therefore we dare not make other Intercessors in Heaven besides him and the distance between Heaven and us breaks off all Communication between the Saints there and us upon Earth so that all Addresses to them now for their Prayers are in a way very different from desiring others on Earth to pray for us and if such Addresses are made in the solemn Offices of Divine Worship they joyn the Creatures with the Creator in the Acts and Signs of Worship which are due to God alone 3. Call upon me in the day of Trouble I will deliver thee and thou shalt glorifie me Psâ—l 50.15 When we pray to Our Father in Heaven as our Saviour commanded us we do bâ—t what both Natural and Christian Religion require us to do But when men pray to the Blessed Virgin for Help and Protection now and at the hour of Death they attribute that to her which belongs only to God who is our Helper and Defender And altho Christ knew the Dignity of his Mother above all others he never gives the least Encouragement to make such Addressâ—s to her And to suppose her to have a share now in the Kingdom of Christ in Heaven as a Copartner with him is to advance a Creature to Divine Honour and to overthrow the true Ground of Christs Exaltation to his Kingdom in Heaven which was His suffering on the Cross for us 4. And no man knoweth of the Sepulchre of Moses unto this day Deut. 34.6 Why should God hide the Body of Moses from the People if hâ— allowed giving religious Honour and Respect to Relicks Why should Hezekiah break in pieces the Brazen Serpent because the Children of Israel did burn Incense to it 2 Kings 18.4 especially when it was a Type or Representation of Christ himself and God had wrought many Miracles by it 5. Whom the Heaven must receive until the times of the Restitution of all things Acts 3.21 And therefore in the Eucharist we adore him as sitting on the right hand of God but we dare not direct our Adoration to the Consecrated Host which we believe to be the Substance of Bread and Wine tho consecrated to a Divine Mystery and therefore not a fit Object for our Adoration 6. The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 This is spoken of the Bread after Consecration and yet the Apostle supposes it to be Bread still and the Communion of his Body is interpreted by the next Words For we being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all Partakers of that one Bread v. 17. Which is very different from the Bread being changed into the very Body of Christ which is an Opinion that hath no Foundation in Scripture and is repugnant to the common Principles of Reason which God hath given us and exposes Christian Religion to the Reproach and Contempt of Iews Turks and Infidels 7. When you shall have done all those things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable Servants we have done that which was our Duty to do St. Luke 17.10 And therefore in no sense can our best Works be truly meritorious of Eternal Life Which consisting in the enjoyment of God it is impossible there should be any just Proportion or due Commensuration between our best Actions and such a Reward 8. And the Son said to him Father I have sinned against Heaven and in thy sight S. Luke 15.21 Where Confession to God is required because the Offence is against him but it is impossible for any Man upon Earth to forgive those whom God doth not forgive And he alone can appoint the necessâ—ry conditions of Pardon among which true Contrition and Repentance is fully declared but Confession to a Priest thô it may be useful for the ease of the Penitent is no where in Scripture made necessary for the Forgiveness of Sin 9. I said I will confess my Transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin Psal. 32.5 If God doth fully forgive the Guilt of sin there remains no Obligation to Punishment for where-ever that is the guilt remains It is true God may not sometimes fully pardon but he may reserve some temporal Punishment here for his own
doubt a mighty Advantage to have such infallible Interpreters as the Apostles and Prophets and all Christians are bound to follow their Sense where they have delivered it But suppose the Question be about the Sense of these Interpreters must their Books not be looked into because of the danger of Error This Reason will still hold against those who go about to deliver their Sense and so on till by this Method of Reasoning all sort of Books and Interpretations be rejected unless any such can be found out which is not liable to be abused or misunderstood And if there be any such to be had they are much to blame who do not discover it But as yet we see no Remedy for two things in Mankind a proneness to Sin and to Mistake But of all things we ought not to take away from them one of the best Means to prevent both viz. a diligent and careful and humble reading the Holy Scriptures But 3. He denies that all persons are forbid to read the Scriptures but only such as have License and good Testimony from their Curats and therefore their design is not to preserve Ignorance in the people but to prevent a blind ignorant presumption These are plausible pretences to such as search no farther but the Mystery of this matter lies much deeper It was no doubt the Design of the Church of Rome to keep the Bible wholly out of the hands of the people But upon the Reformation they found it impossible so many Translations being made into vulgar Languages and therefore care was taken to have Translations made by some of their own Body and since the people of better inclinations to Piety were not to be satisfied without the Bible therefore they thought it the better way to permit certain persons whom they could trust to have a License to read it And this was the true Reason of the fourth Rule of the Index Liber prohibit made in pursuance of the Order of the Council of Trent and published by Pius IV. by which any one may see it was not an Original Permission out of any good Will to the Thing but an Aftergame to get the Bible out of the hands of the People again And therefore Absolution was to be denied to those who would not deliver them to their Ordinaries when they were called for And the Regulars themselves were not to be permitted to have Bibles without a License And as far as I can understand the Addition of Clement VIII to that fourth Rule he withdraws any new Power of granting such Licenses and saith they are contrary to the Command and Vsage of that Church which he saith is to be inviolably observed Wherein I think he declares himself fully against such Licenses And that inferior Guides should grant them against the Command of the Head of the Church is a thing not very agreeable to the Unity and Subordination they boast of XI Of Apocryphal Books HE believes it lawful to make what Additions to Scripture his Party thinks good and therefore takes no notice of the ancient Canon approved by the Apostles and primitive Christians but allows equal Authority to the Books of Toby Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and the Macchabees as to the other part of the Scripture altho' these were always rejected by the Jews never exant in the Hebrew Copy and expresly condemn'd by St. Jerome as not Canonical and never admitted by the Church but only of late years in some of their Synods which made these Innovations contrary to the Sense of their Ancestors HE believes it damnable to add any thing to the Scripture And yet allows the Books of Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Macchabees to be Canonical because the Church of Christ has declar'd them such not only in these later ages but even in the primitive times S. Gregory Nazianzen Orat. de S S. Macc. who lived in the year 354. Also S. Ambrose lib. de Iacob vit beat An. 370. Innocent I. Ep. ad Exup They were also received by the third Council of Carthage An. 419. which approv'd all these Books as Canonical Can. 47. and was subscrib'd by S. Augustine and confirm'd in the 6 th General Synod August lib. 2. Doct. Christ. cap. 8. So that to him 't is of little concern whether they were ever in the Hebrew Copy the Canon of the Church of Christ being of much more Authority with him than the Canon of the Iews He having no other assurance that the Books of Moses and the four Gospels are the true Word of God but by the Authority and Canon of the Church And this he has learn'd from that great Doctor S. Augustine who declares his mind plainly in this case saying That he would not believe the Gospel except the Authority of the Catholick Church mov'd him threunto Contra Ep. Fundam c. 4. Now he is well satisfied that many doubted whether these Books were Canonical or no and amongst others S. Ierom because the Church had not declar'd them so But since the Church's Declaration no Catholick ever doubted no more than of other Books viz. of the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of St. James the second of St. Peter the second and third of St. John St. Jude 's Epistle and the Apocalyps All which were for many years after the Apostles time doubted of but afterwards declar'd and receiv'd as Canonical This he finds S. Ierome expresly confessing of himself viz. That for some time the Book of Judith seemed to him Apocryphal to wit till the Council of Nice declar'd it otherwise Praef. in Iudith The like he affirms of S. Iames's Epistle that it was doubted of by many for several years Paulatim tempore procedente meruit authoritatem By little and little in process of time it gain'd Authority De viris illus verb. Iacob For this reason he matters not what Books have been reputed Apocryphal by some and for some years But only what Books are receiv'd and declar'd by the Church Canonical in what year and at what time soever For believing the same spirit of Truth assists her in all Ages he looks upon himself equally oblig'd to receive her Definitions of the Year 419. as of any of the precedent years It not being possible for Christ to fail of his Promise or the Holy Ghost to err or misguide the Church in that year more than in any other XI Of Apocryphal Books 1. WE do not charge the Church of Rome with making what Additions to Scripture they think good as the Misrepresenter saith but we charge them with taking into the Canon of Scripture such Books as were not received for Canonical by the Christian Church as those Books himself mentions viz. Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and Maccabees 2. We do not only charge them with this but with Anathematizing all those who do not upon this Declaration believe them to be Canonical since they cannot but know that these Books never were in the Iewish Canon and were left
out by many Christian Writers And if the Church cannot add to the Scripture and our Author thinks it damnable to do it how can it make any Books Canonical which were not so received by the Church For the Scripture in this sense is the Canon and therefore if it add to the Canon it adds to the Scripture i. e. it makes it necessary to believe some Books to be of infallible Authority which were not believed to be so either by the Iewish or Christian Church as appears by abundant Testimonies to that purpose produced by a learned Bishop of this Church which ought to have been considered by the Representer that he might not have talked so crudely about this matter But however I must consider what he saith 1. He produces the Testimony of Greg. Nazianzen who is expresly against him and declares but Twenty two Books in the Canon of the Old Testament but how doth he prove that he thought these Books Canonical He quotes his Oration on the Maccabees Where I can find nothing like it and instead of it he expresly follows as he declares the Book of Iosephus of the Authority of Reason concerning them So that if this proves any thing it proves Iosephus his Book Canonical and not the Maccabees 2. He adds the Testimony of S. Ambrose who in the place he refers to enlarges on the Story of the Maccabees but saith nothing of the Authority of the Book And even Coccius himself grants that of old Melito Sardensis Amphilochius Greg. Nazianzen the Council of Laodicea S. Hierom Russinus and Gregory the Great did not own the Book of Maccabees for Canonical 3. Innocentius ad Exuperium speaks more to this purpose And if the Decretal Epistle be allowed against which Bishop Cosins hath made considerable Objections then it must be granted that these Books were then in the Roman Canon but that they were not received by the Universal Church appears evidently by the Canon of the Council of Laodicea c. 60. wherein these Books are left out and this was received in the Code of the Universal Church which was as clear a Proof of the Canon then generally received as can be expected It is true the Council of Carthage took them in and S. Augustine seems to be of the same Opinion But on the other side they are left out by Melâ—to Bishop of Sardis who lived near the Apostles times Origen Athanasius S. Hilary S. Cyril of Ierusalem Epiphanius S. Basil Amphilochius S. Chrysostom and especially S. Ierom who hath laboured in this point so much that no fewer than thirteen places are produced out of him to this purpose by the forementioned learned Bishop of our Church who clearly proves there was no Tradition for the Canon of the Council of Trent in any one Age of the Christian Church But our Author goes on 4. It is of little concern to him whether these Books were ever in the Hebrew Copy I would only ask whether it be of any concern to him whether they were divinely inspired or not He saith It is damnable to add to the Scripture by the Scripture we mean Books written by Divine Inspiration Can the Church make Books to be so written which were not so written If not then all it hath to do is to deliver by Tradition what was so and what not Whence should they have this Tradition but from the Iews and they owned no Divine Inspiration after the time of Malachy How then should there be any Books so written after that time And he that saith in this matter as he doth It is of little concern to him whether they were in the Hebrew Canon doth little concern himself what he ought to believe and what not in this matter 5. Since the Churches Declaration he saith no Catholicks ever doubted What doth he mean by the Churches Declaration that of Innocent and the Council of Carthage Then the same Bishop hath shewed him that since that time there have been very many both in the Greek and Latin Church of another Opinion And a little before the Council of Trent Catharinus saith That a Friend of his and a Brother in Christ derided him as one that wanted Learning for daring to assert these Books were within the Canon of Scripture and it is plain Card. Cajetan could never be perswaded of it But if he means since the Council of Trent then we are returned to our Difficulty how such a Council can make any Books Canonical which were not received for such by the Catholick Church before For then they do not declare the Canon but create it XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible HE makes no Conscience of abusing the Scripture and perverting for the maintenance of his Errors and Superstitions And therefore though he dares not altogether lay it by lest he should by so doing lose all claim to Christianity Yet he utterly disapproves it as it is in its genuine Truth and Purity and as allow'd in the Church of England and crying this down he believes it unlawful to be read by any of his Communion And then puts into their hands another Volume which in its Frontis-piece bears the Title indeed of the Word of God with the names of the Books and Chapters but in the context of it is so every where full of Corruptions Falsifications and intolerable Abuses that it almost every where belies its Title and is unfit for any one who professes himself a Christian. HE believes it a damnable sin to abuse the Scripture or any ways to pervert it for the maintenance of Errors or Superstitions and thinks himself oblig'd rather to lay down his life than concur to or approve of any such Falsifications or Corruptions prejudicial to Faith or Good Manners For this reason being conscious that in all Ages there has been several Copies of this Sacred Volume quite different from the Originals in many places either through the mistake of the Transcribers or malice of others endeavouring by this means to gain credit to their new Doctrines He is commanded not to receive all Books indifferently for the Word of God that wear that Title but only such as are approv'd by the Church and recommended by her Legitimate And such is that he daily uses commonly known by the name of the Vulgar Translation which has been the principal of all other Latin Copies in all Ages since the Primitive times much commended by St. Augustine and never altered in any thing but once heretofore by the Holy Studies of St. Hierome And twice or thrice since being review'd by Authority and purg'd of such mistakes as in length of time had crept in by Transcribers or Printers faults And that this Translation is most pure and incorrupt as to any thing concerning matter of Belief or differences in Religion is not only the Doctrine of his Church but also the Sentiment of many Learned Men of the Reformation who approve this Version and prefer it before any
other Latin one whatsoever Beza in his Preface to the New-Testament Anno 1559. blames Erasmus for rejecting it Paulus Fagius cries out against all that disallow it Cap. 4. Vers. Lat. Paraph Chald. Ludovicus de Dieu with admiration confesses it to be most Faithful in Not. ad Evang. Praef. Causabon prefers it before the Greeks Text now in use and acknowledges that it agrees with the Ancient Manuscripts in Not. ad Evang. Act. Grotius professes to the World that he highly esteems it for that it contains no erroneous Opinions and is very Learned nulla dogmata insalubria continet multum habet in se eruditionis Prâ—f Annot. in vet Test. And for this reason he refers his Annotations generally to this Translation as he declares himself So that seeing this Version is deliver'd to him with the approbation of his whole Church and is commended by most Learned Adversaries he thinks he has great reason to receive it and that he may peruse it without any danger that can come to him from any Corruptions or Falsifications And because he has not the like assurance of the English Translation allowed by Protestants or any other made since the Reformation by any of that Perswasion but sees that there has been almost as many different Translations made and published by these as there had been men of different Humours different Spirits and different Interests whereof none have ever approv'd the Versions of any of the rest but cry'd out against and Condemn'd them of many Alterations Additions Detractions and Forgeries Bucer and the Osiandrians exclaiming against Luther Luther against Munster Beza against Castaleo Castaleo against Beza Calvin against Servetus Illyricus against Calvin and Beza Our English Ministers against Tindal and his Fellows And this not upon the account of some oversights or like mistakes or the following of different Copies but accusing one another of being Absurd and senseless in their Translations of obscuring and perveâ—ing the meaning of the Holy Ghost of Omissions and Additions of perverting the Text in eight hundred forty and eight pieces of corrupt and false Translations all which in express Terms has been charg'd by great Abbetters of the Reformation against a Bible yet us'd in England and ordered to be read in all Churches by Queen Elizabeth and to be seen in the Abridgement of a Book deliver'd by certain Ministers to King Iames pag. 11.12 in Mr. Burges's Apology Sect. 6. Mr. Broughton's Advertisement to the Bishops And in Doctor Reynold's refusing before the King at Hampton-Court to subscribe to the Communion-Book because it warranted a corrupt and false Translation of the Bible For these and such other reasons he is commanded not to read any of these Translations but only that which is recommended to him by the Church XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible 1. WE do not dispute about the Vulgar Edition whether it may not be preferr'd before modern Latin Editions because of its great Antiquity in some parts of it and its general Reception since the time of Gregory I. But our dispute is whether it be made so Authentick since the Council of Trent that no Appeals are to be made to the Originals i. e. whether that Council by its Authority could make a Version equal to the Originals out of which it was made Especially since at the time of that Decree the Vulgar Edition was confessed to be full of Errors and Corruptions by Sixtus V. who saith he took infinite pains to correct them and yet left very many behind as appeared by Clement VIII who corrected his Bibles in very many places and grants some faults were left uncorrected still Now how was it possible for the Council of Trent to declare that Edition Authentick which was afterwards so much corrected And whether was the correct Edition of Sixtus V. Authentick or not being made in pursuance of the Decree of the Council If not how comes Clement his Edition to be made Authentick when the other was not since there may be Corruptions found in that as well as the other and no one can tell but it may be reviewed and corrected still as some of their own Writers confess it stands in need of it 2. Our Controversy is not so much about the Authority of the Vulgar Latin above other Latin Versions to those who understand them but whether none else but the Latin Version must be used by those who understand it not And here our Representer saith That he is commanded not to read any of these Translations speaking of Tindal's and that in Queen Elizabeths time but only that which is recommended to him by the Church If this relate to the Vulgar Latin then we are to seek why the common people should have none to read but what they cannot understand if to Translations of their own then we doubt not to make it appear that our Translations allowed among us is more exact and agreeable than any they can put into their hands XIII Of the Scripture as a Rule of Faith HE believes it lawful nay that it is his obligation to undervalue the Scripture and take from it that Authority which Christ gave it For whereas Christ left this to the World as the Rule of Faith and as a Sacred Oracle from whence all his Followers might be instructed in the Precepts of a good Life learn all the Mysteries of their Faith and be resolv'd in all difficult and doubtful Points of Religion He is taught flatly to deny all this and to believe that the Scripture is not capable of deciding any one point of Controversy or reconciling the different Sentiments of Men in Religion And thus demeans himself towards the word of God in a manner most unbecoming a Christian. HE believes it damnable to undervalue the Scripture or take from it the Authority given it by Christ. He gives it all respect due to the Word of God he owns it to be of greatest Authority upon Earth and that it is capable of leading a Man to all Truth whensoever it is rightly understood But to any one that misunderstands it and takes it in any other sense than what was intended by the Holy Ghost he believes it to such a one to be no Scripture no word of God that to such a one it is no Rule of Faith nor Iudge of Controversies And that what he thinks to be the Doctrine of Christ and Command of Heaven is nothing but his own Imagination and the suggestion of the Devil And since by the experience of so many thousand Heresies since our Saviour's time all pretending to be grounded on Scripture he finds that almost every Text of the Bible and even those that concern the most Essential and Fundamental Points of the Christian Religion may be interpreted several ways and made to signifie things contrary to one another and that while thus contrary meanings are by several Persons drawn from the same Words the Scripture is altogether silent without discovering
which of all those Senses is that intended by the Holy Ghost and leading to Truth and which are Erroneous and Antichristian He is taught to believe that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular person not that there is any thing wanting on the Scripture-side but because no private person can be certain whether amongst all the several meanings every Text is obnoxious to that which he understands it in is the Right or no. And without this certainty of Truth and security from Error he knows there 's nothing capable of being a Rule XIII Of the Scriptures as a Rule of Faith THE only thing insisted on here is That it is not the Words but the Sense of Scripture is the Rule and that this Sense is not to be taken from Mens private Fancies which are various and uncertain and therefore where there is no security from Errors there is nothing capable of being a Rule To clear this we must consider 1. That it is not necessary to the making of a Rule to prevent any possibility of mistake but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault For Certainty in it self and Sufficiency for the use of others are all the necessary Properties of a Rule but after all it 's possible for Men not to apply the Rule aright and then they are to be blamed and not the Rule 2. If no Men can be certain of the right Sense of Scripture then it is not plain in necessary things which is contrary to the design of it and to the clearest Testimonies of Antiquity and to the common Sense of all Christians who never doubted or disputed the Sense of some things revealed therein as the Unity of the Godhead the making of the World by him the Deluge the History of the Patriarchs the Captivity of the Jews the coming of the Messias his sending his Apostles his coming again to Judgment c. No Man who reads such things in Scripture can have any doubt about the Sense and Meaning of the Words 3. Where the Sense is dubious we do not allow any Man to put what Sense he pleases upon them but we say there are certain means whereby he may either attain to the true Sense or not be damned if he do not And the first thing every man is to regard is not his security from being deceived but from being damned For Truth is made known in order to Salvation If therefore I am sure to attain the chief end I am not so much concerned as to the possibility of Errors as that I be not deceived by my own fault We do not therefore leave Men either to follow their own fancy or to interpret Scripture by it but we say They are bound upon pain of Damnation to seek the Truth sincerely and to use the best means in order to it and if they do this they either will not err or their Errors will not be their Crime XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture HE believes that his Church which he calls Catholick is above the Scripture and profanely allows to her an uncontrollable Authority of being Judge of the Word of God And being fondly abus'd into a distrust of the Scriptures and that he can be certain of nothing even of the Fundamentals of Christianity from what is deliver'd in them though they speak never so plainly he is taught to rely wholly upon this Church and not to believe one word the Scripture says unless his Church says it too HE believes that the Church is not above the Scripture but only allows that Order between them as is between the Iudge and the Law And is no other than what generally every private Member of the Reformation challenges to himself as often as he pretends to decide any doubt of his own or his Neighbours in Religion by interpreting the Scripture Neither is he taught at all to distrust the Scripture or not to rely on it but only to distrust his own private Interpretation of it and not to rely on his own Iudgment in the Resâ—lution of any doubt concerning Faith or Religion though he can produce several Texts in favour of his Opinion But all such cases he is commanded to re-cur to the Church and having learnt from her the sense of all such Texts how they have been understood by the whole Community of Christians in all Ages since the Apostles and what has been their Receiv'd Doctrine in such doubtful and difficult Points he is oblig'd to submit to this and never presume on his own private Sentiments however seemingly grounded on Reason and Scripture to believe or preach any New Doctrine opposite to the Belief of the Church But as he receives from her the Book so also to receive from her the Sense of the Book With a Holy Confidence that she that did not cheat him in delivering a False Book for the True one will not cheat him in delivering a False and Erroneus Sense for the True one her Authority which is sufficient in the one being not less in the other And his own private Iudgment which was insufficient in the one that is in finding out the True Scripture and discerning it from all other Books being as incapable and insucffiient in the other that is in certainly discovering the meaning of the Holy Ghost and avoiding all other Heterodox and mistaken Interpretations XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture 1. THE Question is not Whether Men are not bound to make use of the best means for the right Interpretation of Scripture by Reading Meditation Prayer Advice a humble and teachable Temper c. i. e. all the proper means fit for such an end but whether after all these there be a necessity of submitting to some infallible Judge in order to the attaining the certain Sense of Scripture 2. The Question is not Whether we ought not to have a mighty regard to the Sense of the whole Christian Church in all Ages since the Apostles which we profess to have but Whether the present Roman Church as it stands divided from other Communions hath such a Right and Authority to interpret Scripture that we are bound to believe that to be the infallible Sense of Scripture which she delivers And here I cannot but take notice how strangely this matter is here misrepresented for the Case is put 1. As if every one who rejects their pretence of Infallibility had nothing to guide him but his own private Fancy in the Interpretation of Scripture 2. As if we rejected the Sense put upon Scripture by the whole Community of Christians in all ages since the Apostles times Whereas we appeal in the matters in difference between us to this universal Sense of the Christian Church and are verily perswaded they cannot make it out in any one Point wherein we differ from them And themselves cannot deny that in several we have plainly the Consent of the first Ages as far as appears by the Books remaining
may pray and fast in secret according to our Saviours Directions far more than they do however our People are mightily to blame if they do not understand what they pray for if they do not receive more of the Sacrament than they and we verily believe there are as great and remarkable Instances of true Charity among those of the Church of England as among any People in the World XXXII Of Miracles HE is so given up to the belief of idle Stories and ridiculous Intentions in favour of his Saints which he calls Miracles that nothing can be related so every way absurd foolish and almost impossible but it gains credit with him and he is so credulously confident of the truth of them that there 's no difference to him betwixt these Tales and what he reads in Scrâ—pture 'T is a pretty Romance to see what is recounted of St. Francis 's Cord the Scapular St. Anthony St. Bridget and other such Favourites of Heaven He that has but read the Atchievements of these may excuse the perusal of Bevis of Souâ—hampton the Seven Champions or Quevedo 's Dreams For these are nothing to compare to the former either for the rare invention wonderful surprises or performance of impossibilâ—ties HE is not oblig'd to believe any onâ— Miracle besides what is in the Scripture and for all others he may give the credit which in prudence he thinks they deserve considering the Honesty of the Relator the Authoriâ—y of the Witnesses and such other circumstances which on the like occasions use to gain his assent And if upon the account of meer History and the consent of Authors few make any doubt but that there was such a one as Caesar Alexander Mahomet Luther c. Why should he doubt of the truth of many Miracles which have not only the like consent of Authors and History but also are attested by great numbers of Eye-witnesses examin'd by Authority and found upon Recoâ—d with all the formalâ—ties due to such a Process St. Augustine relates many Miracles done in his time so does St. Ierom and other Fathers and if they doubted nothing of them then Why should he question the truth of them now He finds that in the time of the Old Law God favour'd many of his Servants working Miracles by their hands and he thinks now that God's hand is not shortned that the Disciples of Christ are no less Favourites of Heaven than those of Moses and that the new Law may be very well allow'd to be as Glorious and as particularly priviledg'd as the Old especially since Christ promised that his Apostles should do greater Miracles than ever He himself had done And what if some Miracles recounted by Authors are so wonderfully strange to some they seem Ridiculous and Absurd are they the less true upon this account Is not every thing Ridiculous to Unbelievers The whole Doctrine of Christ is a Scandal to the Iews and Folly to the Gentiles And what more Absurd to one that wants Faith than the Miracles recounted in the Old Testament Might not such a one turn them all into Ridicule and Buffoonry Take but Faith away and see what becomes of Balaam and his Ass. Sampson and his Iaw-bone Elias and his Fiery Chariot Elijah's Mâ—ntle Ax-head and Dead Bones Gideon's Pitchers Lamps and Trumpets in demolishing the Walls of Iericho Moses and his Burning Bush his holding up his hands for the Victory over his Enemies his parting of the Red-Sea and Ioshua's commanding the Sun to stand still c. Might not these and all the rest be painted out as Ridiculous as any supposed to be done since Christ's time and be put in the same List with the History of Bevis or Guy of Warwick A little incredulity accompanied with a presumption of measuring God's Works by Humane Wâ—sdom will really make the greatest part of them pass for Follies and Absurd Impossibilities And thô he is so far from giving equal assent to the Miracles related in Scripture and the others wrought since that the former he believes with a Divine Faith and the rest with an inferiour kind of assent according to the Grounds and Authority there is in favour of them like as he does in Prophane History Yet the strangeness of these never makes him in the least doubt of the Truth of them since ' â—is evident to him that all the Works of Heaven far surpass all his reasoning and that while he endeavours but to look even into the very ordinary things daily wrought by God Almighty the Motion of the Sun Moon and Stars the Flowing of the Sea the Growing of an Ear of Corn the Light of a Candle the Artifice of the Bees c. he quite loses himself and is bound to confess his own Ignorance and Folly and that God is Wonderful in all his Works a God surpassing all our knowledge Whatsoever therefore is related upon good grounds as done by the extraordinary Power of God he is ready to assent to it although he sees neither the how the why nor the wherefore being ready to attribute all to the Honour and Praise of his Maker to whose Omnipotent Hand most of poor Man's impossibles are none XXXII Of Miracles 1. OUr Author saith He is not obliged to believe any one Miracle besides what is in Scripture 2. He sees no Reason to doubt the truth of many Miracles which are attested by great numbers of Eye-witnesses examined by Authority and found upon Record with all the Formalities due to such a Process Now how can these two things stand together Is not a Man obliged to believe a thing so well proved And if his other Arguments prove any things it is that he is bound to believe them For he thinks there is as much Reason to believe Miracles still as in the time of the old or new Law If he can make this out I see no reason why he should not be as well obliged to believe them now as those recorded in Scripture But I can see nothing like a proof of this And all Persons of Judgment in their own Church do grant there is a great difference between the Necessity of Miracles for the first establishing a Religion and afterwards This is not only asserted by Tostatus Erasmus Stella Andradius and several others formerly but the very late French Author I have several times mentioned saith it in exprâ—ss Terms And he confesses the great Impostures of modern Miracles which he saith ought to be severely punished and that none but Women and weak People think themselves bound to believe them And he cannot understand what they are good for Not to convert Hereticks because not done among them Not to prove there are no corruptions or errors among them which is a thing incredible with much more to that purpose and so concludes with Monsieur Paschal That if they have no better use we ought not to be amused with them But Christ promised that his Apostles should do greater Miracles than himself had done
Honour or the Chastisement of a penitent Sinner But then what have any men to do to pretend that they can take off what God thinks fit to lay on Can any Indulgences prevent Pain or Sickness or sudden Death But if Indulgences be understood only with respect to Canonical Penances they are a most notorious and inexcusable corruption of the Discipline of the Ancient Church 10. For if when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Romans 5.10 And therefore no Satisfaction to the Justice of God is now required from us for the Expiation of any Remainder of Guilt For if Christ's Satisfaction were in it self sufficient for a total Remission and was so accepted by God what Account then remains for the Sinner to discharge if he perform the Conditions on his part But we do not take away hereby the Duties of Mortification Prayer Fasting and Alms c. but there is a difference to be made between the Acts of Christian Duties and Satisfaction to Divine Iustice for the Guâ—lt of Sin either in whole or in part And to think to joyn any Satisfactions of ours together with Christ's is like joyning our hand with God's in Creating or Governing the World 11. Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly in all Wisdom teaching and admonishing one anotâ—er c. Col. 3.16 How could that dwell richly in them which was not to be communicated to them but with great Caution How could they teach and admonish one another in a Language not understood by them The Scriptures of the New Testament were very early perverted and if this Reason were sufficient to keep them out of the hands of the People certainly they would never have been published for common use but as prudently dispensed then as some think it necessary they should be now But we esteem it a part of our Duty not to think our selves wiser than Christ or his Apostles nor to deprive them of that unvaluable Treasure which our Saviour hath left to their use 12. All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3.16 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2 Pet. 1.21 Therefore where there is no Evidence of Divine Inspiration those Books cannot be made Canonical But the Jewish Church To whom the Oracles of God were committed never deliver'd these Books as any part of them being written when Inspiration was ceased among them And it is impossible for any Church in the World to make that to be divinely inspired which was not so from the beginning 13. But I say Have they not heard Yes verily their sound went into all the Earth and their Words unto the ends of the World Rom. 10.18 Therefore the Intention of God was that the Gospel should be understood by all Mankind which it could never be unless it were translated into their several Languages But still the difference is to be observed between the Originals and Translations and no Church can make a Translation equal to the Original But among Translations those deserve the greatest esteem which are done with the greatest Fidelity and Exactness On which account our last Translation deserves a more particular Regard by us as being far more useful to our People than the Vulgar Latin or any Translation made only from it 14. Thy Word is a Lamp unto my Feet and a Light unto my Path Psalm 119.105 Which it could never be unless it were sufficient for necessary direction in our way to Heaven But we suppose Persons to make use of the best means for understanding it and to be duely qualified for following its Directions without which the best Rule in the World can never attain its End And if the Scripture have all the due Properties of a Rule of Faith it is unconceivable why it should be denied to be so unless men find they cannot justify their Doctrines and Practices by it and therefore are forced to make Tradition equal in Authority with it 15. Wo unto you Lawyers for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledg ye entred not in your selves them that were entring in ye hindred S. Luk. 11.52 From whence it follows that the present Guides of the Church may be so far from giving the true Sense of Scripture that they may be the chief Means to hinder Men from right understanding it Which argument is of greater force because those who plead for the Infallibility of the Guides of the present Church do urge the promises made to the Jewish Church at that time as our Author doth from those who sat in the Chair of Moses and from Calâ—phas his Prophesying 16. We have also a more sure word of Prophesie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed 2 Pet. 1.19 And yet here the Apostle speaks of something delivered by the Testimony of those who were with Christ in the Holy Mount From whence we infer that it was not the Design of Christ to lâ—ave us to any Vocal Testimony buâ— to refer us to the Written Word as the most certain Foundâ—tion of Faith And it is not any Pâ—â—sons assumâ—ng the Title of the Catholâ—ck Church to themselves can give them Authority to impose any Traditions on the Faith of Christians or require them to be believed equally with the Written Word For before any Traditions can be assented to with Divine Faith the Churches Authority must be proved to be Divine and Infallible either by a written or unwritten Word but it can be done by neither without overthrowing the necessity of such an Infallibility in order to Divine Faith because the Testimony on which the Churches Infallibility is proved must be received only in a way of Credibility 17. Also of your own selves shall Men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Acts 20.30 Which being spoken of the Guides of the Christian Church without Limitation of Number a possibility of Error is implied in any Assembly of them unless there were some other Promises which did assure us That in all great Assemblies the Spirit of God shall always go with the casting Voice or the greater Number 18. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Unity of the Faith c. Ephes. 4.13 14 15. Now here being an account given of the Officers Christ appointed in his Church in order to the Unity and Edification of it it had been unfaithfulness in the Apostle to have left out the Hâ—ad of it in case Christ had appointed any Because this were of more consequence than all the rest being declared necessary to Salvation to be in subjection to him But neither this Apostle nor St. Peter himself give the least intimation of it Which it is impossible to conceive should have been left out in the Apostolical Writings upon so many
Communion as unworthy Neither does it reflect at all on the Churches Authority or make the Truth of her Doctrine questionable to him that many of her eminent Members Doctors Prelates and leading Men have been or are great enormous Sinners infamous for their Pride Covetousness or other Vices whatsoever The Promises of God's continual and un-interrupted Assistance to his Church being not to be frustrated by the Wickedness of such particular Men though in great Dignities These Promises being made surer to her than ever the Iewish Church Which nevertheless stood firm in her Authority and the Delivery of Truth notwithstanding the frequent Idolatry of the People Nadab and Abihu's consecrated Priests offering strange Fire Corah Dathan and Abiram's making a great Schism and the Sins of Moses and Aaron and other High-Priests in all her succeeding Ages Nay though all things touching Religion and Virtue were in a manner run to decay in our Saviour's time both in Priests and People yet did he maintain the Authority of the Iewish Church and commanded all to be Obedient and submit to those who had the Superiority without calling in question their Authority or doubting of the Reasonableness of their Commands The Scribes and Pharisees says he Matth. 23.2 sit in Moses 's Chair All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do But do ye not after their Works If therefore God's special Assistance was never wanting to the Church of the Iews so as to let it fail in the Truth of its Doctrine or its Authority notwithstanding the Pride Covetousness Cruelty Impiety Idolatry of many of her Levites Elders Priests and High-Priests Why should not he believe the same of the Church of Christ which as Saint Paul says is built on better Promises and that it remains entire in the Truth of her Doctrine and her Authority notwithstanding the Viciousness of many of her Governours Especially since he 's in a manner confident that there has been nothing so infamous acted by any Priests Prelates Popes or others since Christ's time but what may be follow'd Nay was out-done by the Priests of the Iews XVII Of Infallibility in the Church 1. HE doth not pretend this belongs to the Pastors and Prelates of his Church who may fall he saith into Heresie and Schism but that the whole Church is secured by Divine Promises from all Error and danger of Prevarication which he proves from the Promises of the New Testament Mat. 16.18 28.20 Iohn 14.16 26. But however the former seems to take away Infallibility from the Guides of the Church yet that this is to be understood of them seperately appears by what follows 2. The like Assistance of the Holy Ghost he believes to be in all General Councils which is the Church Representative by which they are specially protected from all error in all definitions and declarations in matters of Faith Now here are two sorts of Infallibility tacked to one another by vertue of these general Promises which ought more distinctly to be considered 1. To preserve Christs Church so as it shall never cease to be a Church is one thing to preserve it from all Errors is another The former answers the End of Christs Promises as to the Duration of the Church and the latter is not implied in them 2. The promise of teaching them all Truth Joh. 16.13 is not made to the whole Church but to the Apostles And their case was so peculiar and extraordinary that there can be no just inference from the assistance promised to them of what the Church should enjoy in all Ages 3. If the diffusive Church have no infallible Assistance promised then no infallible Assistance can from thence be proved for the Church Representative so that some particular Promises to the Guides of the Church as assembled together are necessary to prove the Infallibility of Councils 4. It by no means proves following Councils to be Infallible because the Apostle said Acts 15.28 It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Our Author doth not doubt but the same may be prefixed to all determinations in point of Faith resolved on by any General Council lawfully assembled since that time or to be held to the Worlds end But what Reason he had for not doubting in this matter I cannot see the Assistance he said being to extend as far as the Promise But shall Assistance imply Infallibility Then there must be good store as long as the Promises of Divine Grace hold good But this Assistance of Councils is very different from the Assistance of Grace for the Church may subsist without Councils but cannot without Grace What General Council was there from the meeting Acts 15. to the Council of Nice Were not Christ's Promises fulfilled to his Church all that time when it encreased in all parts against the most violent Opposition 5. No parity of Reason from the Iewish Church can be sufficient proof for Infallibility in the Christian. But our Author argues thus If Gods special Assistance was never wanting to the Church of the Iews so as to let it fail in the truth of its Doctrine or its Authority Why should not he believe the same of the Church of Christ which is built on better Promises What special Assistance was it which Israel had when it is said that for a long time Israel had been without the true God and without a teaching Priest and without Law And as to Iudah was there no failing in point of Doctrine in our Saviours time It is true they had the Law intire and that was all that was good among them for their Teachers had corrupted themselves and the people and made the Law of no effect among them If there were Infallibility any where it must be in the High Priest and Sanhedrim but is it possible for any Christian to think them Infallible when they were so grosly mistaken about the main Article of their Faith as to the Messias and pronounced him worthy of Death Is not this a fine Argument for the Infallibility of the Guides of the Christian Church But the Church of Christ hath better Promises No doubt of it greater Promises of Grace and Mercy in this World and in that to come but what is all this to Infallibility in Councils 6. Christ's Command of Obedience to those who sat in Moses Chair Matth. 23.2 doth not prove the Infallibility of those who sat there Yet this is alledged to that purpose and that men ought not to doubt of the Reasonableness of the Commands of their Superiors But St. Chrysostom saith our Saviour speaks of the things commanded by the Law of Moses â—er Cathedram Doctrinam Legis ostendit saith St. Ierome Not their own Doctrine but that of Moses saith Isidore and so Hilary and Theophylact. Maldonate confesseth our Saviours Words are to be understood not of their own Doctrine but of that of the Law and therefore he yields the Obedience here required is to be restrained to
look on themselves as obliged to shew him the Respect due to his place which he knows is not the matter in question Two things however he saith which seem to justifie his Title 1. He is the Successor of St. Peter to whom Christ committed the Care of his Flock But how far is this from proving the Pope to be Head of the Church under Christ For how doth it appear that Christ ever made St. Peter Head of the Church or committed his Flock to him in contradistinction to the rest of the Apostles This is so far from being evident from Scripture that the Learned Men of their Church are ashamed of the Places commonly produced for it it being impossible ever to justify the sense of them according to their own Rules of interpreting Scripture viz. by the unanimous consent of the Fathers For 1. Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church is interpreted by many of the Fathers both Greek and Latin of S Peters Confession and not of his Person so by S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Basil of Selucia S. Hilary S. Gregory Nyssen and Theodoret all great and considerable Persons in the Christian Church whose words are plain and full to that purpose and so they can never produce the unanimous Consent of the Fathers for S. Peter's Supremacy out of these words 2. And unto thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are interpreted by the Fathers of S. Peter in common with the other Apostles so Origen S. Cyprian S. Hilary S Hierom and S. Augustine as they are all owned by some Members of the Roman Communion And 3. For these words Feed my Sheep a late learned Doctor of the Sorbon shews that if they prove any thing peculiar to Saint Peter they must prove him sole Pastor of the Church which was the thing Saint Gregory disputed against so warmly But that there was nothing peculiar to Saint Peter above or beyond the rest of the Apostles he shews at large from S. Chrysostom S. Cyril S. Augustine and others to whom I refer the Reader and to the former Authors But suppose it were made to appear that Saint Peter was Head of the Church How doth the Bishop of Rome's Succession in that Headship shew it self To that he saith 2. That there hath been a visible Succession of above Two hundred and fifty Bishops acknowled as such in all past Ages by the Christian World As such What is that As Bishops of Rome That is not of weight enough to put it upon Tryal as Heads of the Catholick-Church That he knows is not only denied by us but by all the Greek Armenian Nestorian Abyssin Churches so that we dare say it was never allowed in any one Age of the Christian Church But we need not insist on the proof of this since the late mentioned Authors of the Roman Communion have taken so great pains not only to prove the Popes Supremacy to be an Incroachment Usurpation in the Church but that the laying it aside is necessary to the Peace and Unity of it And until the Divine Institution of the Papal Supremacy be proved it is to no purpose to debate what manner of Assistance is promised to the Pope in his Decrees Our Author is willing to decline the Debate about his personal Infallibility as a matter of Opinion and not of Faith and yet he saith he doubts not but God doth grant a special Assistance to the High Priest for the good of the whole Flock under the New Law as he did under the Old and produces the Instance of Caiaphas Joh. 11.51 This is a very surprizing way of Reasoning for if his Arguments be good from Scripture he must hold the Popes personal Infallibility as a matter of Faith and yet one would hardly think he should build an Article of Faith on the instance of Caiaphas For what consequence can be drawn from Gods over-ruling the Mind of a very bad man when he was carrying on a most wicked design to utter such words which in the event proved true in another sense than he meant them that therefore God will give a special Assistance to the Pope in determining matters of Faith Was not Caiaphas himself the man who proposed the taking away the Life of Christ at that time Was he assisted in that Council Did not he determine afterwards Christ to be guilty of Blasphemy and therefore worthy of Death And is not this a rare Infallibility which is supposed to be consistent with a Decree to crucifie Christ And doth he in earnest think such Orders are to be obeyed whether the Supreme Pastor be Infallible or not For so he concludes That his Sentence is to be obeyed whether he be Infallible or no XIX Of Dispensations HE believes that the Pope has Authority to pispense with the Laws of God and absolve any one from the obligation of keeping the Commandments So that if he has but his Holy Fathers leave he may confidently Dissemble Lie and Forswear himself in all whatsoever he pleases and never be in danger of being call'd to an account at the last day especially if his Lying and Forswearing was for the common good of the Church there being then a sure Reward prepar'd for him in Heaven as a recompence of his good Intentions and Heroick Atchievements And if at any time he should chance to be catch'd in the management of any of these publick and Church-concerns and being obnoxious to Penal Laws should have Sentence of Death pass'd on him he has liberty at his last hour on the Scaffold or Ladder to make a publick Detestation of all such Crimes to make protestations of his Innocence to call God to witness that he denies unjustly and that as he is immediately to appear before the Supreme Judge he knows no more of any such designs and is as clear from the Guilt of them as the Child unborn And this though the Evidence against him be as clear as noon-day though the Jury be never so Impartial and the Judge never so Conscientious For that he having taken the Sacrament and Oath of Secresie and receiv'd Absolution or a Dispensation from the Pope may then Lye Swear Forswear and Protest all that he pleases without scruple with a good Conscience Christian-like Holily and Canonically HE believes that the Pope has no Authority to dispense with the Law of God and that there 's no Power upon Earth can absolve any one frome the Obligation of keeping the Commandments or give leave to Lie or Forswear or make that the breaking of any the least Divine Precept shall not be accountable for at the day of Judgment He is taught by his Church in all Books of Direction in all Catechisms in all Sermons that every Lie is a Sin that to call God to witness to an Vntruth damnable that it ought not to be done to save the whole World that whosoever does it either for his own personal account
or for the Interest of Church or Pope or whatsoever else must of necessity answer for it at the last day and expect his portion with the Devil and his Angels if unrepented And that no one can give leave for Lying Perjury or committing any Sin or even pretend to it unless it be the Devil himself or some devilish Ministers of his such as he detests in his heart and utterly abominates And in consequence to this believes that whosoever at the hour of his death denies any Crime of which he is guilty and protests himself to be innocent when he is not so can have no hope of Mercy but departing out of this World an enemy to God and the Truth shall infallibly be receiv'd as such in the next and dying with a Lye in his mouth can expect no reward but from the Father of Lies And this whatsoever his Crime was whether incurr'd by an undertaking for Mother-Church or no and whatsoever his pretences for the denial of the Truth were whether Absolutions Dispensations the Sacrament or Oath of Secresie or whatsoever else nothing of these being capable of excusing him in Lies or Perjury or making them to be Innocent and not displeasing to God Nor indeed did he ever hear of these so much talk'd on Dispensations and Absolutions from any Priests of his Church either in Sermons or Confessions he never read of them in his Books and Catechisms he never saw the Practice of them in any of his Communion it having been their Custom ever since Oaths were first devis'd against them rather to suffer the loss of their goods banishments imprisonments torments and death it self than Forsâ—ear themselves or protest the least Untruth And 't is not out of the memory of man that several might have saved their Estates and Lives too would they have subscrib'd to and own'd but one Lye and yet refus'd it chusing rather to die infamously than prejudice their Conscience with an Vntruth So that it seems a great Mystery to him that those of his Profession should have Leave and Dispensations to Lye and forswear themselves at pleasure and yet that they should need nothing else but Lying and Perjury for the quiet enjoyment of their Estates for the saving their Lives for the obtaining Places of highest Command and greatest Dignity such as would be extraordinarily advantagious for their Cause and the interest of their Church And yet that they should generally chuse rather to forego all these so considerable Conveniences that once Lie or Forswear themselves And is it not another great Mystery that these Dispensations for Lying and Swearing should be according to the Receiv'd Doctrine of his Church and yet that he or any of his Communion were never instructed nor inform'd of any such Diabolical Point nay had never come to the knowledge of it had it not been for the information receiv'd from some Zealous Adversaries such as relate either meerly upon Trust or else such as have receiv'd a Dispensation of Lying from the Devil that they might charge the like Doctrine on the Church of Rome and the Pope XIX Of Dispensations HEre the Misrepresenter saith That a Papist believes that the Pope hath Authority to dispence with the Laws of God and absolve any one from the Obligation of keeping the Commandments On the other side the Representer affirms That the Pope has no Authority to dispence with the Law of God and that there 's no Power upon Earth can absolve any one from the Obligation of keeping the Commandments This matter is not to be determined by the one's affirming and the others denying but by finding out if possible the true sense of the Church of Rome about this matter And there are three Opinions about it 1. Of those who assert That the Pope hath a Power of Dispensing in any Divine Law except the Articles of Faith The Gloss upon the Canon Law saith that where the Text seems to imply that the Pope cannot dispence against the Apostle it is to be understood of Articles of Faith And Panormitan saith This Exposition pleases him well for the Pope may dispense in all other things Contra Apostolum dispensat saith the Gloss on the Decree And the Roman Editors in the Margin refer to 34 Dist. c. Lector to prove it And there indeed the Gloss is very plain in the Case sic Ergo Papa dispensat contra Apostolum And the Roman Correcters there justifie it and say it is no absurd Doctrine as to positive Institutions But the former notable Gloss as Panormitan calls it sets down the particulars wherein the Pope may dispense As 1. Against the Apostles and their Canons 2. Against the Old Testament 3. In Vows 4. In Oaths The Summa Angelica saith the Pope may dispense as to all the Precepts of the Old Testament And Clavasius founds this Power upon the Plenitude of the Popes Power according to that Expression in the Decretal mentioned that he can ex plenitudine potestatis de Iure supra Ius dispensare and without such a Power he saith God would not have taken that care of his Church which was to be expected from his Wisdom Iacobatius brings several Instances of this Power in the Pope and refers to the Speculator for more Iac. Almain saith That all the Canonists are of Opinion that the Pope may dispense against the Apostle and many of their Divines but not all For 2. Some of their Divines held that the Pope could not dispence with the Law of God as that implies a proper relaxation of the Law but could only Authoritatively declare that the Law did not oblige in such a particular Case because an Inferiour could not take away the force of a Superiors Law and otherwise there would be no fixed and immutable Rule in the Church and if the Pope might dispense in one Law of God he might dispense in the rest And of this Opinion were some of the most eminent School-Divines as Thomas Aquinas Bonaventure Major Soto and Catharinus who at large debates this Question and denies that the Pope hath any Power to dispense with Gods Law But then he adds that the Pope hath a kind of prophetical Power to declare in what Cases the Law doth oblige and in what not which he parallels with the Power of declaring the Canon of Scripture and this he doth not by his own Authority but by Gods He confesseth the Pope cannot dispense with those Precepts which are of themselves indispensable nor alter the Sacraments but then saith he there are some Divine Laws which have a general force but in particular Cases may be dispensed with and in these cases the Law is to be relaxed so that the Relaxation seems to come from God himself But he confesses this Power is not to be often made use of so that he makes this Power to be no Act of Jurisdiction but of prophetical Interpretation as he calls it and he brings the Instance of Caiaphas to this
purpose And he adds that the difference between the Divines and Canonists was but in Terms for the Canonists were in the right as to the Power and the Divines in the manner of explaining it 3. Others have thought this too loose a way of explaining the Popes Power and therefore they say That the Pope hath not a bare declaratory Power but a real Power of dispensing in a proper sense in particular Cases For say they the other is no act of Jurisdiction but of Discretion and may belong to other men as well as to the Pope but this they look on as more agreeable to the Popes Authority and Commission and a bare declaratory Power would not be sufficient for the Churches Necessity as Sanchez shews at large and quotes many Authors for this Opinion and Sayr more and he saith the Practice of the Church cannot be justified without it Which Suarez much insists upon and without it he saith the Church hath fallen into intolerable Errors and it is evident he saith the Church hath granted real Dispensations and not meer Declarations And he founds it upon Christ's Promise to Peter To thee will I give the Keys and the Charge to him Feed my Sheep But then he explains this Opinion by saying that it is no formal Dispensation with the Law of God but the matter of the Law is changed or taken away Thus I have briefly laid together the different Opinions in the Church of Rome about this power of dispensing with the Law of God from which it appears that they do all consent in the thing but differ only in the manner of explaining it And I am therefore afraid our Representer is a very unstudied Divine and doth not well understand their own Doctrine or he would never have talked so boldly and unskilfully in this matter As to what he pretends that their Church teaches that every Lye is a Sin c. it doth not teach the Case for the Question it not whether their Church teach men to lye but whether there be not such a power in the Church as by altering the nature of things may not make that not to be a Lye which otherwise would be one As their Church teaches that men ought not to break their Vâ—ws yet no one among them questions but the Pope may dissolve the Obligation of a Vow although it be made to God himself Let him shew then how the Pope comes to have a Power to release a Vow made to God and not to have a Power to release the Obligation to veracity among men Again We do not charge them with delivering any such Doctrine That men may have Dispensations to lye and forswear themselves at pleasure for we know this Dispensing Power is to be kept up as a great Mystery and not to be made use of but upon weighty and urgent causes of great consequence and beneâ—it to the Church as their Doctors declare But as to all matters of fact which he alludes to I have nothing to say to them for our Debate is only whether there be such a Power of Dispensation allowed in the Church of Rome or not XX. Of the Deposing Power HE believes that the Pope has Authority to dispence with his Allegiance to his Prince and that he needs no longer be a Loyal Subject and maintain the Rights Priviledges and Authority of his King than the Pope will give him leave And that if this Mighty Father think sit to thunder out an Excommunication against him then he shall be deem'd the best Subject and Most Christian that can first shed his Prince's Blood and make him a Sacrifice to Rome and he 's but ill rewarded for his pains who after so Glorious an Atchievement has not his Name plac'd in the Kalendar and he Canoniz'd for a Saint So that there can be no greater Danger to a King than to have Popish Subjects he holding his Life amongst them only at the Pope 's pleasure 'T IS no part of his Faith to believe that the Pope has Authority to dispence with his Allegiance to his Sovereign or that he can Depose Princes upon any account whatsoever giving leave to their Subjects to take up Arms against them and endeavour their ruin He knows that Deposing King-killing Power has been maintain'd by some Canonists and Divines of his Church and that it is in their Opinion lawful and annex'd to the Papal Chair He knows likewise that some Popes have endeavor'd to act according to this Power But that this Doctrine appertains to the Faith of his Church and is to be believ'd by all of that Communion is a malicious Calumny a down-right Falsity And for the truth of this it seems to him a sufficient Argument that for the fâ—w Authors that are Abettors of this Doctrine there are of his Communion three times the number that publickly disown all such Authority besides several Universities and whole Bodies that have solemnly condemn'd it without being in the least suspected of their Religion or of denying any Article of their Faith Those other Authors therefore Publish their own Opinions in their Books and those Popes acted according to what they judg'd lawful and all this amounts to no more than that this Doctrine has been or is an Opinion amongst some of his Church but to raise it to an Article of Faith upon these grounds is impossible Let his Church therefore answer for no more than what she delivers for Faith let Prelates answer for tâ—eir Actions and Authors for their own Opinions otherwise more Churches must be charg'd with Deposing and King-killing Doctrine besides that of Rome The University of Oxford having found other Authors of Pernicious Books and Damnable Doctrines destructive to the Sacred Persons of Princes their State and Government besides Iesuits as may be seen in their Decree published in the London Gazette Iuly 26. 1683. In which they condemn'd twenty seven false iâ—pious seditious Propositions fitted to stir up Tumults overthrow States and Kingdoms to lead to Rebellion Murder of Princes and Atheism it self Of which number only three or four were ascrib'd to the Iesuits the rest having men of another Communion for their Fathers And this Doctrine was not first condemn'd by Oxford What they did here in the Year 1683. having been solemnly done in Paris in 1626. Where the whole Colledge of Sorbon gave Sentence against this Proposition of Sanctarellus viz That the Pope for Heresie and Schism might depose Princes and exempt the Subjects from their Obedience the like was done by the Universities of Caen Rhemes Poictoirs Valence Bourdeaux Bourges and the Condemnation subscrib'd by the Iesuits And Mariana's Book was committed publickly to the flames by a Provincial Council of his own Order for the discoursing the Point of King-killing Doctrine problematically Why therefore should this disloyal Doctrine be laid to his Church whenas it has been writ against by several hundred single Authors in her Communion and disown'd and solemnly condemn'd by so many famous
Universities And why should the Actions of some few Popes with the Private Opinions of some Speculative Doctors be so often and vehemently urg'd for the just charging this Doctrine upon the Faith of the Church of Rome which to a Serious Impartial Considerer are only meer Fallacies capable of Libelling all Societies in the World of overthrowing all States and Kingdoms and only fit Arguments for Knaves to cheat Fools withal There being no Government in the World which might not be easily proved Tyrannical No Religion Perswasion or Society which might not plausibly be indicted of Atheism If the Actions Pretences Claims and endeavour of some few of their Governours and Leading Men the Opinions Writings Phansies of some Authors be allow'd as sufficient Evidence for the bringing in the Verdict of Guilty upon the whole When Malice therâ—fore and Envy have done their worst in this point to render the Papists bloody and barbarous to the World yet ' ds certain after all that Popish Princes sit as safe in their Thrones enjoy as much Peace and Security as any other Princes whatsoever and that the Papists in England can give as good proofs of their Loyalty as the best of those that clamour so loud against them They can bid defiâ—nce to their Adversaries to shew any one Person of Honour and Estate amongst them or even four of any condition whatsoever that bore Arms against Charles the First during the whole time of his Troubles They can make good that there was scarce any amongst them that did not assist his Majesty either with Person or Purse or both And they can say that Charles the First was murder'd in cold blood by his Protestant Subjects after many hundred Papists had lost their Lives for the preventing that Butchery and that Charles the Second being pursued by the same Subjects for his Life sav'd it amongst the Papists XX. Of the Deposing Power TO bring this matter into as narrow a compass as may be I shall first take notice of his Concessions which will save us a labour of Proofs 1. He yields that the Deposing and King-killing Power hath been maintained by some Canonists and Divines of his Church and that it is in their opinion lawful and annexed to the Papal Chair 2. That some Popes have endeavoured to act according to this Power But then he denies that this Doctrine appertains to the Faith of his Church and is to be believed by all of that Communion And more than that he saith The affirming of it is a malicious Calumny a downright Falsity Let us now calmly debate the matter Whether according to the received principles of the Church of Rome this be only a particulâ—r opinion of some Popes and Divines or be to be received as a matter of Faith The Question is not Whether those who deny it do account it an Article of Faith for we know they do not But whether upon the Principles of the Church of Rome they are not bound to do it I shall only to avoid cavilling proceed upon the Principles owned by our Author himself viz. 1. That the sense of Scripture as understood by the Community of Christians in all Angels since the Apostles is to be taken from the present Church 2. That by the present Church be understands the Pastors and Prelates assembled in Councils who are appointed by Christ and his Apostles for the decision of controversies and that they have Inâ—allible assistance 3. That the Pope as Head of the Church hath a particular assistance promised him with a special regard to his Office and Function If therefore it appear that Popes and Councils have declared this Deposing Doctrine and tâ—ey hâ—ve received other things as Articles of Faith upon the same Declarations why should they then stick at yielding this to be an Article of Faith as well as the other It is not denied that I can find that Popes and Councils for several Ages have asserted and exercised the Deposing Power but it is alledged against these Decrees Acts. 1. That they were not grounded upon Universal Tradition 2. That they had not Universal Reception Now if these be sufficient to overthrow the Definitions of Councils let us consider the consequences of it 1. Then every Man is left to examin the Decrees of Councils whether they are to be embraced or not for he is to judge whether they are founded on Universal Tradition and so he is not to take the sense of the present Church for his Guide but the Universal Church from Christs time which overthrows a Fundamental Principle of the Roman Church 2. Then he must reject the pretended Infallibility in the Guides of the Church if they could so notoriously err in a matter of so great consequence to the Peace of Christendom as this was and consequently their Authority could not be sufficient to declare any Articles of Faith And so all Persons must be left at Liberty to believe as they see cause notwithstanding the Definitions made by Popes and Councils 3. Then he must believe the Guides of the Roman Church to have been mistaken not once or twice but to have persisted in it for Five hundred years which must take away not only Infallâ—bilâ—ty but any kind of Reverence to the Authority of it For whatever may be said as to those who have depended on Princes or favour their Partâ—es against the Guides of the Church it cannot be denied that for so long time the leading Party in that Church did assert and maintain the Deposing Power And therefore Lessius truly understood this matter when he said That there was scarce any Article of the Christian Faith the denial whereof was more dangerous to the Church or did precipitate Men more into Heresie and Hatred of the Church than this of the Deposing Power for he says they could not maintain their Churches Authority without it And he reckons up these ill Consequences of denying it 1. That the Roman Church hath erred for at least five hundred years in a matter fundamental as to Government and of great Moment Which is worse than an Error about Sacraments as Penance Extream Unction c. and yet those who deny the Church can err in one hold that it hath erred in a greater matter 2. That it hath not only erred but voluntarily and out of Ambiâ—ion perverting out of Design the Doctrine of the Primive Church and Fathers concerning the Power of the Church and bringing in another contrary to it against the Right and Authority of Princes which were a grievous sin 3. That it made knowingly unrighteous Decrees to draw persons from their Allegiance to Princes and so they became the Causes of many Seditions and Rebellions and all the ill Consequences of them under a shew of Piety and Religion 4. That the Churches Decrees Commands Judgments and Censures may be safely contemned as Null and containing intolerable Errors And that it may require such things which good Subjects are bound to disobey 5. That Gregory VII
some Middlestate And in this sense it was understood by St. Augustine nigh twelve hundred Years ago as is manifest in his Works Civ Dei l. 21. c. 13 24. lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 15. so also by St. Gregory the Great l. 4. Diacl c. 39. so by St. Bernard against the Hereticks of his time In the same manner does St. Augustine understand those words of St. Paul 1 Cor. 3.15 He himself shall be saved yet so as by fire Where he thinks him to speak of a purging fire Aug. in Psal. 37. So the same Father understands that Prison of which St. Peter speaks 1 Pet. 3.19 to be some place of Temporal Chastisâ—ment Aug. Ep. 99. And if this great Doctor of the Chuâ—ch in those purer times found so often in the Bible a place of Pains after this Life from whence there was Release how can any one say without great presumption that the Being of a Third Place is contrary to the Word of God Neither can the Antiquity of this Doctrine be more justly call'd in question of which is found so early mention not only by this Holy Father but even by others his Predecessors the Disciples of the Apostles and the best Witnesses of their Doctrine Dionys. l. de Eccl. Hier. c. 7. In Actis SS Perpet Felicit mention'd and approv'd by S. Aug. l. 1. de Anima ejus Orig. c. 10. l. 3. c. 9. l. 4. c. 18. Tertul. l. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. Cypr. Ep. 66. ad Cler. Arnob. l. 4. cont Gent. pag. ult and many others quoted at length by the Learned Natalis Alixand Tom. 9. Hist. Eccl. dissert 41 And as for the Reason of this Tenet he is bound to think it does not want it since he finds it abetted by such Virtuous Learned and Considering Men whom he dares not reckon Fools never hearing that these us'd to Believe but upon very good Groundâ— and substantial Reasons And he thinks he is able to give some himself by what he has learned from the Scriptures and these Fathers For having been taught by these First That when a sinner is reconciâ—'d to God though the Eternal Punishment due to his sins is always remitted yet there sometimes remains a Temporal Penalty to be undergone As in the case of the Israelites Num. 14. who by Moses's Prayers obtained Pardon for their Murmuring and yet were excluded the Land of Canaan As in the Case of David 2 Sam. 12. who was punish'd in the loss of his Child after his sin was forgiven Secondly That there are some sins which of their own nature are Light and Venial such as cool the fervour of Charity but do not extinguish it from which even Holy Men are not exempt and of which it is said that the Iust man falls seven times Augustin Enchir. c. 70. lib. Quaest. Oct. tr 9.26 Thirdly That to all sins whether great or small some Penalty is due to the Iustice of God who as he has Mercy to forgive has also Iustice to punish so that as St. Augustin says â—n Ennar in Psal. 50. Whosoever seeks to God for mercy must remember that he is just and that his sin shall not pass unpunished Fourthly That generally speaking few Men depart out of this life but either with the guilt of some light offences and venial sins or else obnoxious to some Temporal Punishment due to former sins forgiven From these Heads Discourse leads him immediately to the Necessity of some Third Place For since the Infinite Goodness of God can admit nothing into Heaven which is not clean and pure from all sin both great and small And his Iâ—finite Iustice can permit none to receive the Reward of Bliss who as yet are not out of debt but have something in Iustice to suffer There must of necessity be some Place or State where Souls departing this life pardon'd as to the Eternal Guilt or Pain yet obnoxious to some Temporal Penalty or with the guâ—lt of some venial faults are Purg'd and Purify'd before their Admittance into Heaven And this is what he is taught concerning Purgatory Which though he knows not Where it is of what nature the Pains are or how long each Soul is detained there yet he believes that those that are in this Place being the Living Members of Jesus Christ are reliev'd by the Prayers of their Fellow-Members here on Earth and that the Charitable Works perform'd upon their Death-bed and the Alms dispos'd on in their Last Will are very available afterwards in order to their speedier release XXIII Of PVRGATORY HEre our Author begins with proving from Scripture and Antâ—quity and then undertakes to explain the Dâ—ctrine of Purgatory from substantial Reasons 1. As to his Proof from Scripture 1. Is that from 2 Maccab. c. 12. where he saith Money was sent to Jerusalem that Sacrifices might be offered for the slain and 't is recommended as a Holy Cogitation to pray for the dead To this which is the main foundation of Purgatory I answer 1. It can never prove such a Purgatory as our Author asserts for he supposes a Sinner reconciled to God as to eternal Punishment before he be capable of Purgatory but here can be no such Supposition for these Men died in the sin of Achan which was not known till their Bodies were found among the slain Here was no Confession or any sign of Repentance and therefore if it proves any thing it is deliverance from Eternal Punishment and for such as dye in their Sins without any shew of Repentance 2. We must distinguish the Fact of Iudas from the Interpretation of Iason or his Epitomizer The Fact of Iudas was according to the strictness of the Law which required in such Cases a Sin-Offering and that is all which the Greek implies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so Leo Allatius confesses all the best Greek Copies agree and he reckons Twelve of them Now what doth this imply but that Iudas remembring the severe punishment of this Sin in the Case of Achan upon the People sent a Sin-Offering to Ierusalem But saith Leo Allatius It was the sin of those men that were slain I grant it But the Question is Whether the Sin-Offering respected the dead or the living For the Law in such a Case required a Sin-Offering for the Congregation And why should not we believe so punctual a Man for the Law as Iudas did strictly observe it in this point But the Author of the Book of Maccabees understands it of those that were slain I do not deny it but then 3. We have no Reason to rely upon his Authority in this matter which I shall make appear by a parallel Instance He doth undoubtedly commend the fact of Razias in Killing himself 2. Macc. 14.42 when he saith he did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like a brave Man and if he had thought it a fault in him he would never have given such a Character of it but he would have added something of Caution
they borrow thence and set them down for so many Articles of Popery They turn over every Pâ—pish Author and whatsoever light loose or extravagant Opinions whatsoever Discourses carried on either through Flattery Disgust or Faction appear in any of them they are all mark'd out for so many Articles of Popery And by these and such like means is finish'd at last a compleat Dâ—aught of Popery in which she is render'd so foul monstrous and abominable that there can be nothing raked from the very Sinks of Turcism nothing borrow'd from the wild Africans or barbarous Americans that can make her more odious or add to her deformity Why and is not Popery then such as 't is thus generally painted No 't is no more like it than Monarchy is to that which turbulent Republican Spirits shew for it when displaying to the multitude some Miscarriages of State Frailties in Persons in Dignities Abuses of Government c. they cry out Behold this is Monarchy By this means making it infamous among the People that they may more easily overthrow it And are not the Papists such as they are commonly Represented No They are no more alike than the Christians were of old under the Persecuting Emperors to what they appear'd when cloathed with Lions and Bears Skins they were exposed in the Amphi-theatre to Wild Beasts under those borrow'd Shapes to provoke their Savage Opposites to greater fury and that they might infallibly and with more rage be torn in pieces Let Monarchy be shewn in its own colours and the Christians be expos'd in their own form and one will have but few Maligners and the others will meet with a more tame Behaviour even from the wildest Beasts Let any but search into the Câ—uncils of the Church of Rome even that of Trent than which none can be more Popish let them peruse her Catechisms that ad Parochos or others set forth for Pastors to instruct their Flock and for Children Youth and others to learn their Christian Doctrine of which there is extant great variety in English let them examine Vernon's Rule of Faith and that set forth by the Bishop of Condan let them look into the Spiritual Books of Direction Those of Bishâ—p Sales the Following of Christ the Christian Rules the Spiritual Combat Granado's Works and infinite others of this sort which Papists generally keep by them for their Instruction And then let them freely declare whether the Papists are so ill principled either as to their Faith or Morals as they are generally made appear A little diligence in this kind with a serious inquiry into their conversation their manner of Living and Dying will easily discover that that of Beast with which they are commonly expos'd to publick is not theirs but only of the skin that is thrown over them The Papists own that there are amongst them Men of very ill Lives and that if every corner be narrowly sifted there may be found great abuses even of the most sacred things that some in great Dignities have been highly vilious and carried on wicked Designs That some Authors maintain and publish very absurd Opinions and of ill consequence But these things are nothing of their Religion they are Imperfections indeed the Crimes the Scandals of some in their Communion but such they are so far from being oblig'd to approve maintain or imitate that they wish with all their heart there had been never any such thing and desire in these Points a thorough Reformation Thô the Imprudences therefore the Failings the Extravagancies the Vices that may be pick'd up throughout the whole Society of Papists are very numerous and great and too too sufficient if drawn together for the composing a most Deform'd Antichristiaâ—-Monster yet the Popery of the Roman-Catholicks is no such Monster as 't is painted Those things which are commonly brought against them being as much detested by them as by the Persâ—ns that lay the charge of their dis-favour and having no more relation to them than Weeds and Tares to the Corn amongst which it grows or Châ—ff to the Wheat with which it lies mix'd in one heap A Papists therefore is no more than he is above Represented and whosoever enters that Communion has no obligation of believing otherwise then as there specified And thô in each Particular I have cited no Authorities yet for the truth and exactness of the Character I Appeal to the Council of Trent And if in any Point it shall be found to disagree I again promise upon notice publickly to own it And as for the other Part of the Papist Mis-represented it contains such Tenets as are wrongfully charged upon the Papists and in at many respects as it is contrary to the other Character in so many it is contrary to the Faith of their Church And so far they are ready to disown them and subscribe to their Condemnation And though any serious enquirer may be easily satisfied as to the truth of this yet for a publick satisfaction to shew that those Abominable Unchristian Doctrâ—nes are no part of their Belief however extravagant some men may be in their Opinions the Papists acknowledg that a Faith assenting to such Tenets is wholly opposite to the Honour of God and Destructive to the Gospel of Christ and do publickly invoke God Almighty's Iudgments upon that Church which teaches either publickly or privately such a Faith And since 't is lawful for any Christian to answer Amen to such Anathema ' as are pronounc'd against things apparently sinful the Papists to shew to the World that they disown the following Tenets commonly laid at their door do here oblige themselves that if the ensuing Curses be added to those appointed to be read on the first day of Lent They will seriously and heartily answer Amen to them all I. Cursed is he that commits Idolatry that prays to Images or Relicks or Worships them for God R. Amen II. Cursed is every Goddess Worshiper that believes the Virgin Mary to be any more than a creature that Honour her Worship her or puts his Trust in her more than in God that believes her above her Son or that she can in any thing command him R. Amen III. Cursed is he that believes the Saints in Heaven to be his Redeemers that prays to them as such or that gives God's Honour to them or to any creature whatsoever R. Amen IV. Cursed is he that Worships any Breaden God or makes Gods of the empty Elements of Bread and Wine R. Amen V. Cursed is he that believes that Priests can forgive Sins whether the Sinner repent or no Or that there 's any Power in Earth or Heaven that can forgive sins without a hearty repentance and serious purpose of amendment R. Amen VI. Cursed is he that believes there 's Authority in the Pope or any others that can give leave to commit sins Or that can forgive him his sins for a sum of Money R. Amen VII Cursed is he that believes that Independent of the
and another knowing me unable to pay it gives me so much to pay the Debt this is no more than what may be called strict Payment as to the Creditor but if the Creditor himself gives me this 100 l. to pay himself with will any Man call this strict Payment He may call it so himself if he pleases but that only shews his Kindness and Favour but it doth not look very modestly or gratefully for the Debtor to insist upon it as true legal Payment Just so it is in good Works done by the Power of God's Grace which we could never have done without it and therefore such cannot be truly meritorious 2. What is truly meritorious must not be defective because the Proportion is to be equal between the Act and the Reward due to it which being perfect requires that there be do Defect in the Acts which merit it But this can never be said of Good Works of justified Persons that they have no Defects in them We do not say they are not Good Works but they are not exact and perfect for although the Grace of God as it comes from him be a perfect Gift yet as it acts upon Mens Minds it doth not raise them to such a degree but that they have Imperfections in their best Actions And whatever is defective is faulty whatever is faulty must be forgiven whatever needs forgiveness cannot be truly meritorious But not only their Good Works are defective but if they would merit they ought to have none but Good Works whereas the mixture of others renders the good uncapable of being meritorious because there is so much to be pardoned as takes away all claim of Merit in the good they perform And themselves do not pretend that Men can merit the Grace of Remission but it is very strange that those who cannot deserve to be forgiven should deserve to have an infinite Reward bestowed upon them 3. There must be an exact Proportion between the Act and the Recompence for to merit is to pay a Price for a thing and in such Acts of commutative Justice there must be an Equality of one thing with another But what Equality can there be between the imperfect Good Works of the best Men and the most perfect Happiness of another World especially when that consists in the fruition of the Beatifical Vision For what Proportion can there be between our Acts towards God and God's Acts towards the Blessed in Heaven Let the Acts be of what Person soever or of what Nature soever or from what Principle soever as long as they are the Acts of finite imperfect Creatures it is impossible there should be any Equality or exact Proportion between them and the Eternal Favour of God which is the Reward promised 4. Where Acts are truly meritorious there follows an Obligation of strict Justice to pay the Recompence due to them But what strict Justice can there be between the Creator and his Creatures to recompence the Service they are bound to perform when their very Being Power to act Assistance in acting and Recompence for it are all from his Bounty and Goodness But our Author would avoid all this by saying that though Good Works are truly meritorious yet it is through the Merits of Christ and as they proceed from Grace and through his Goodness and Promise that they are so i. e. they are truly meritorious because it appears from all these things they neither are nor can be meritorious For 1. How come the Merits of Christ to make good Works truly meritorious Are the Merits of Christ imputed to those Good Works Then those Good Works must be as meritorious as Christ's own Works which I suppose he will not assert Or is it that Christ hath merited the Grace whereby we may merit But even this will not make our personal Acts truly meritorious and the Nature of Merit relates to the Acts and not to the Power 2. How comes the Power of Grace to make them truly meritorious when the Power of Grace doth so much increase the Obligation on our side If it be said That the state of Grace puts men into a capacity to merit we might more reasonably infer the contrary that it puts them out of a capacity of meriting because the Remission of Sins and the Favour of God are things for which we can never make him any recompence 3. How comes a Divine Promise to make Acts truly meritorious For God's Promise is an Act of meer kindness which is very different from strict Justice and although by the Promise God binds himself to performance yet how come those Acts to be more meritorious of Heaven than the Acts of Repentance are of Remission of Sins Yet none will now say that there can be any Acts meritorious of that Yet certainly there is a clear promise of Pardon upon Repentance as there is of Heaven upon Good Works And if the Promise in the other case doth not make Repentance meritorious of Pardon how can it make Good Works truly meritorious of Eternal Life But notwithstanding we do not deny God's Fidelity to his Promise may be called Iustice and so God as a Righteous Iudge may give a Crown of Righteousness to all that follow St. Paul's Example without making Good Works to be truly meritorious VII Of Confession HE believes it part of his Religion to make Gods of Men foolishly thinking that these have power to forgive sins And therefore as often as he finds his Conscience oppressed with the guilt of his Offences he calls for one of his Priests who are commonly more wicked than himself and falling at his feet he unfolds to him the whole state of his Soul and having run over a Catalogue of his Sins he asks of him Pardon and Forgiveness And what is most absurd of all he is so sillily stupid as to believe That if his Ghostly Father after he has heard all his Villanies in his Ear does but pronounce three or four Latin words making the sign of a Cross with two fingers and a thumb over his head his sins are forthwith forgiven him although he had never any thoughts of amendment or intention to forsake his wickedness HE believes it damnable in any Religion to make Gods of Men. However he firmly holds that when Christ speaking to his Apostles said Ioh. 20.21 Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven and whose sins you shall retain they are retained He gave to them and their Successors the Bishops and Priests of the Catholick Church Authority to absolve any truly penitent sinner from his sins And God having thus given them the Ministry of Reconciliation and made them Christ's Legates 2 Cor. 5.18 19 12. Christ's Ministers and the Dispensers of the Mysteries of Christ and given them power to loose on Earth whatsoever was to be loosed in Heaven Mat. 18.18 he undoubtedly believes that whosoever comes to them making a sincere and humble confession of his sins with a
firm purpose of amendment and an hearty resolution of turning from his evil ways may from them receive Absolution by the Authority given them from Heaven and not doubt but God ratifies above the sentence pronounced in that Tribunal Loosing in Heaven whatsoever is thus loosed by them on Earth And that whosoever comes without the due preparation without a Repentance from the bottom of his heart and real intension of forsaking his sins receives no benefit by the Absolution but adds sin to sin by an high contempt of God's Mercy and abuse of his Sacraments VII Of Confession WE do not charge the Church of Rome that in the power of Absolving they make Gods of Men as our Misrepresenter pretends 2. We do not deny That Christ gave to the Bishops and Priests of the Catholick Church Authority to absolve any truly penitent Sinner from his Sins which he therefore needlesly proves out of Scripture and that such Absolution is ratified in Heaven 3. We are glad to find that our Author declares That no Man receives benefit by Absolution without Repentance from the bottom of his Heart and real intention of forsaking his Sins by which we hope he means more than Attrition But yet there are some things which stick with us as to the Doctrine and Practicee of the Church of Rome in this matter which he takes no notice of 1. That Secret Confession of Sins to a Priest is made so necessary to Salvation that an Anathema is denounced against all that deny it when they cannot deny that God doth forgive Sins upon true Contrition For the Council of Trent doth say That Contrition with Charity doth reconcile a Man to God before the Sacrament of Penance be actually received But then it adds That the desire of Confession is included in Contrition Which is impossible to be proved by Scripture Reason or Antiquity For so lately as in the time of the Master of the Sentences and Gratian in the 12 th Century it was a very disputable Point whether Confession to a Priest were necessary And it is very hard for us to understand how that should become necessary to Salvation since which was not then Some of their own Writers confess that some good Catholicks did not believe the necessity of it I suppose the old Canonists may pass for good Catholicks and yet Maldonat saith That all the Interpreters of the Decrees held that there was no Divine Precept for Confession to a Priest and of the same Opinion he grants Scotus to have been But he thinks it is now declared to be Heresie or he wishes it were And we think it is too much already unless there were better ground for it 2. That an Anathema is denounced against those who do not understand the words of Christ Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. of the Sacrament of Penance so as to imply the necessity of Confession Whereas there is no appearance in the words of any such Sense and themselves grant that in order to the Remission of Sins by Baptism of which St. Matthew and St. Mark speak in the Apostles Commission there is no necessity of Sacramental Confession but a general Confession is sufficient And from hence the Elder Iansenius concludes That the Power of Remission of Sins here granted doth not imply Sacramental Confession Cajetant yields There is no Command for Confession here And Catharinus adds That Cajetan would not allow any one Place of Scripture to prove Auricular Confession And as to this particular he denies that there is any Command for it and he goes not about to prove it but that Cajetan contradicts himself elsewhere viz. when he wrote School-Divinity before he set himself to the study of the Scriptures Vasques saith That if these words may be understood of Baptism none can infer from them the Necessity of Auricular Confession But Gregory de Valentia evidently proves that this place doth relate to Remission of Sins in Baptism not only from the Comparison of places but from the Testimonies of Saint Cyprian Saint Ambrose and others 3. That it is expressed in the same Anathema's that this hath been always the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholick Church from the beginning We do not deny the ancient practice either of Canonical Confession as part of the Discipline of the Church for publick Offenses nor of Voluntary Confession for ease and satisfaction of the perplexed Minds of doubting or dejected Penitents but that which we say was not owned nor practised by the Church from the beginning was this Sacramental Confession as necessary to the Remission of sins before God It is therefore to no purpose to produce out of Bellarmine and others a great number of Citations to prove that which we never deny but if they hold to the Council of Trent they must prove from the Fathers that Sins after Baptism cannot be forgiven without Confession to men which those who consider what they do will never undertake there being so many Testimonies of undoubted Antiquity against it And it is observable that Bonaventuâ—e grants that before the Lateran Decree of Innocentius 3. it was no Heresie to deny the necessity of Confession and so he excuses those who in the time of Lombard and Gratian held that Opinion And all other Christians in the World besides those of the Church of Rome do to this day reject the necessity of particular Confession to a Priest in order to Remission as the Writers of the Church of Rome themselves confess So Godignus doth of the Abyssins Philippus à SS Trinitate of the Iacobites Clemens Galanus of the Nestorians who saith They made a Decree against the use of Confession to any but to God alone And Alexius Meneses of the Christians of St. Thomas in the Indies The Greeks believe Confession only to be of Positive and Ecclesiastical Institution as the late Author of the Critical History of the Faith and Customs of the Eastern Nations proves And the very Form of their Absolution declares that they do not think particular Confession of all known Sins necessary to pardon for therein the Priest absolves the Penitent from the sins he hath not confessed through forgetfulness or shame And now let any one prove this to have been a Catholick Tradition by Vincentius his Rules viz. That it hath been always received every where and by All. VIII Of Indulgences HE believes that his Holy Father the Pope can give him leave to commit what sins he pleaseth especially if he can make him a present of a round Sum of Mony he never need doubt of an Indulgence or Pardon for himself and his Heirs for ever for all sorts of Crimes or Wickedness he or any of his Posterity may have convenience of falling into And having this Commission in his Pocket under the Popes Broad Seal he may be confident that Christ will confirm and stand to all that his Vicar upon Earth has granted and not
Merits and Pâ—ssion of Christ he câ—n Merit Salvation by his own good Works or make condign satisfaction for the guilt of his sins or the pains Eternal due to them R. Amen VIII Cursed is he that contemns the Word of God or hides it from the People on design to keep them from the knowledge of their Duty and to preserve them in Ignorance and Error R. Amen IX Cursed is he that undervalues the Word of God or that forsaking Scripture chuses rather to follow Humane Traditions than it R. Amen X. Cursed is he that leaves the Commandments of God to observe the constitutions of Men. R. Amen XI Cursed is he that omits any of the Ten Commandments or keeps the people from the knowledge of any one of them to the end they may not have occasion of discovering the Truth R. Amen XII Cursed is he that Preaches to the People in unknown Tongues such as they understand not or uses any other means to keep them in Ignorance R. Amen XIII Cursed is he that believes that the Pope can give to any upon any account whatsoever Dispensation to lie or swear falsly or that 't is lawful for any at the last hour to protest himself Innocent in case he be Guilty R. Amen XIV Cursed is he that encourages sins or teaches Men to defer the amendment of their Lives or presumption of their Death-bed-Repentance R. Amen XV. Cursed is he that teaches Men that they may be lawfully drunk on a Friday or any other Fasting-day tho they must not taste the least bit of Flesh. R. Amen XVI Cursed is he who places Religion in nothing but a pompous shew consisting only in Ceremonies and which teaches not the People to serve God in Spirit and Truth R. Amen XVII Cursed is he who loves or promotes Cruelty that teaches People to be bloody-minded and to lay aside the meekness of Iesus Christ. R. Amen XVIII Cursed is he who teaches it lawful to do any wicked thing tho it be for the Interest and Good of Mother-Church or that any Evil Action may be done that Good may come on it R. Amen XIX Cursed are we if amongst all those wicked Principles and damnable Doctrines commonly laid at our doors any one of them be the Faith of our Church And cursed are we if we do not as heartily detest all those hellish Practâ—ces as they that so vehemently urge them against us R. Amen XX. Cursed are we if in an answering and saying Amen to any of these Curses we use any Equivocations Mental Reservations or do not assâ—nt to them in the common and obvious Sense of the Words R. Amen And can the Papists then thus seriously and without check of Conscience say Amen to all these Curses Yes they can and are ready to it whensoever and and as often as it shall be requir'd of them And what then is to be said of those who either by Word or Writing charge these Doctrines upon the Faith of the Church of Rome Is a lying Spirit in the mouth of all the Prophets Are they all gone aside Do they bâ—ck bâ—te with their Tongue do Evil to their Neighbour and take up Reproach against thâ—ir Neighbour I 'll say no such thing but leave the impartial Considerer to judge One thing I can safely affirm That the Papists are foully Mis represented and shew in publick as much unlike what they are as the Christians were of old by the Gentiles that they lie under a great Calumny and severely smart in good Name Persons and Estates for such things which they as much and as heartily detest as those who accuse them But the Comfort is Christ has said to his Followers Ye shall be hated of all men Matth. 10.22 and Saint Paul We are made a Spectacle unto the World and we don't doubt that who bears this with Patience shall for every loss here and content receive a hundred fold in Heaven For base things of the World and things which are despiâ—ed hath God chosen â— Corinth 1.28 An Answer to the Conclusion HAving thus gone through the several Heads which our Author complains have been so much Mirsrepresented it is now fit to consider what he saith in his Conclusion which he makes to answer his Introduction by renewing therein his doleful Complaints of their being Misrepresented just as Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians were I hope the former Discourse hath shewed their Doctrines and Practices are not so very like those of Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians that their Cases should be made so parallel but as in his Conclusion he hath summed up the substance of his Representations so I shall therein follow his Method only with this difference that I shall in one Column set down his own Representations of Popery and in the other the Reasons in short why we cannot embrace them Wherein Popery consists as represented by this Author 1. IN using all external Acts of Adoration before Images as Kneeling Praying lifting up the Eyes burning Candles Incense c. Not merely to worship the Objects before them but to worship the Images themselves on the account of the Objects represented by them or in his own Words Because the Honour that is exhibited to them is referred to the Prototypes which they represent 2. In joining the Saints in Heaven together with Christ in Intercession for us and making Prayers on Earth to them on that Account 3. In allowing more Supplications to be used to the Blessed Virgin than to Christ For he denies it to be an idle Superstition to repeat Ten Ave Maria's for one Pater-Noster 4. In giving religious Honour and Respect to Relicks Such as placing them upon Altars burning Wax Candles before them carrying them in Processions to be seen touched or humbly kissed by the People which are the known allowed Practices in the Church of Rome 5. In adoring Christ as present in the Eucharist on the account of the Substance of Bread and Wine being changed into that Body of Christ which suffered on the Cróss 6. In believing the Substance of Bread and Wine by the Words of Consecration to be changed into his own Body and Blood the Species only or Accidents of Bread and Wine remaining as before 7. In making good Works to be truly meritorious of Eternal Life 8. In making Confession of our Sins to a Priest in order to Absolution 9. In the use of Indulgences for taking away the Temporal Punishments of sin remaining due after the Guilt is remitted 10. In supposing the Penitent Sinner may in some measure satisfie by Prayer Fasting Alms c. for the Temporal Pain which by order of God's Iustice sometimes remains due after the Guilt and the Eternal Pain are remitted 11. In thinking the Scripture not fit to be read generally by all without Licence or in the Vulgar Tongue 12. In allowing the Books of Tobit Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Maccabees to be Canonical 13. In preferring the Vulgar Latin Edition