consigned to Writing By which means the Word written and unwritten were not Two different Rules but as to all necessary matters of Faith one and the same And the unwritten Word so far from losing its Authority that it was indeed the more firmly Establish'd by being thus delivered to us by the holy Apostles and Evangelists We receive with the same Veneration whatsoever comes from the Apostles whether by Scripture or Tradition provided that we can be assured that it comes from them And if it can be made appear that any Tradition which the Written Word contains not has been received by All Churches and in All Ages we are ready to embrace it as coming from the Apostles Monsieur de Meaux therefore ought not to charge us as Enemies to Tradition or obstinate to receive what is so delivered Our Church rejects not Tradition but only those things which they pretend to have received by it But which we suppose to be so far from being the Doctrine of the Apostles or of All Churches in All Ages that we are perswaded they are many of them directly contrary to the Written Word which is by Themselves confessed to be the Apostles Doctrine and which the best and purest Ages of the Church adhered to ARTICLE XXV Of the Churches Authority THE Church i. e. The Vniversal Church in All Ages having been Establish'd by God the Guardian of the Holy Scriptures and of Tradition we receive from her the Canonical Books of Scripture It is upon this Authority that we receive principally the Song of Solomon as Canonical and reject other Books as Apochryphal which we might perhaps with as much readiness otherwise receive By this Authority we reverence these Books even before by our own reading of them we perceive the Spirit of God in them And when by our reading them we find all things conformable to so Excellent a Spirit we are yet more confirmed in the belief and reverence we before had of them This Authority therefore we freely allow the Church that by her hands in the succession of the several Ages we have received the Holy Scriptures And if as universal and uncontroverted a Tradition had descended for the Interpretation of the Scriptures as for the receiving of them we should have been as ready to accept of that too Such a declaration of the sense of Holy Scripture as had been received by all Churches and in all Ages the Church of England would never refuse But then as we profess not to receive the Scriptures themselves only or perhaps principally upon the Authority of the Roman Church which has in all Ages made up but a part and that not always the greatest neither of this Tradition so neither can we think it reasonable to receive the sense of them only from her though she profess never so much to invent nothing of her self but only to declare the Divine Revelation made to her by the Holy Ghost which she supposes has been given to her for her direction Whilst we are perswaded that neither has any Promise at all been made to any particular Church of such an infallible direction and have such good cause to believe that this particular Church too often instead of the divine Revelations declares only her own Inventions When the dispute arose about the Ceremonies of the Law Acts 15. the Apostles assembled at Jerusalem for the determination of it When any Doubts arise in the Church now we always esteem it the best Method to decide them after the same manner That the Church has Authority not only in matters of Order and Discipline but even of Faith too we never deny'd But that therefore any Church so assembled can with the same Authority say now as the Apostles did then Acts 15.28 It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs This we think not only an unwarrantable presumption for which there is not any sufficient ground in Holy Scripture but evidently in its self untrue seeing that many such Councils are by the Papists themselves confessed to have erred Hence it is that we cannot suppose it reasonable to forbid Men the Examination of the Churches Decisions which may err when the Holy Apostles nay our Saviour Christ himself not only permitted but exhorted their Disciples to search the Truth of their Doctrine which was certainly Infallible Yet if the determination be matter of Order or Government as not to Eat of things offered to Idols c. or of plain and undoubted Precept as to abstain from Fornication and the like Here we fail not after the Example of Paul and Silas to declare to the faithful what her decision has been and instead of permitting them to judg of what has been so resolved teach them throughout all places to keep the Ordinances of the Apostles Acts 16.4 Thus is it that we acquiesce in the judgment of the Church and professing in our Creed a Holy Catholick Church we profess to believe not only that there was a Church planted by our Saviour at the beginning that has hitherto been preserved by him and ever shall be to the end of the World but do by consequence undoubtedly believe too that this Vniversal Church is so secured by the Promises of Christ that there shall always be retain'd so much Truth in it the want of which would argue that there could be no such Church We do not fear that ever the Catholick Church should fall into this entire Infidelity But that any particular Church such as that of Rome may not either by Error lose or by other means prevaricate the Faith even in the necessary Points of it this we suppose not to be at all contrary to the Promise of God Almighty and we wish we had not too great cause to fear that the Church of Rome has in effect done both It is not therefore of the Catholick Church truly such that we either fear this infidelity or complain that she hath endeavoured to render her self Mistress of our Faith But for that particular Communion to which Monsieur de Meaux is pleased to give the Name tho she professes never so much to submit her self to the Holy Scripture and to follow the Tradition of the Fathers in all Ages yet whilst she usurps the absolute Interpretation both of Scripture and Fathers and forbids us to examine whether she does it rightly or no we must needs complain that her Protestations are invalid whilst her Actions speak the contrary For that if this be not to render her self Mistress of our Faith we cannot conceive what is In a word tho we suppose the Scriptures are so clearly written that it can very hardly happen that in the necessary Articles of Faith any one man should be found opposite to the whole Church in his Opinion Yet if such a one were evidently convinced that his Belief was founded upon the undoubted Authority of Gods Holy Word so far would it be from any Horror to support it that it is at this day
the greatest glory of S. Athanasius that he stood up alone against the whole World in defence of Christs Divinity when the Pope the Councils the whole Church fell away Conclude we therefore that God who has made us and knows what is best and most proper for us as he has subjected us to the Government and Direction of his Church for our Peace and Welfare so to secure our Faith he has given us his Holy Word to be the last resort the final infallible Rule by which both we and the Church its self must be directed And from this therefore if any one shall endeavour to turn us aside or preach any other Gospel unto us than what we have therein received Gal. 1.8 9. tho he were an Apostle from the Grave or even an Angel from Heaven let him be Anathema ARTICLE XXVI The Opinion of the Church of England as to the Authority of the Church FOR the two last Articles of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition I might very well have pass'd them by The Church of England whose Doctrine I pretend to explain is but very little concerned in them Therefore only in a word That we allow the Church a just Authority in matters of Faith both the declaration of our xxth Article and the subscription we make to the whole 39 shew Such a deference we allow to her decisions that we make them our directions what Doctrine we may or may not publickly maintain and teach in her Communion In effect we shew whatever Submission we can to her Authority without violating that of God declared to us in his Holy Scriptures Whatsoever deference we allow to a National Church or Council the same we think in a much greater degree due to a General And whensoever such a one which we much desire shall be freely and lawfully assembled to determine the Differences of the Catholick Church none shall be more ready both to assist in it and submit to it ARTICLE XXVII Of the Authority of the Holy See and of Episcopacy FOR the Pope's Authority tho' we suppose no good Consequence can be drawn from that Primacy we are content to allow St. Peter among the Apostles for that exorbitant Power which has of late been pretended to Yet when other Differences shall be agreed and the true Bounds set to his Pretences we shall be content to yield him whatsoever Authority the Ancient Councils of the Primitive Church have acknowledged and the Holy Fathers have always taught the faithful to give him This Monsieur de Meaux ought to be contented with who himself absolves us from yielding to those pretences that have indeed very justly rendred this Authority not only odious but intolerable to the World Let those who are Enemies to Episcopacy and who deny any due respect to the Chair of St. Peter answer for themselves The Church of England has both retain'd the one and will be ready according to what we have before declared when ever it shall be requisite to acknowledge the other THE CLOSE SUCH is the Doctrine of the Church of England in those points which Monsieur de Meaux has thought fit to propose as the principal matters in debate betwixt us May it please the unprejudiced Papist to say what he can find in All these to warrant that bitter and unchristian hatred they have conceived against us To cut us off as much as in them lies from the Communion of Christs Church on Earth and to deny us all part of his promises in Heaven We firmly believe the Holy Scriptures and whatsoever they teach or command we receive and submit to as to the Word of God We embrace all the ancient Creeds and in them all that Faith which the Primitive Christians supposed and which the Religious Emperors by their Advice decreed should be sufficient to intitle us to the common name of Catholicks What new Donatists Gentlemen are you to presume to exclude us from this Character And may we not justly demand of you what S. Augustin once did of them on the same occasion You say that Christ is Heir of no Lands De unitate Eclesia c. 6. but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel out of the Sacred Epistles Read it to us and we will believe We accept the Tradition of Primitive Antiquity truly such with a Veneration we dare confidently say greater than your selves We have shew'd that the very grounds of our difference is that you require us to believe and practise such things as the Holy Scripture forbids us and the Primitive Church never knew You command us to worship Images See Article 4. Is it not evident that both the Law and the Gospel have forbid it and is it not confess'd that both the Apostles and their Successors abhorred the very name You command us to communicate only under one kind That is in our Opinion nay it is in yours too Article 23. to contradict the Institution of our Blessed Saviour and the practice of the very Roman Church for above a Thousand years and of all other Christians to this very day You command us to pray to Saints and Angels Article 3. Col. 2. v. 18. Rev. 19.10 22.9 Does not St. Paul forbid it Did not the holy Angel twice refuse it from St. John And many Centuries pass without One probable Instance of any that did it You command us under pain of your Anathema to believe Transubstantiation Article 19. Do you your selves understand what you mean by it Is it any where written Was it ever mention'd for above a Thousand years You bid us Adore the Holy Sacrament Article 19. Has Christ prescribed it Have his holy Apostles written it Did not here also above a Thousand years pass before any one attempted it You require us to believe the blessed Eucharist to be a true and real Propitiatory Sacrifice for the sins and satisfactions both of the Dead and of the Living Article 20. Have ye any probable proof of it Are ye yet or ever like to be agreed among your selves about it Do not your own principles evidently shew the contrary Men and Brethren Consider we conjure you these things And if you please consider us too what we are and what our Manners and Conversation among you has been Believe us at least that we have no other End but Truth in these Enquiries No other Interest but to save our souls and go the surest and directest way to Heaven The Proofs we offer they are not vain Conjectures they are clear we think convincing Arguments And though the design of this little Treatise has been rather to shew you what our Doctrine is than to give a just account of those Reasons that detain us in it Yet perhaps even in this there may be somewhat to shew that we do not altogether build in the Air but deserve certainly to have our Articles and our Canons both better
acknowledging then this That the Church of Rome do's believe and profess all that is essential to preserve the substance of the Christian Religion so that they cannot reasonably impute to us any Doctrine contrary thereunto they must at the same time acknowledg by their own Principles that the Church of Rome is a true part of the Church of Christ to which every Christian is obliged to unite himself in his Heart and in effect as far as in him lies 1 Ed. Monsieur de Meaux may please to know that we do confess the Church of Rome to be a part of the true Church thô indeed we think one of the worst and that we do with all our Hearts desire a Union with her and in effect do shew it as far as we are able by retaining whatever we can of the same Doctrines and Practices with her And if this were all they desired of us as indeed it is all they ought and all we can do However an absolute Union would not thereby be obtained yet might we live at least like Christians and Brethren in a common Charity with one another and so dispose our Minds as by God's Grace to come in a little time to some better agreement in the rest too than ever we are like to do without it These are some of those Passages that gave occasion to the correction we have spoken of at the Sorbon and to the suppression of the whole first Edition however authorized by the Bishops of France in the same words it now is I might have added many more but instead of it will beg leave to offer the Reader one Correction made very lately by another Faculty that of Louvain if not immediatly of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition yet at least of a Doctrine which they were before-hand given to understand was so explained in it Monsieur de W itte Pastor and Dean of St. Maries in the City of Michlin having in a Discourse with some Persons of that City on the 8th of July last maintain'd the Authority of the Church and Pope according to the manner of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition complaint was made of him first to the Inter-noaen then to his Holiness himself and four Propositions drawn up against him as the Heads of his Heresy Monsieur de Witte maintain'd his Opinion in several Papers printed to that end in the * Intituled Prosecutio probationis locum Mar. 16. non recte resundi in Apostolorum principis successores 4th of which after several other Authorities of Persons of their Church defending the same Doctrine He tells them That the Golden Exposition of Faith of Monsieur the Bishop of Condom Nihil praeterea ad sanam Catholicam Orthodoxam fidem deposcit aurea illa Expositio Catholicae fidei Jacobi Episcopi Condomensis praeter Illustrissima Clarissimonum Virorum Elogia ipsius S. Patris Innocent xi peramantissimis literis comprobata required nothing more to the Sound Catholic and Orthodox Faith in this Matter which Exposition besides the Elogies of many other Eminent Persons was also approved by our Holy Father Innocent the 11th himself in his kind Letter to him But all this could not prevail with them to respect his Doctrine ever the more for Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition or his Holinesses Brief The Faculty of Divinity at the command of the Nonce and with the knowledg no doubt and assent of the Pope to whom the whole Affair had been communicated censured his Propositions Nov. 3. 1685. and especially the second in which Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition of the Catholick Faith was principally concerned as scandalous and pernicious Judicamus eam censurari posse uti scandalosam perniciosam May those who insist so much on the Fidelity and Authority of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition please calmly to consider these things and tell us how we can rely on such an Exposition of their Doctrine as notwithstanding so many formal Approbations first of the Bishops of France was yet corrected in so many places by the Sorbon and secondly of the Pope Cardinals and others in Italy and of the whole Body of the Clergy of France in their Assembly has yet so lately been censured at the command of the Nonce and with the consent of his Holiness by the Faculty of one of their most eminent Universities to be scandalous and pernicious A TABLE OF THE ARTICLES Contained in this TREATISE I. THe Introduction Page 3 II. That Religious Worship is to be paid to God only Page 6 III. Of the Invocation of Saints Page 9 IV. Of Images and Relicks Page 13 V. Of Justification Page 19 VI. Of Merits Page 21 VII Of Satisfactions Purgatory and Indulgences Page 24 PART II. VIII Of the Sacraments in general Page 33 IX Of Baptism Page 35 X. Of Confirmation Page 39 XI Of Penance and Confession Page 40 XII Of Extream Vnction Page 44 XIII Of Marriage Page 45 XIV Of Holy Orders Page 46 XV. Of the Eucharist and first of the Explication of those words This is my Body Page 47 XVI Do this in remembrance of Me. Page 54 XVII The Doctrine of the Church of England concerning this holy Sacrament 55 XVIII Of Transubstantiation and of the Adoration of the Host. 58 XIX Of the Sacrifice of the Mass 62 XX. Of the Epistle to the Hebrews 67 XXI Reflections upon the foregoing Doctrine 69 XXII Of communicating under one kind 72 PART III. XXIII Of the Word written and unwritten 75 XXIV Of the Authority of the Church 76 XXV The Opinion of the Church of England as to the Authority of the Church 80 XXVI The Authority of the holy See and of Episcopacy 81 XXVII The Close 82 ERRATA PReface Page xxix the number of the Sections mistaken to the â—nd P. xxxii l. 15. dele 5 Ed. p. 210. P. xxxiv l. 28. r. Mechlin ib. l. 33. r. Inter-nonce Book P. 13. l. 10. r. Practise P. 20. l. 5. r. works it in us P. 22. in the Margin l. 9. del 16. P. 23. the same P. 24. Marg. del p. 66. P. 34. l. 18. r. Vertue P. 36. l. 13. r. Mr. de Meaux l. 14. Charity P. 40. l. 13. r. Vertue P. 69. Marg. ib. r. ver 24. AN EXPOSITION OF THE Doctrine of the Church of England In the several Articles expounded by Monsieur de MEAUX I. The Introduction IT has always been esteemed more reasonable to doubt of Principles first and then to deny the Conclusions that are drawn from them than having granted the Foundation afterwards to cavil at the clear and necessary Deductions from it To profess that Religious Worship is due to God only and at the same time to say that we ought to adore Men and Women Crosses and Images and all that infinite variety of Follies which these latter Ages have set forth under the pious name of Relicks To declare That we are saved only by Christ's Merits and yet still continue to teach us that we ought to set up our own In a
word to say That the Death of Christ was a perfect Sacrifice and one drop of his Blood more than sufficient for the Redemption of Mankind and nevertheless go on to require our Satisfactions as necessary too and oblige us to believe that other Propitiatory Sacrifices besides that of the Cross ought to be offered up continually to God in his Church for the Sins both of the Dead and the Living This must certainly be the part of a Disputant either too ignorant to understand or too obstinate to submit to any Conviction Monsieur de Meaux the design of whose Exposition seems rather to be an Apology for the Popish Religion than a free Assertion and Vindication of its Errors is above all things sensible of the Justice of this Reflection and therefore endeavours by all means possible in the very entry of his Treatise to prepare his Reader against it By shewing the Injustice of charging Consequences upon Men which they do not allow and that therefore tho their Superstructure should chance to overthrow their Foundation yet since they profess not to know that it does so they ought not to be taxed with what they do not believe It is not deny'd but that Consequences may be sometimes either so obscure or so far distant that a Person prejudicate for the Principle may well be excused the charge of a Collection which his Actions shew he neither believes nor approves But when the Conclusions as well as Principles are plain and confess'd and the Dispute is only about the Name not the Thing we must beg leave to profess that we cannot chuse but say that he believes not as he ought the infinite Merits of Christ's Sacrifice who requires any other Offering for Sin and that no subtilty of Argument will ever perswade us that those destroy not their Principle of worshipping God only whom we see contrary to his express Command prostrate every day before an Image with Prayers and Hymns to Creatures that have been subject to like Infirmities with our selves and that are perhaps at this very time in a worser Estate than the most miserable of those that call upon them for their assistance Be it therefore allow'd to be as great a Calumny as Monsieur de Meaux can suppose it to accuse Men of Consequences obscure and disavow'd the Opinions we charge the Church of Rome with are plain and confess'd the Practice and Prescription of the chiefest Authority in it And to refuse our Charge of them is in good earnest nothing else than to protest against a matter of Fact a Plea which even Justice it self has told us may without Calumny be rejected as invalid However thus much at least we have got by this Reflection that it directs us to the true State of the Controversy between us and shews That we who have been so often charged by the Church of Rome as Innovators in Religion are at last by their own confession allow'd to hold the ancient and undoubted Foundation of the Christian Faith and that the Question between us therefore is not Whether what we hold be true which is on all hands agreed but Whether those things which the Roman Church has added as Superstructures to it and which as such we reject be not so far from being necessary Articles of Religion as they pretend that they indeed overthrow that Truth which is on both sides allow'd to be Divine and upon that account ought to be forsaken by them The Declaration of this not so much by any new proof as by clearing rather the true state of those Points which are the subject of our Difference is the design of the following Articles in which I shall endeavour to give a clear and free account of what we can approve and what it is that we dislike in their Doctrine and as far as the shortness of this Discourse will allow touch also upon some of those Reasons that are the most usually given by us for both ARTICLE II. That Religious Worship is to be paid to God only THat Religious Worship is due to God only how necessary soever those Practices of the Roman Church which we are hereafter to consider may have rendred it to Monsieur de Meaux to declare yet is it we suppose but little necessary for us to say We firmly believe that the inward acknowledgment of his Divine Excellencies as the Creator and Lord of all things is a part of the supream Worship that is due to him We believe that all the Powers of our Soul ought to be tied to him by Faith Hope and Charity as to that God who alone can establish and make us happy And tho we do not think that there is now any sensible or material Sacrifice to be offered to Him under the Gospel as there was heretofore under the Law yet do we with all Antiquity suppose the Sacrifice of Prayer and Thanksgiving to be so peculiarly his due that it cannot without derogation to his Honour be applied to any other What our Opinion is of that Worship which the Roman Church pays to the Blessed Virgin and Saints departed we shall hereafter fully shew But certainly great was the difference of those Holy Men whom Monsieur de Meaux mentions as their fore-runners in this practice from the present manner of the Popish Invocation Gregory Nazianzen in a Rhetorical Apostrophe called to Constantius in one to his Sister Gorgonia in another Oration but he prayed to neither St. Basil St. Ambrose St. J. Chrysostom St. Hierom St. Augustin they desired sometimes that the Martyr or Saint would joyn with them in their requests but they were rather Raptures and Wishes than direct Prayers and their formal Petitions but especially those of the Church were only to God Almighty They doubted whether the Saints could hear them or no and were rather inclined to believe that they could not The Addresses of the Mind which the Church of Rome allows no less than the others to them they look'd upon to be so peculiarly God's due that they supposed he did not communicate them to the very Angels that are in Heaven They declared against all thoughts of being assisted by the Merits of their Saints or that God would ever the more readily or indeed so soon accept their Prayers coming by the Intercession of another as if they had gone themselves directly to the Throne of Grace In a word they never imagined that this was an Honour due to them but on the contrary constantly taught that it was a Service belonging only to God Almighty Well therefore might * And that it is the most he does Se de Cult Lat. l. 3. c. 18. Monsieur Daillé refer the beginnings of this Invocation to these Men whose innocent Wishes and Rhetorical Flights being still increased by the Superstition of after-Ages first gave birth to this Worship But certainly the Romanists cannot with any reason alledge them in favour of their Error till it be shewn either that we are mistaken in those
day scandalizes not only so great a number of Christians but even our common Enemy the Jew Turk In a word which is so far from being commanded by God that it needs many nice Distinctions to render it not directly opposite to an express Prohibition and is therefore if not down-right Idolatry to those who know how to direct their Intention aright yet to the Simple and Ignorant that is to the much greater number and the most zealous practioners of this Service so very near it that the Generality of the wisest Papists no less than We complain of it For the honour that is due to Reliques no Protestant will ever refuse whatever the Primitive Church paid them or may be fit to express the Honour we ought to retain for those Bodies that by Martyrdom have been made Sacrifices to God Almighty If this be all Mr. de Meaux desires of us we are ready to profess our Opinion that we judg it to be neither offensive to God nor fit to be scrupled by any good Man We believe that according to the Circumstances of the Times the Church may testify this Honour by more or less outward Signs and Marks of Respect And we do with satisfaction read that Declaration of Mr. de Meaux That we ought not to be servilely subjected to these outward Ceremonies but to be invited by them to offer up to God that reasonable service in Spirit and in Truth which he requires of us And if this be the State of the Question we confess the Explication of it has taken away a great part of the difficulty But what then means the Council of Trent to tell us That we are not only to honour them but to worship them too That by doing so we shall obtain many Benefits and Graces of God That these sacred Monuments are not unprofitably revered but are to be sought unto for the obtaining their help and assistance to cure the Sick to give Eyes to the Blind Feet to the Lame and even Life to the Dead How comes it to pass that their Church not only honours them which we could allow but carries them in Processions makes Offerings to them gives Indulgences to such as shall go to visit them prescribes Pilgrimages to them swears by them touches their Beads or Hankerchiefs with them to sanctify them thinks to obtain one Blessing by virtue of this Relick another from that and the like superstitious usages which we suppose we have good reason with our Chnrch to conclude to be fond things vainly invented Art xxii and grounded upon no Authority of Holy Scripture but indeed repugnant thereunto When therefore all these Abuses which we have named and which Monsieur de Meaux seems content to allow with us to be such shall be corrected When in the matter of Images 1. The Hymns and Addresses that teach us so contrary to the Spirit of Christianity to demand Graces of them and to put our Trust in them shall be reformed St. Thomas and his Abettors censured and all other Marks of an unwarrantable Worship be forbidden 2. When the Pictures of God the Father and of the holy Trinity so directly contrary both to the second Commandment and to St. Paul's Doctrine shall be taken away and those of our Saviour and the blessed Saints be by all necessary Cautions rendred truly the Books not Snares of the Ignorant When in points of Relicks 3. they shall be declared to have no sanctifying Virtue in them 4. Nor that they ought to be sought to for any Assistance Spiritual or Temporal to be expected from them 5. When it shall be resolved to be no matter of Merit to go to visit them 6. Nor any more extravagant Indulgences be set forth for Pilgrimages unto them When all these things which Monsieur de Meaux passes over and which yet are undeniably their Practice and our Scandal shall be corrected Then will we both believe and submit to the rest which he desires of us We will honour the Relicks of the Saints as the Primitive Church did we will respect the Images of our Saviour and the Blessed Virgin And as some of us now bow towards the Altar and all of us are enjoyned to do so at the Name of the Lord Jesus so will we not fail to testify all due Respect to his Representation In the mean time if the Outcries of their own Church at these Abuses cannot prevail with them to redress them yet at least they will confirm us in the Reformation we have made of them and whilst we find Hezekiah commended in the holy Scripture for destroying the Brazen Serpent thô made by God's express Command and in some sort deservedly honourable for that great Deliverance it brought to the Jews 2 King 18. Because the Children of Israel offered Incense unto it We shall conclude our selves to be by so much the more justifiable in that the Images we have removed were due only to the Folly and Superstition of Men and have been more scandalously abused to a worser and greater dishonour of God ARTIC V. Of Justification THE Doctrine of Justification is one of those Points that deserves our careful Consideration as being not only one of the chiefest of those Points wherein we suppose the Church of Rome to have prevaricated the Faith but as Monsieur de Meaux remarks one of the first that gave occasion to that Reformation that was made from it It is not necessary to say to what an Extravagance the business of Pardons Indulgences and other means of satisfying the Divine Justice was arrived and how much more confidence the People generally put in the Inventions of Men than in the Merits and Satisfaction of Christ If they have been somewhat better instructed since they may thank the Reformation for it tho we fear all the difference is that they are somewhat more reserved in exposing these Follies now but yet still retain the Foundation of that Doctrine upon which they are built We willingly allow Monsieur de Meaux this honour that he has reduced the long Decrees of the Council of Trent to a short and easie Debate and proposed the things which contain our Difference with such tenderness as might invite us to close with a great part of it did not the Decrees of the Council seem too plainly to refuse Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition of them We believe with him That our Sins are freely forgiven by God's Mercy through Christ and that none of those things which precede our Justification whether our Faith or our good Works could merit this Grace We are perswaded that our Sins are not only covered but are entirely done away by the Blood of Jesus Christ We confess that the Righteousness of Jesus Christ is not only imputed but actually communicated to the Faithful through the operation of the holy Spirit in so much that they are not only reputed but made just by his Grace We deny not that this Righteousness is a true Righteousness even in
are the Principles which we suppose to have been an unwarrantable derogation to the Grace of God and directly opposite to the nature of Justification by Faith in Christ before established And tho this point was far from being the only cause of our Separation from their Communion yet let Mr. de Meaux himself please to say whether such a Doctrine of Merits as this were not sufficient if not to engage us wholly to leave a Church that taught such things yet at least to dissent from her in these Particulars ARTIC VII c. Of Satisfactions Purgatory and Indulgences THE whole of this Point we think to be the advancement of a Doctrine grounded upon no Authority of Holy Scripture but on the contrary derogatory to God's Mercy in Jesus Christ and as the Doctrine of Merits before considered inconsistent with the nature of that Justification we before establish'd Monsieur de Meaux was pleased there to tell us of God's justifying us freely for Christ's Merits That our Sins are not only covered but entirely done away by his Mercy and the Sinner not only reputed but made just by his Grace We cannot but be troubled to see our selves so soon deprived of this excellent Hope and required our selves to satisfy God's Justice here which he assured us was entirely done for us by Christ before When Christ says Monsieur de Meaux who alone was able to make a sufficient Satisfaction for our Sins See above p. 66. died for us having by his Death abundantly satisfied for them he became capable of applying that Satisfaction to us after two very different manners Either by giving us an entire Forgiveness of our Sins without reserving any Pains for us to undergo for them or in changing only a greater Pain into a lesser the Eternal Torments of Hell into a Temporal Punishment The former of these being the more entire and the more agreeable to the Divine Goodness he accordingly makes use of it at our Baptism But we suppose he gives the second only to them who after Baptism fall again into sin being in a manner forced to it through the Ingratitude whereby they have abused his former Gifts so that they are to suffer some Temporal pain tho the eternal be remitted to them This is a very great Doctrine and ought certainly to have some better Proof of it than barely We suppose However it be our Church has declared its self of an opinion directly contrary That since the absolute forgiving of sin is Confessed to be the more perfect way and more becoming the Divine Goodness and that God has never that we know of revealed any other but rather has constantly encouraged us to expect his Pardon after the largest and most ample manner that it is possible for words to set forth We are persuaded that accordingly whenever God do's pardon it is in that way which is the most suitable to his Divine goodness and which alone he hath declared to us that he do's it intirely for Christs merits not for any Works or Sufferings of our own In vain therefore does Monsieur de Meaux labour to reconcile this Doctrine with Christ's absolute Satisfaction We confess that we ought not to dispute with God the manner of his Dispensations Nor think it at all strange if he who shews himself so easie at our Baptism is afterwards more difficult for those sins which we commit being Baptized There is nothing in all this but what we could most readily allow of were there but any tollerable Arguments to establish the Doctrine that requires it But whilst this is so destitute of all Proof that it is acknowledged to introduce a manner of forgiveness neither so intire nor so befitting Gods mercy as a total remission of the Punishment together with the Guilt whilst we have the Sufferings of Christ to rely upon which are so far from needing any addition of our own that they are Confessed to have been Super-abundant to whatever the divine Justice could require of us Tho we can and do practice the same Discipline for the other benefits of it viz. To shew our Indignation against our selves that we have offended and to keep us from sinning for the future yet we cannot be so forgetful of our dear Master as to pretend to any part in that Redemption but only to enjoy the benefits of that forgiveness which by his alone Merits he has intirely purchased for us nor do we see any reason to believe that Gods Justice will require any more than what has been Super-abundantly paid upon the Cross for the Iniquities of mankind 'T is true Monsieur de Meaux tells us That the necessity of this Payment does not arise from any defect in Christ's Satisfaction but from a certain Order which God has establish'd for a salutary Discipline and to keep us from offending This indeed were something would either Monsieur de Meaux have been pleased to shew us this Establistment or had not the Council of Trent declared more Concil Trid. Sess 14. c. 8. viz. That the Justice of God requires it and that therefore the Confessors should be charged to Proportion the Satisfaction to the Crime From whence Cardinal Bellarmine concludes L. 1. de purg c. 14. That it is We who properly satisfie for our own sins and that Christs Satisfaction serves only to make ours Valid This is an Exposition somewhat different from Monsieur de Meaux's who will have the Church of Rome believe That we do not our selves satisfie in the least for our sins but only apply the infinite Satisfaction of Christ to them Upon the whole it appears 1. That these Penances are not only a Salutary discipline but a Satisfaction too 2. They change the Mercy of God into a forgiveness that is confessed neither to be in its self Perfect nor so becoming the Divine goodness as an intire remission of sin the Punishment as well as Guilt would be 3. Their Establishment depends only upon a humane Supposition of its fitness and derogates from the very Foundation of that Covenant God has entred into with us by Christ Hebr. c. 8. v. 12. That he will be merciful to our unrighteousness and our Sins and our Iniquites he will remember no more Upon all which accounts tho we Practise this Discipline for many other benefits of it and wish it were universally Established not only in a more perfect manner than either in Ours or Their Church it is Catech conc Trid. but even in a strictness equal to what they tell us it is fallen from yet we cannot believe that by any of these things we are able to make a true and proper Satisfaction to God for sin which he only could do who Himself bore our sins in his own Body upon the Cross and by that one suffering Hebr. 10.14 for ever perfected them that are Sanctified ARTICLE VII Of INDVLGENCES THE Doctrine of Indulgences the Council of Trent has asserted only not explained Monsieur