bound to unite and assist each other in such works What is to be accounted Heresie the Law of God sufficiently determineth And what particular persons are to be Judged hereticks and excommunicated according to that Law the particular Pastors that are on the place can better decide then a Pope that is a thousand or five thousand miles off and cannot hear the witnesses And do you not your selves decide almost all such cases through the world that is of your subjection by the present Pastors or Bishops and not by the Pope And why may not we do so then as well as you 9. But if you lay all upon your Popes or Councils Infallibility I desire you but to read my third Disputation in a Book against Popery called the Safe Religion and then believe that Infallibility if you can I should think my self a miserable man if I were not my self more Infallible then many of your Popes have been Every Christian while such is infallible in his belief of the Christian faith And the Scripture is an infallible ground of our belief 10. Is it not a plain Judgement of God upon you that while you make the Scripture so dark and not intelligible and cry up the Necessity of a living Judge you should not only swarm with differences among your selves but should be utterly disagreed and at a loss to know who is this Judge of Controversies one saying it is the Pope and another that its the Council and what the better are you for saying There must be a Judge as long as you cannot tell Who it must be It s not only uncertain among you Whether Pope or Councill be the Infallible Judge but also which is a true Pope and which is a lawfull General Council For fourty years at least together the Church could not know the true Pope but the more learned and conscionable men were divided Nor is it known to this day Frequently the strongest hath carried it and success been his best title Nay General Councils themselves knew not the right Pope The Council at Constance and Basil knew not the right Pope They of Basil thought Felix the fifth the true Pope and Eugenius no Pope But friends and strength confuted a General Council and proved deposed Eugenius the Pope And for Councils themselves who knows which to take for currant and of Authority What Catalogues have you of reprobated Councils and of doubtfull Councils and partly approved partly reprobate and who knows which and how far but only that is approved that pleaseth the Pope and that reprobate that displeased him and yet perhaps approved by a former Pope So that you are all in a confusion and uncertain about your true Popes and General Councils And if you knew them yet what a loss are you at to know their Decrees and Canons What a Fardel of false Decretall Epistles have you thrust upon the world as Blondell Dalleus Reignolds and others have fully proved Forsooth decretals that use a translation of the Scripture that was formed a long time after the death of the supposed Authors of those Epistles And Decretals which make mention of persons and things that were many score or hundred years after the death of the said Authors These are your new Scriptures and by these our faith must be regulated and our controversies decided And your Canons are abundance of them as uncertain some of your own will have but twenty Canons of the first General Council at Nice some will have the new found rabble of additions Much more uncertainty or certain forgery there is in the Canons called the Apostles and the like we may say of abundance more And now I appeal to all the impartial Reason in the world whether your voluminous apocriphal uncertain faith that needs a living Judge and cannot find one or agree upon him and that leaves your controversies still undecided be a liker way to peace and unity then our short and plain Articles and infallible Scripture faith that hath less matter of contention and better means to prevent it even faithful Teachers and Judges in every Church and Commonwealth which shall so far determine as may preserve the peace of those societies levaing the final full Decision of all to the Eternal Judge that is even at the door 11. Yea and is not Gods hand of Judgement yet more observable against you that when your Popes and Councils have past their judgement the several Sects are unable to understand them witness the late sentence against the Jansenists of which the persons that seem to be condemned say that there is no such thing or words in all Jansenius writings as the Pope saith are in him and condemneth as his and the Controversie is as far from a decision as if the Pope had held his peace Yea your great Disputer here in England Thomas White the Novelist is the same for all the Popes determination Take another instance in the forementioned Case Whether the Pope or Council be supream The Councils of Constance and Basil determined it one way as de fide and yet that made no end of the Controversie The Council of Lateran and Pope Leo determined it the other way and yet it is a Controversie after two contrary decisions and some say one way and some the othe and some say It is yet undecided for fear of angring the French by casting them off as Hereticks Another instance The Council at Basil Sess 36. pag. 80. in Binnius hath fully determined the Controversie between the Franciscans and Dominicans about the Virgin Maries immaculate conception and yet it is undetermined still and Thomas White presumes to affirm that Certainly there is no Tradition for it nor any probability that ever the Negative will be defined Apolog. for Tradit pag. 64 65 66. yea he carryeth it as boldly out as if never Council had made or medled with it I will therefore recite the words of the Council which are these A hard question hath been in divers parts and before this holy Synod about the Conception of the glorious Virgin Mary and the beginning of her Sanctification some saying that the Virgin and her soul was for some time or instant of time actually under Original sin others on the contrary saying that from the beginning of her Creation God loving her gave her grace by which preserving and freeing that blessed person from the Original spot we having diligently looke into the authorities and reasons which for many years past have in publike relation on both sides been alledged before this holy Synod and having seen many other things about it and weighed them by mature consideration do Define and Declare that the doctrine affirming that the glorious Virgin Mary the Mother of God by the singular preventing and operating grace of God was never actually under Original sin but was ever free from all Original and actual sin and was holy and immaculate is to be approved held and embraced of all Catholikes as godly and Consonant
would have the causes taken away What! When I recite his very words Or was I deeply silent of the particular causes Do you mean Here or Throughout If Here so I was deeply silent of ten thousand things more which either it concerned me not to speak or I had not the faculty of expressing in one sentence If you mean Throughout you read without your eyes or wrote either with a defective Memory or Honesty Read again and you shall find that I recite the causes 3. But did I not all that my task required by reciting the Negation of the causes It was not saith Grotius the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome according to the Canons And I shewed you partly and the Canons shew you fully that that Primacy is the Universall Headship which Protestants I mean not Roman Grotian Protestants have ever used to call Popery But saith Mr. P. Grotius chargeth the Papists with it Answ 1. True but the Protestants much more as making many more faults by their withdrawing from Rome then they mended 2. And he chargeth not that which we have called Popery with it though he charge the Papists with it That some sins of the Papists did occasion it he confesseth and all the Papists that ever I spoke with of it do confess But I am referred for these causes charged on the Papists to Grot. Votum pag. 7 8. and thither I 'le follow Mr. P. that I may know how much he chargeth on the Papists himself And there I find that the things that Grotius found faulty in the Papists were but these two 1. That to the true and ancient doctrine many quirks of the Schoolmen that were better skli'd in Aristotle then the Scriptures were introduced out of a liberty of disputing not out of the Authority of Universal Councils And the Opinions stablisht in the Church were less fitly explicated 2. That Pride and Covetousness and manners of ill example prevailed among the Prelates c. And really did you think that he is no Papist that is but against the Schoolmens Opinions and the Prelates Pride Covetousness and Idleness and holdeth all that they call the Decrees of General Councils Hath not the Council at Lateran and Florence decreed that the Pope is above a General Council and the Council at Lateran decreed that Princes are to be deposed and their Subjects absolved from their fidelity if they exterminate not Hereticks such as Protestants out of their Dominions Is he no Papist that holds all that is in the Council of Trent if he be against some School-points not determined and against the Prelates Pride Well Sir I understand you better then I did And though you thought meet that your words might be conform to one another and not to truth to say that I called you Arminian and Pelagian I purpose if I had done so to call you an Arminian no more But I beseech you cry not out of persecution till the men of your mind will give us leave to be Rectors of Churches in their Dominions as you and others of your mind are allowed to be in these And demand not of Mr. Hickman the bread he eats nor the money he receives as if it were yours till we can have license to be maintained Rectors or at least to escape the Strappado in your Church But I promised you some more of Grotius in English to stop your mouth or open it whether you see cause and you shall have it Discus pag. 14. Grotius distinguisheth between the Opinions of Schoolmen which oblige no man for saith Melchior Canus our School alloweth us great liberty and therefore could give no just cause of departing as the Protestants did and between those things that are defined by Councils even by that of Trent The Acts of which if any man read with a mind propense to peace he will find that they may be explained fitly and agreeably to the places of the holy Scriptures and of the ancient Doctors that are put in the Margin And if besides this by the care of Bishops and Kings those things be taken away which contradict that holy doctrine and were brought in by evil manners and not by authority of Councils or Old Tradition then Grotius and many more with him will have that with which they may be content This is Grotius in English Reader is it not plain English Durst thou or I have been so uncharitable as to have said without his own consent that Mr. Pierce would have defended this Religion and that we have Rectors in England of this Religion and that those that call themselves Episcopal Divines and seduce unstudied partial Gentlement are crept into this garb and in this do act their parts so happily If words do signifie any thing it here appears that Grotius his Religion is that which is contained in the Council of Trent with all the rest and the reformation which will content him is only against undetermined School-Opinions and ill manners that Cross the doctrines of the Councils I 'le do the Papists so much right as to say I never met with a man of them that would not say as much Especially taking in all Old Tradition with all the Councils how much together by the ears now matters not as Grotius doth Yet more Discus p. 185. He professeth that he will so interpret Scripture God favouring him and pious men being consulted that he cross not the Rule delivered both by himself and by the Council of Trent c. Pag. 239. The Augustine Consession commodiously explained leath scarce any thing which may not be reconciled with those Opinions which are received with the Catholicks by Authority of Antiquity and of Synods as may be known out of Cassander and Hoffmeister And there are among the Jesuites also that think not otherwise Pag. 71. He tels us that the Churches that join with Rome have not only the Scriptures but the Opinions explained in the Councils and the Popes Decrees against Pelagius c. They have also received the Egregious Constitutions of Councils and Fathers in which there is abundantly enough for the correction of vices but all use them not as they ought They lye for the most part hid in Papers as a Sword in the Scabbard And this is it that all the lovers of piety and peace would have corrected And gives us Borromaeus for a president Pag. 48. These are the things which thanks be to God the Catholicks do not thus believe though many that call themselves Catholicks so live as if they did believe them but Protestants so live by force of their Opinions and Catholicks by the decay of Discipline Pag. 95. What was long ago the judgement of the Church of Rome the Mistris of others we may best know by the Epistles of the Roman Bishops to the Africans and French to which Grotius will subscribe with a most willing mind Rome you see is the Mistris of other Churches Pag 7. They accuse the Bull of Pius Quintus that it
Scriptures 3. To let Pastors and other Subjects know what sence of Scripture the Magistrate will own within his Dominions 4. And to let the Pastors and the world know what sence in the principal Points we are agreed in But still we take not our Confessions for our Divine Rule and therefore if there be any errour in a Confession there is none in the Rule of our Religion and consequently none in the Religion which we all agree in but only in such a persons or Churches exposition of the Rule which yet among Christians is not in any essential Point 3. Understand well what is the Catholick Church that when the Papists ask you what Church you are of or call to you to prove its antiquity or truth you may give them a sound and Catholick answer The Catholick Church is the whole number of true Christians upon earth for we meddle not now with that part which is in Heaven It is not tyed to Protestants only nor to the Greeks only much less to the Romanists only or to any other party whatsoever but it comprehendeth all the members of Christ and as visible it containeth all that profess the Christian Religion by a credible profession If the Christian Religion may be known then a man may know that he is a Christian and consequently a member of the Catholick Church But if the Christian Religion cannot be known then no man can know which is the Church or which is a Christian All Christians united to Christ the Head are this Catholick Church If you tye the Church to your own party and make a wrong description of it you will ensnare your selves and spoil your belief and your defence of it 4. Run not into extreams mix not any unsound principles with your Religion For if you do the Papists will cull out those and by disgracing them will seem to disgrace your Religion 5. Use not any unsound Arguments to defend the Truth For if you do the truth will suffer and seem to be overthrown by the weakness of your Arguments 6. Joyn not with those men that cast out any Ordinance of God because the Papists have abused it Reformation of corrupted Institutions is not by the Abolition of them but by the Restauration of them There are few things in use among the Papists themselves as parts of worship but may lead us up to a good original or tell us of some other real Duty which did degenerate into these 7. Joyn not with those ignorant unpeaceable self-conceited womanish rabious Divines or private men that pour out unworthy reproaches at godly men among our selves as if they were Hereticks or such as the Churches should dis-own For these are they that please the Papists and harden them in their Error and offend the weak They think they may call us Hereticks or Blasphemers by authority when we call one another so Such Railers teach them what to say and play their game more effectually then they could do their own When they are alluring the simple people how soon will they prevail if they can but prove their charge against us from the pens of Protestants themselves Having told you on what grounds you must make good your cause against them I shall next give you three or four easie Arguments some of them formerly given you by which even the weakest may prove that Popery is but deceit CHAP. III. Argum. 1. IF there be any godly honest men on earth besides Papists then Popery is false and not of God But there be godly honest men on earth besides Papists therefore Popery is false and not of God The Major is proved thus It is an Article of the Popish faith that there are no godly honest men on earth besides Papists therefore if there be any such Popery is false By godly honest men I mean such as have true love to God and so are in a state of salvation The Antecedent I prove thus 1. Their very definition of the Church doth make the Pope the Head and confine the membership only to his subjects making the Roman Catholick Church as they call it the whole 2. But yet lest any ignorant Papists say I may be a Roman Catholick without believing that all others are ungodly and shall be damned I will give it you in the Determination of a Pope and general Councll Leo the tenth Abrog Pragm sanct Bull. in the 17 th General Council at the Laterane saith And seeing it is of necessity to salvation that all the faithful of Christ be subject to the Pope of Rome as we are taught by the testimony of divine Scripture and of the holy Fathers and it is declared in the Constitution of Pope Boniface 7. c. And Pope Pius the second was converted from being Aenaeas Sylvius by this Doctrine of a Cardinal approved by him at large Bull. Retract in the Vol. 4. of Binnius p. 514. I came to the Fountain of Truth which the holy Doctors both Greek and Latine shew who with one voyce say that he cannot be saved that holdeth not the unity of the holy Church of Rome and that all those vertues are maimed to him that refuseth to obey the Pope of Rome though he lye in sack cloth and ashes and fast and pray both day and night and seem in the other things to fulfill the Law of God So that if a Pope and General Council be false then Popery is false For their infallibility is the ground of their faith and they take it on their unerring authority But if the Pope and a General Council be to be believed then no man but a subject of the Pope can be saved no though he fast and pray in sack-cloth and ashes day and night and seem to fulfill the rest of the Law of God It s certain therefore that if any one of you that call your selves Romane Catholicks do not believe that all the world shall be damned save your selves you are indeed no Romance Catholicks but are Hereticks your selves in their account for you deny a principal Article of their faith and deny the Infallibility of the Pope with a General Council which is your very Foundation And therefore we find that even in the great charitable work of reducing the Abassines the Jesuite Gonzalus Rodericus in his speech to the Emperours mother laid so great a stress on this point that when she professed her subjection to Christ he told her that None are subject to Christ that are not subject to his Vicar Negavi Christo subjici qui ejus vicario non subjicitur Godignus de reb Abassin Lib. 2. c. 18. in Roderic liter p. 323. And Bellarmine saith de Eccl. l. 3. c. 5. that no man though he would can be subject to Christ that is not subject to the Pope that is he cannot be a Christian And therefore Card. Richlieu then Bishop of Lusson tels the Protestants that they were not to be called Christians And Knot against Chillingworth with abundance more of them
tongue 2. And their Publick Praying in an unknown language 3. And their administring the Lords Supper to the People by the halves denying them the Wine and giving them the bread only 4 And their affirming men to be perfect without sin in this life 5. And their calling some sins venial which deserve a pardon and yet are truly no sins 6. And their absolute forbidding their Priests to marry 7. And saying that there is no Bread and Wine left after the Consecration with abundance the like the very reading of the texts may satisfie you As for the first see Deut. 6. 7 8 9. Deut. 11. 18 19 20. Isa 34. 16. Psal 1. 2. Neh. 8. Jos 8. 34 35. Mat. 12. 3 5. 19. 4. 21. 16. 22. 31. Mark 12. 10 26. Acts 8. 28. 13. 27. 15. 21. 1 Thes 5. 27. Col. 4. 16. Deut 31. 11. Eph. 3. 4. Mat. 24. 15. Rev. 1. 3. 2 Tim. 3. 16. John 5 39. Act. 17. 2 11. 18 28. Rom. 15. 4. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Isa 8. 16 20. 42. 4. Rom. 7. 1. James 1. 25. Hos 8. 12. For the second read 1 Cor. 14. For the third see Mat. 26 27 28. 1 Cor. 11. 25 26 27 28. 1 Cor. 10. 16. For the fourth see Eccles 7. 20. James 3. 2. 1 John 1. 8. Phil. 3. 12. Luke 11. 4. For the fifth see Deut. 12 32. Gal. 3. 10. 1 John 3. 4. For the sixth see 1 Tim. 3. 2 4 5 11 12. Tit. 1. 6. 1 Tim. 43. 1 Cor. 9. 5. For the seventh see 1 Cor. 10. 16. 1 Cor. 11. 23 26 27 28. Act. 2. 42. Act. 20. 7. 11. 2. And that they are contrary to themselves appeareth 1. In that as I said before not only several persons but several Countries go several wayes the French are of one way and the Italians of another even in the Fundamentals of their Faith which all the rest is resolved into 2. Their Popes have ordinarily been contrary to one another in their Decrees which made Platina say Following Popes do still either infringe or wholly abrogate the Decrees of the former Popes And Erasmns saith that Pope John 22. and Pope Nicolas are contrary one to another in their whole Decrees and that in things that seem to belong to matter of faith Had we no instances but of Sergius and Formosus and their following partakers it were enough And Celestines case puts Bellarmine to silly shifts 3. That their Councils contradict each other I have formerly manifested They confess that the Arrians have had many Councils as General as most ever the Orthodox had and if it be only the want of the Popes approbation that nullifieth their authority then let them tell us no more of Councils and of all the Church but say plainly that is but one man that they mean But even their approved Councils have been contrary As the sixth Council at Constantinople approved by Pope Adrian is now confessed to have many errors The Council of Neocasarea confirmed by Pope Leo 4. and by the Nicen Council as saith the Council of Florence Ses 7. condemned second marriages contrary to Scripture and the present Church The Council at the Laterane under Leo the tenth determines that the Pope is above a General Council and the Councils of Constance and Basil determine that the General Council is above the Pope and that this is de fide and its heresie to deny it CHAP. XII Detect 3. IF you enter into Dispute with any Papist enquire first what he will take for sufficient Proof and what common Principles you are agreed on by which the rest must be decided For men that agree in nothing at all are not capable of a dispute For the Principles in which they are agreed are those that the rest must be reduced to And when you have made this enquiry you shall find that the Popish way of Disputing is to forbid you to Dispute unless you will first yield the cause to them as beyond dispute and that they are not agreed with the rest of the world in any common principles to which the differences may be reduced for tryal and so that there is no sort of Proof that they will admit of as sufficient For if there be any ground of Proof at all it must be 1. From the senses 2. Or from Reason 3. Or from Scripture 4. Or from the Church but they will stand to none of all these 1. Begin at the bottom of all and know of them whether they will take that for a Valid Proof which is fetcht from sense even from the soundest senses of all men in the world supposing a convenient object and Medium If they will not take this for Proof how can you dispute with them Or what Proof can be admitted if this be not admitted We have this advantage in dealing even with those Heathen that have blotted out much of the Law of nature it self that yet they will yield to an Argument from sense But if they would yield to the Validity of this proof then they give away their cause seeing sense telleth us that it is bread which we see and feel and eat after the Consecration They know this and therefore they must disown and deny this sort of proof 2. But will they then admit of Proofs from Reason No that cannot be if proof from sense be not admitted For Reason receiveth its object by means or occasion of the senses and must needs be deceived if it be deceived And Reason hath not a principle that it holds faster then that sense is to be credited that this is white or black which my own eyes and the eyes of all other men do see to be so and so that this is bread which we all see and feel and taste to be so And therefore the Papists tell us that Reason must stoop to faith that is they will not stand to Reason when it contradicteth the doctrine of their sect It seems they are in some parts of their Religion unreasonable But I would know whether they have any Reason to be unreasonable If they have then why might not our Reason be valid as well as their Reason which they bring against Reason by which they contradict themselves For if Reason be vain why Reason they to prove its Vanity or invalidity But if they have no Reason against Reason let them confess it and offer us none and then their disputes will do no harm We easily yield that we have Reason to believe Gods Revelations about those things which we had no Reason to believe if they were not Revealed And that many of those Revelations are above Reason so far as that Reason cannot discern the truth of the thing without them yea it would rather judge the things improbable But yet Revelations are received by Reason and inform Reason and not destroy it nor do they so contradict Sense or Reason as to make that credible which Sense and Reason have sufficient ground to judge
the second and third Age produced no Councils the greater deceivers then are the Papists that have found us Councils then and so you have no Catholick succession proved Yea but he saith they have successions of Popes Martyrs and Confessors which is sufficient for their purposes See the strength of Popery Any thing is sufficient for your purposes it seems Rome had Bishops therefore they were the Universal Rulers of the Church A strong consequence Rome had Martyrs and Confessors therefore it was the Mistris of all Churches Who can resist these arguments But why did you not prove that your Confessors and Martyrs suffered for attesting the Popes Soveraignty If they suffered but for Christianity that will prove them but Christians and not Papists Thus you see to the confusion of the Papists that they have nothing to shew for the succession or antiquity of Popery for the three first Ages Yea worse then nothing For here he comes in with some of the Decretals forsooth of some of their Bishops Decretals unknown till a while ago in the world brought out by Isidore Mercator but with so little cunning as left them naked to the shame of the world the falshood of them being out of themselves fully proved by Blondell Reignolds and many more and confessed by some of themselves Here you see the first foundation of Papal succession even a bundle of fictions lately fetcht from whence they please to cheat the ignorant part of the world But in the fourth and fifth ages H. T. doth make us amends for his want of proof from the three first But suppose he do what 's that to a succession while the three first ages are strangers to Popery Well! but lets hear what he hath at last His first proof after a few silent names is from the Council of Nice And what saith that why 1. It defined that the Son of God is consubstantiall to his Father and true God And what 's that to Popery 2 But it defined the Popes Soveraignty But how prove you that Why it is in the thirty ninth Arab. Canon O what Consciences have those men that dare thus abuse and cheat the ignorant As if the Canons of the first General Council had never been known to the world till the other day that Alphonsus Pisanus a Jesuite publisheth them out of Pope Julius and I know not what Arabick book These men that can make both Councils and Canons at their pleasure above a thousand years after the supposed time of their existence do never need to want authority And indeed this is a cheaper way of Canon-making in a corner then to trouble all the Bishops in the world with a great deal of cost and travail to make them But if this be the foundation the building is answerable Their Bishop Zosimus had not been acquainted with these new Articles of an old Council when he put his trick upon the sixth Council of Carthage where for the advancement of his power though not to an universall Monarchy yet to a preparative degree he layeth his claim from the Council of Nice as saying Placuit ut si Episcopus accusatus fuerit c. which was that If an ejected Bishop appeal to Rome the Bishop of Rome appoint some of the next province to judge or if yet he destre his cause to be heard the Bishop of Rome shall appoint a Presbyter his Legate c. In this Council were 217. Bishops Aurelius being president and Augustine being one They told the Pope that they would yield to him till the true copies of the Council of Nice were searched for those that they had seen had none of them those words in that Zosimus alledged Hereupon they send abroad to the Churches of the East to Constantinople Alexandria Antioch c. for the ancient Canons From hence they received several copies which all agreed but none of them had either Zosimus forgery in nor the forged clause which Bellarmine must have in much less the eighty Canons of Pisanus the Jesuite or this one which H. T. doth found his succession on but only the twenty Canons there mentioned which have not a word for the Popes Soveraignty And here note 1. That Zosimus knew not then of Pisanus Canons or else he would have alledged them nor yet of Bellarmines new part of a Canon for the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome 2. That Zosimus himself had not the faith the wit or the memory to plead either Scripture Apostolical Institution or Tradition for his priviledge but only a false Canon of the Council of Nice as looking no higher it seems for his authority 3. How early the Roman Bishops begun both to aspire and make use of forgeries to accomplish it 4. That there was no such Apostolick or Church Tradition for this Roman power as our Masters of Tradition now plead for which all the Catholick Church must know For the whole Council with all the Churches of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch c. that is in a manner all save Rome were ignorant of that which Zosimus would have had them believe and Bellarmine and H. T. would have us to believe 5. Note also how little the Church then believed the Popes infallibility 6. Yea Note how upon the reception of the several Copies of the Nicene Canons they modestly convicted Zosimus of falshood And how the Council resolved against his usurpation See in the African Councils the Epistle of Cyril and Alexandria and Atticus of Constantinople and the Epistles of the Council to Boniface and Celestine In their Epistle to Boniface before they had received their answers from other Churches about the Nicene Canons they tell him that they believed they should not suffer that Arrogancy non sumus istum typhum passuri But to Celestine they conclude more plainly though modestly Presbyterorum quoque sequentium c. i. e. Let your holiness as beseemeth you repell the wicked refuges of Presbyters and the Clergy that follow them because this is not derogate or taken from the African Church by any Definition of the Fathers and the Nicene Decrees most plainly committed both the inferiour Clergy and Bishops themselves to the Metropolitans For they did most prudently and most justly provide that all businesses N. B. all should be ended in the very places where they begun and the Grace of the holy Ghost will not or should not be wanting to each province which equity should by the Priests of Christ be prudently observed and most constantly maintained Especially because it is granted to every one to appeal to the Councils of their own Province or to a Universall Council if he be offended with the judgement of the Cognitors Unless there should be any one that can think that our God can inspire a justice of tryall into any one man N. B. and deny it to innumerable Priests that are congregated in Councill Or how can that judgement that 's past beyond sea be valid to which the necessary persons of the witness
colo c. 1 worship neither the Image nor a Spirit in it but by the bodily likeness I behold the sign of that which I ought to worship Yea that many of them renounced the worshipping of Devils appeareth by Augustines report of their words in Psal 96. Non colimus mala daemonia c. We worship not evil spirits It is those that you call Angels that we worship who are the powers of the great God and the Ministers of the great God To whom Austin answers Would you would worship them that is honour them aright then you would easily learn of them not to worship them And doubtless few could be so silly as to think there were as many Jupiters or Apollos as there were Images of them in the world So that you see here that some of the Pagans as to Image-worship disclaimed that which the Papists ascribe to them viz. Divine worship Oh but saith H. T. tell us not of particular Doctors but of the Doctrine of Gods Church Answ What not of Saint Thomas What! not of the Army of School Divines before mentioned What! not of the Communis sententia Theologorum the common judgement of Divines for so they call it What not of that which is de fide or consonant to it and whose contrary is heresie or savours of Heresies as they say of Durandus opinion what not of Pope Clement the eighth and the Romane Pontifical pag. 672. wonderful are all these no body in your Church O admirable harmony that is in your united Church But you can agree to leave out the second commandment lest the very words should deter the people from Image worship and to make an irrational division of the tenth to blind their eyes And yet you cry up the Testimony of the Fathers when you are fain to hide one of the ten commandments so that thousands of your poor seduced followers know not that there is such a thing No wonder if you cast away Gregory Nyssen's Epistle against Pilgrimages and Epiphanius his words in the end of his Epistle to Johan Herosol against Images and if Vasquez in 3 Thom. disp 105. c. 3. contrary to the plain words do fain that it was the Image of a prophane or common man that Epiphanius puld down and Al. Cope Dial. 5. c. 21. say that the epistle is counterfeit and not Epiphanius's and if Bellarmine de Imag. c. 9. and Baronius ad an 392. say that this part of the Epistle is forged and if Alphons a Castro cont Haeres de Imag. reproach Epiphanius for it as an Iconoclast so well are you agreed also in the confutation of the Fathers Testimonies that any way will serve your turn though each man have his several way Fair fall Vasquez that plainly confesseth that indeed the Scripture doth forbid not only the worship of an Image for God but also the worshiping of the true God in an Image but saith that this commandment is now repealed and therefore under the Gospel we may do otherwise Vasq li. 2. de Adorat Disp 4. c. 3. Sect. 74. 75. c. 4. Sect. 84. But of this point I shall say no more now but this 1. Many Christian Churches do reject Images from their Churches and worship as well as Protestants 2. More reject statues that reject not pictures 3. Many that keep them worship not them nor God in them or by them as by a mediate object 4. General Councils have been against Images that want nothing but the pleasure of the Pope to make them of as good authority as the Council that was for them 5. That Council that was for them Nice 2. condemneth the Schoolmen and Pope Clement himself as Hereticks for worshiping them or the Cross with Divine worship 6. I again urge any Papist to answer Dallaeus book rationally that can 7. To spare me the labour of saying more of the judgement of the ancient Catholick Church against the Popish use of Images I desire the Reader to peruse what Cassander an honest Papist hath written to that end Consultat de Imag. et simulac who begins thus Ad Imagines vero sanctorum quod attinet certum est initio praedicati Evangelii aliquanto tempore inter Christianos praesertim in ecclesiis imaginum usum non fuisse ut ex Clemente Arnobio patet Tandem picturas in ecclesiam admissas ut rerum gestarum historiam exprimentes c. And he produceth abundance from antiquity against the present Popish use of them 4. Another point in which the Papists pretend to better Countenance from Antiquity then we is the point of the Corporal presence with Transubstantiation But of this there is so much said by multitudes of our Divines that I shall now say no more but desire the studious to Read at least Bishop Ushers Answ to the Jesuite of it and Edmundus Abertinus de Eucharistia a Treatise so full of evidence from Scripture Reason and the judgement of the Fathers that I boldly challenge all the Papists in the world to give a tolerable answer to it that is a better then that is given When we have thus shewed them the stream of Antiquity to have been against them they pass us by and thrust into the ignorant peoples hands a few musty scraps of abused words which are answered and cleared over and over Thus do H. T. D. Baily and others 5. In the point of Satisfaction and Purgatory besides what Sadeel Chamier and others have said Usher and the foresaid Dallaeus in a full Treatise have shewed the Papists nakedness from Antiquity so that modesty should forbid them to pretend the Fathers for them any more if any modesty be left 6. About their Fasts though that be no essential of Religion both the time manner c. is so fully spoak to by the said Dallaeus in another just volume de Jejuniis that Popery in this also is openly condemned by the Fathers in the view of the impartial considerate world The point of Free will and most of the rest in which they imagine that we dissent from Antiquity or the Eastern Churches I have spoak to already in my first Book against Popery I had thought to have gone through the rest particularly at least the rest mentioned by H. T. and D. Baily but finding them so frequently and fully handled already I will forbear such labour in vain CHAP. XXVI Detect 17. ANother of the Papists Deceits and one of the Principal that they support their cause with is A false interpretation and application of all the sayings of the Fathers which they can but force to a shew of countenancing their supremacy That you may find out their jugling in this I shall shew you some of of their Footsteps more particularly 1. Any claim that their own ambitious Bishops have made to a further power then was due to them they use as an Argument for their universal soveraignty when as we deny not but that there was too much pride and Ambition in their Prelates
in their own shame Vigilius saith he proceeded to that insolency that he excommunicated Mennas for four moneths And Mennas did the same by him But Justinian being moved to anger with such things sent some to lay hold on him But Vigilius being afraid of himself fled to the Altar of Sergius the Martyr and laid hold on the Sacred Pipes would not be drawn away till he had pul'd them down But by the Mediation of the Empress Theodora the Pope was pardoned and Menna and he absolved one another A fair proof of the Vicarship 3. And so it was that Pope Honorius was condemned for an Heretick by two or three General Councils 5. Also when they meet with any big words of their own Popes as I command this or that they take it for a proof of the Vicarship As if big words did prove Authority Or as if we knew not how lowlily and poorly they spoke to those that were above them As Gregory the first for instance was high enough towards those that he thought he could master but what low submissive language doth he use to secular Governors that were capable of overtopping him And what flattering language did his successors use to the most base murderers and usurpers of the Empire 6. Another Roman deceit is this When they find any mention of the exercise of the now thriving Roman Power over their own Diocess or Patriarchal circuit they would hence prove his universal Power over all And by that Rule the Patriarch of Alexandria or Constantinople may prove as much 7. Also when they meet with the passages that speak of the elevation of their Pope to be their first Patriarch in the Roman Empire or any Power that by the Emperors was given him they cunningly confound the Empire with the world and especally if they find it called by the name of the world and they would perswade you that all other Christians and Churches on earth did ascribe as much to the Bishop of Rome as the Roman Empire did It s true that he was in the Empire acknowledged to be first in order of dignity because of Rome the seat of his Episcopacy especially when General Councils began to trouble themselves and the world about such matters of precedency And it s well known from the language of their writers as well as from the words of Luke 2. 1. that they usually called the Empire all the world And from such passages would the Papists prove the Primacy at least of the Pope over all the world But put these Juglers to it to prove if they can that beyond the Rivers Meroes and Euphrates and beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire the Pope did either exercise Dominion or was once so much as regarded by them any more then any other Bishop except there were any adjacent Island or Countrey that had their dependence upon the Empire I hope they will not deny that the Church extended much beyond the Empire Though our History of that part of it be much defective And let them prove if they can that ever any of those Churches had any regard to the Roman Bishop any more then to another man Let them tell you where either the Empire of the Abassines or any other out of the line of the Imperial power was any whit like-subject to the Pope 8. But their chief fraud is about names and words When they meet with any high complemental title given to the Bishop of Rome they presently conclude that it signifieth his Soveraignty Let us instance in some particulars and shew the vanity of their conclusions from them 1. Sometimes the Roman Bishops are called Summi Pontifices the chief Popes and hence some gather their Supremacy But I suppose you will believe Baronius their chief flatterer in such a case as this And he tells you in Martyrolog Roman April 9. that Fuit olim vetus ille usus in Ecclesia ut Episcopi omnes non tantum Pontifices sed summi Pontifices dicerentur i. e. It was the ancient custom of the Church to call all Bishops not only Pontifices Popes but chief Popes And then citing such a passage of Hierom Epist 99. he addeth Those that understand not this ancient custom of speech refer these words to the Popedom of the Church of Rome 2. As for the names Papa Pope Dominus Pater Sauctissimus beatissimus dei amantissimus c. it s needless to tell you that these were commonly given to other Bishops 3. And what if they could find that Rome were called the mother of all Churches I have formerly shewed you where Basil saith of the Church of Caesarea that it is as the mother of all Churches in a manner And Hierusalem hath oft that Title 4. Sometime they find where Rome is called Caput Ecclesiarum and then they think they have won the cause When if you will consult the words you shall find that it is no more then that Priority of Dignity which not Christ but the Emperours and Councils gave them that is intended in the word It s called the Head that is the chief Seat in Dignity without any meaning that the Pope is the universal Monarch of the world 5. But what if they find the Pope called the Archbishop of the Catholick Church or the Universal Bishop then they think they have the day I answer indeed three flattering Monks at the Council of Calcedon do so superscribe their libels but they plainly mean no more then the Bishop that in order of dignity is above the rest And many particular Churches are oft called Catholick Churches There 's difference between A Catholick Church and The Catholick Church And the Bishop of Constantinople had that Title even by a Council at Constant an 518. before the Bishop of Rome had it publikely or durst own it It was setled on the Patriarch of Constantinople to be called the Oecumenical or Universal Patriarch Who knoweth not that Emperours gave such Titles at their pleasure Justinian would sometime give the Primacy to Rome and at another time to Constantinople saying Constantinopolitana Ecclesia omnium aliarum est caput The Church of Constantinople is the Head of all other Churches An. Dom. 530. C. de Episcopis l. 1. lege 24. And it s known that this Justinian that sometime calls Rome the Head did yet when the fifth General Council had condemned Vigilius Pope of Rome permit Theodora his Empress to cause him to be fetcht to Constantinople and drag'd about the street in a halter and then banished till they had forced him to subscribe and submit to the Council even as they had deposed Pope Silverius his predecessor And Baronius himself mentioneth a Vaticane Monument which as it calls Agapetus Episcoporum princeps on one side so doth it call Menna the Apostolick Universal Bishop Which Baronius saith doth mean no more then that he was Universal over his own Provinces aad if that be so any Bishop may be called Universal And do not these
Imperial City 3. They give Equal Priviledges to the seat of Constantinople because it was now become New Rome 4. That the Roman Legates would not be present at this act 5. But the next day when they did appear and pretended that this act was forced the Bishops all cryed No man was compelled It s a just decree we all say thus we all approve it Let that stand that is decreed it s all right 6. Here specially note that this General Council thought they needed not the Popes Approbation for the validity of their Decrees when they pass them and take them for valid even contrary to the will of the Pope Speak you that bear the least reverence to a General Council Did this Council think that their Decrees were invalid if the Pope approve them not You see if you be not wilfully blind they did not And who is now to be believed Bellarmine and his party and the present prevalent party of the Papists that say Councils not approved by the Pope are invalid or without authority or the Council of Calcedon that thought otherwise 7. Note that the Popes Legates called this An humbling and depressing and wronging of the Papacy and therefore entred their dissent see Bellarmines Confession lib. 2. de Pontif. cap. 17. Binnius notes on this Council Baronius an 451. 8. Note also that the shifts of Bellarm. Binnius Baronius Becanus Gretser c. are apparently false that say this Canon was surreptitiously brought into the Council for Aetius Act. 16. openly professed the contrary and all the Bishops professed their consent to the last 9. Note also that this is one of the four Great Councils which the Papists themselves compare to the four Gospels and in it were six hundred and thirty Fathers 10. Note also that this great Council is against them and on the Protestant side in the very foundation of all our differences Whether the Roman Priviledges be jure divino or humano And though it be but the Priviledges and not the now claimed Vicarship that was in Question yet the Conclusion is the stronger against them because the lesser was denyed But their last shift is that this Clause or Canon was not approved and so is Null 1. Mark then you that wrote this Manuscript that we have General Councils against you but we want the Popes Approbation And in good sadness was that the meaning of your Question What Council that is what Pope condemned our Church Can it be expected that this one man should condemn himself or can you be no Heretick till then 2. But let it be so this once Did not your Pope approve of this Council when Gregory the first did liken it with the other three to the four Gospels and said of this Tota devotione Complector integerrima approbatione custodio I embrace it with my whole devotion I keep it with most entire approbation Greg. 1. Regist l. 1. Epist 24. cited in the Decrees Dist 15. c. 2. I think this is expresly a full Approbation not without excepting any part only but excluding all such exceptions And the like Approbation of Gelasius in the Roman Council is cited there also in the Decrees ibid. pag. 33. I did also before instance the sixt General Council against you approved by Pope Adrian in his Epistle to Tharasius in the second Nicene Council And indeed it is no hard matter to prove you condemned by your own Popes also If you could but understand the plainest words in a matter that is against your opinions and wills there needed no talk to perswade you that Pope Gregory the first condemned the Title of Universal Bishop or Patriarch professing earnestly that he was the forerunner of Antichrist that would usurp it But the plain truth is as sad experience teacheth us no words of Fathers Popes or Councils much less of Scripture are intelligible to you when your wills are against the matter But we may truly say of you that lay all on the will of the Pope as Austins Observator your Lodovicus Vives freely speaketh in schol in August lib. 20. de Civit. Dei cap. 26. Those are taken by them for Edicts and Councils which make for them or are on their side the rest they no more regard then a meeting of women in a workhouse or a washing place Do you understand this language of one of your own but too honest to have much company Well but you have a third Question By what Authority was she otherwise reproved Answ By the Authority of that Precept Levit. 19. 17. and many the like By the same Authority that Paul reproved Peter Gal. 2. and withstood him to the face by such Authority as any man may seek to quench a fire in his neighbours house or pull a man out of the water that is drowning or as any one Pastor may reprove another when he sinneth By the same Authority as Irenaeus rebuked Victor and the Asian Bishops withstood him and as Cyprian and the Council of Carthage reproved Stephen and the rest aforecited did what they did By as good Authority as the Church of Rome condemneth the Greek Church doth the Greek Church and many another condemn the Church of Rome 3. The next case is about the Roman schism To your Questions I answer 1. To Question whether Papists be Schismaticks is to question whether Ethiopians be black Do you not at this day divide from all the Christian world save your selves Do you not unchurch most of the Christians on earth O dreadful presumption when Christ is so tender of his interest and his servants and is bound as it were by so many promises to save them and not forsake them You ask what Church you left and when was it and whose company Sensless Questions By a Church if you mean the Universal Church there is but One in all and therefore One Universal Church cannot forsake another but when part of it forsaketh the other part and arrogateth the title of the whole to themselves do you doubt whether this be Schism If you mean a particular Church How can Spain Italy France and many more Kingdoms go out of a particular Church that contain so many hundred particular Churches in them No more then London can go out of Pauls Church The Catholick is but One containing all true Christians on earth and you have been guilty of a most horrid Schism as ever the Church knew For 1. You have set up a Church in the Church An Universal Church in the Universal Church A new form destructive to the old Your Pope as Christ-representative is now an Essential part of it and no man is a member of it that is not a member of the Popes body and subject to him So that even the Antipdes and the poor Abassians that know not whether the Pope be fish or flesh or never heard of such a name or thing must all be unchristened unchurched and damned if you be Judges Yea and Bellarmine tells us which indeed your
the Churches live under Mahometans and other Infidels that will not give them leave to travail so far into the Countries of Christian Princes on such occasions They hate us and our Religion They are oft at war with us and then would hang those Bishops as Intelligencers that should offer to come among us 4. And they must many of them pass through the Countries of other Princes that are Infidels and oft in war with the parts which they come from or go to And it cannot be expected that in such cases they should allow them passage through their Countries If one do all will not When poor Lithgow had travailed nineteen years he was tortured strappado'd and disjoynted and made a cripple at Malaga in the Spanish Inquisition And thanked God and the English Embassador that he sped so well 5. Even at home in Europe the Princes are so commonly in Wars as are France Spain Venice Sweden Denmark Poland the Emperor Brandenburgh Holland Portugal England Transylvania c. at this very day that there is not the least probability that they should all or half consent to have so many of their subjects pass into their enemies Countries to reside so long Jealousies raised by particular Interests would make it Treason 6. Moreover many Princes understand that the Pope hath no power to call such Councils nor any man else and they know the design of the Pope to subject the world to himself And therefore they will abhor that their subjects should travail so far at his call that hath such designs or at another mans that hath no authority to call them This hath made the Emperor of Habassia so resolutely resist the Popes pretensions as Godignus Maffaeus and others do declare Few Princes will endure to have their subjects brought under a forreign Power 7. And if you suppose all the Bishops come to the Council the very number out of all the Christian world to make any thing like a General Council would be so great as would be unfit for one or two or ten or twenty Council houses or Assemblies 8. And they would be uncapable of conferring through diversity of languages Few of the Abassines Egyptians Syrians Armenians or of most of the world understand and speak any language that would commonly be understood and used in a Council Nor is it possible to do it by Interpreters For so many Interpreters cannot be used to tell all that understand not what every man saith and to expound their minds to others This would waste an age in a Council so that such a Council would be a very Babel 9. And Councils use to be so long that it cannot be expected that after so many years journey old men should live to see the issue or do any great matters there Eighteen years at Trent would consume a great many of the Bishops How many even of the Popes own Legates dyed before that Council could be finished 10. And if they should live to see the end can you dream that they should live to perform the like tedious dangerous journeys and voyages to bring back the Decrees of the Councill to their Churches Judge now whether such Councils are not Naturally Impossible I will add but this No men can be compelled And to make all the world at once agree to so difficult a task and agree upon the time and place must be a Miracle One will be for it and another against it One for one time and place and another for another through most of the world We see how hardly any two Princes can agree upon times places and all circumstances in their Treaties 2. Let us next enquire of what Necessity such a Council is If it be Necessary for Church government it is either to make Laws or to execute them But for neither of these therefore they are not Necessary 1. Christ hath made us Laws already sufficient for salvation And I hope he hath not constituted so loose a Society and left his Body to such mutations as that they must so frequently have new Laws And if it must sure it must be from their Soveraign who hath reserved the Legislative Power to himself as his Prerogative Legislation is the highest act of Supremacy and chief flower in the Crown of Soveraignty The Church is Christs subjects and shall subjects make their own Laws Scripture is sufficient If this be all that we need General Councils for to make Universal Laws to the Church we can spare them as well as Traytors in a Common-wealth And for Execution of Laws it is either Magisterial by force of the Sword and this they have nothing to do with it being the Princes right Or it is for the Excommunicating Church offenders And to cast them out of particular Churches is the work of the Pastors of those Churches Others cannot know the persons and hear the cause If all Church-causes should come to a General Council Millions of men must be attending them at once And if it be to judge who shall be cast out of the Communion of the Churches and what Churches themselves are to be excommunicated the Synods of neighbour Pastors are to do as much of that as is to be done Where then is the Necessity of such Councils at such rates Augustine said that drunkenness in his time was grown so strong that there must be a Council to suppress it Could they do such feats as to cure Drunkenness Whoredom Covetousness Pride I would be for them 3. If a General Council were called it must be a most unjust Assembly For 1. It would be guilty of cruelty and destroying the Church of Christ by killing so many of the Pastors as aforesaid 2. It would be guilty of cruelty and Church destoying by the starving and desertion of the flocks at home What will become of the poor peoples souls when they are left to the Wolves to Hereticks and Deceivers and to the temptations of their own flesh and the world being for ten or twenty years or for ever deprived of their Pastors under pretense of a General Council Basil in his seventieth Epistle tells the Western Bishops that they of the East could not come to solicite their own cause with them For saith he If any one of us N. B. do for the least moment leave his Church he presently leaveth his people to deceivers And on this ground he shews that they could not so much as spare Bishops to be meer Messengers to them Much less could they have spared a sufficient number to stay seven or ten years together If any think that such Necessities are unusuall he knows not the world And Councils are most usefull if ever when necessities are greatest 3. In Councils things are carried by Votes and so Abassia Armenia Mexico and places so remote that they can send but one or two would be out-voted by that corner of the world where the Council is called that can send in proportionably an hundred for one and so under the name of
Councils are unjust because there can be no just satisfaction given by men that live at so vast a distance that this great number that come thither are truly Bishops yea or Presbyters either It s not possible under many years time so much as to take any satisfactory account of their ordination and abiding in that office and the truth of their deputations or elections And when in their elected Representative Councils there will be perpetual controversies between several parties as there is in Parliaments whether it be this man or that which is truly elected in how many years will all these be decided before they begin their work So that I may well conclude laying all these seven considerations together the distance of places the age and state of the Bishops the state of the Civil Governments which they live under their necessary labours at home and the ruine that will befall their Churches by so much absence the diversity of their languages the multitude of the Bishops and the difficulty of knowing the Ordination and Qualifications of persons so remote to prove their capacity I say all these together do plainly shew that such General Councils are impossible and unjust and therefore not the standing Government or form of the Church or the center of its Unity Argum. 4. As the Synod it self is impossible needless and unjust so it is Impossible that they should do the work of a Head or Soveraign Power if they could Assemble therefore they are not appointed thereunto The Antecedent is partly manifest by what is said from their different languages and other considerations Moreover 1. The persons that will have appeals to them and causes to be judged if really they will do the work of a Soveraign Power and Judge will be so many millions that there will be no room for them about their doors nor any leisure in many years to hear their causes If you say It was not so in former Councils I answer that is because they were not truly General or were called in such times when the Church did lie in a narrow compass and not in such remote parts of the world and because they were assembled indeed but occasionally to advise upon and determine some one particular mans case or few and never took upon them to be the Soveraign power or head of the Church or its essential form or Center of Unity 2. These millions of persons that have so many causes will have so far to travail that it will put them to great cost and labour to come and attend and bring all their witnesses And if they be not sounder bodyed then our English Souldiers the poor people of Mexico and other parts of those Indies to look no further will be a great part of them dead by the way before they can reach the General Council e. g. if it should be in the midst of Europe 3. And the Council will not be competent Judges of so many causes which by distance must needs be much unknown in many weighty Circumstances whose cognisance is necessary 4. And lastly such Councils will sit so seldom that the work will be undone Argum. 5. If God had intended that such a Council should have been the form of his Church or the necessary Governour of it he would have acquainted us with his will concerning some certain Power to summon them or would have authorized some or other to call such a Council But he hath not acquainted us with his will herein nor authorized any to call such a Council therefore it was not his intent that it should be the form or necessary Governour of his Church Either this Council must meet by an Authoritative call or by consent If by such a call who must call them The Popes pretense to this Authority is voluminously and unanswerà bly confuted long ago and it s well known what ever Baronius say that the ancient Councils were called by the Emperors and many since have been called by Emperours and Cardinals And if you say that it belongs to the Emperour I answer what hath he to do to summon the subjects of the French Spaniards Turks Aethiopian c And by this it appears that we never had true Universal Councils They were but General as to the Roman world or Empire For who ever precided it is certain that the Emperours called them And what had Constantine Martian Theodosius or any Roman Emperour to do to call the subjects in India Aethiopia Persia c. to a Council Nor de facto was there any such thing done Is it not a wonderfull thing that the Pope and all his followers should be or seem so blinded to this day as to take the Empire for the whole earth or the Roman world for all the Christian world yet this is their all If you say that it must be done by the consent of Princes then either of Christian Princes or of all If of the Christian only you must exclude the Bishops that are under Mahometan and Heathen Princes and then it will be no General Council especially if it be now as it was in the time of Jacob à Vitriaco the Popes Legate in the East who saith that the Christians of the Easterly parts of Asia alone exceeded in number the Christians both of the Greek and Latine Churches And whether it be all Princes or only Christian Princes that should consent who can tell whether ever it will be God hath not promised to lead them to such a consent And they are unlikely of themselves as being many and distant and of different interests and apprehensions and usually in wars with one another so that if an age should be spent in treating of a General Council among them it s ten to one that the treaty will be in vain and its next to an impossibility that all should consent Besides no man can shew a Commission from God to enable them and only them to such a work But if you say that it must be done by the consent of the Bishops themselves the Impossibility moral is apparent who will be found that will be at the cost and pains to agitate the business among them No one can appoint the time and place but by consent of the rest Who doth it belong to to travail to the Indies Aethiopia Aegypt Palestine and all the rest of the world to treate with the Bishops about the time and place of a Council And how many lives must he have that shall do it And when he findeth them of a hundred minds what course shall he take and how many more journies about the world must he make to bring them to an agreement But I am ashamed to bestow more words on so evident a case Argum. 6. The Head or Soveraign of the Church as of every body Politick hath the Legislative Power over the whole The Pope or a General Council have not the Legislative Power over the whole Therefore the Pope or General Council are not the
is impossible to most of the world as is before shewed and were it possible it would be so tedious and laborious a course that its ridiculous in most to mention such Appeals Argum. 9. The Soveraign or Head of the Church as of every Body Politick hath power to deprive and denude any other of their power The Pope or General Council hath not power to do so therefore they are not of the Head or Soveraigns of the Church The Major is a known principle in polity He that giveth power can take it away And it 's confessed by the Opponents in this case The Minor I prove 1. Because else it would be in the power of the Pope or Council whether Christ shall have any Ministry and Church or not They may at least make havock of it at pleasure But that 's false 2. As is before said we receive not our power from them therefore they cannot take it from us 3. The Holy Ghost doth make us Over-seers of the flock Act. 20. 28. and lay a Necessity on us and denounce a woe against us if we preach not the Gospel and hath no where given us leave to give over his work if the Pope or a Council shall forbid us 4. And they can shew no Commission from Christ that giveth them such a power Arg. 10. If it were the form or Essence of the Church to have a humane visible Head then our Relation to such a head would be essential to our Membership or Christianity But the Consequence is false therefore so is the Antecedent The falseness of the consequent is apparent 1. In that it cruelly and ungroundedly unchristeneth all that do not believe in such a visible Head That is the greatest part by far of the Christians in the world And 2. By the ensuing argument And the necessity of the consequence is evident of it self Argum. 11. If such a visible Head were essential to the Church and so to our Christianity then should we all be Baptized into the Pope or a General Council as truly and necessarily as we are baptized into the Church But we neither are nor ought to be so baptized into the Pope or a General Council therefore they are not essential to the Church or our Christianity The Major viz. the Consequence is clear and not denyed by the Papists who affirm that Baptism engageth the baptized to the Pope He that is united to the body is united to the head he that is listed into the Army is listed to and under the General He that is entred into the Common-wealth is engaged to the Soveraign thereof But that we are not baptized to the Pope or a General Council is proved 1. Because neither the form of Baptism nor any word in Scripture doth affirm such a thing 2. No persons in Scripture times were so baptized Men were baptized before there was a Pope at Rome or a General Council And afterward none were baptized to them at least for many hundred years otherwise then as they were entred into the particular Church of Rome who were Inhabitants there 3. Never any was baptized to Peter or Paul or any of the Apostles saith Paul 1 Cor. 1. 13. was Paul crucified for you or were ye baptized in the name of Paul They must be baptized into the name of no visible Head but him that was crucified for them 4. The Apostle fully resolveth all the doubt 1 Cor. 12. describing the body into which we are baptized ver 13. And he entitleth it from the head Christ vers 12. but acknowledgeth no other head either co-equal with Christ or subordinate The highest of the other members are called by Paul but eyes and hands and thus Apostles Prophets Teachers Miracles gifts of healing helps Governments are only said to be set in the Church as eyes and hands in the body but not over the Church as the Head or Soveraign Power ver 17 18 19 28 29. so that though he that is baptized into the Church is baptized into an Organical body and related to the Pastors as to hands and eyes yet not as to a head nor as to a representative body neither And me thinks neither Pope nor Council should pretend to be more then Apostles Prophets and Teachers and Governments If the form of baptism had but delivered down the authority of the Pope or a Council as it did the authority and name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Tradition would have been a tolerable Argument for them though Scripture had been silent But when the Baptismal Tradition it self is silent and it is a doctrine so monstruously strange to the Primitive Church that all the baptized are baptized to the Pope or a General Council I know no remedy but they must both put up their pretenses Argum. 12. The Essence of the Church into which they were baptized was part of the doctrine which the Catechumeni were taught and all at age should learn before their baptism The Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was no part of the Doctrine which by the Primitive Church the Catechumeni were taught and ought to learn before their baptism Therefore the Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was not then taken to be of the Essence of the Church The Major is evident 1. In that the Catholick Church was in the Creed and it's essentials there briefly expressed in those terms Holy Catholick Church and Communion of Saints 2. In that Church History fully acquainteth us that it was the practice of the Catethists and other Teachers to open the Creed to them before they baptized them and therein the Article of the Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints The Minor is proved by an induction of all the Records of those times which in gross may now suffice according to our present intended brevity to be mentioned There is no one Writer of many hundred years no not Origen Tertullian Irenaeus or any other that purposely recite the Churches belief which the Catechumeni were taught nor Cyril or John Hierosol or any other who open those Articles to the Catechumens that ever once mention the Doctrine of the Headship of the Pope or Council when they open the Article of the Catholick Church nor yet at any other time If they affirm that they did let them prove it if they can Argum. 13. As it is high Treason in a Republick to deny the Soveraign and to be cut off from him is to be cut off from the Common-wealth so it would be a damning unchristening sin to deny the Headship of the Pope or General Council if they were indeed the Head of the Church But it is no such damning unchristening sin Therefore they are not the Head of the Church The Major is plain from the Nature of Soveraignty The Minor is certainly proved 1. Because it is never mentioned in Scripture nor any ancient Writer for many hundred years as a state of Apostasie nor as a damning sin nor as any sin to deny
do so by the Scriptures 2. And can any Learned Papists be so ignorant as not to know that the Arrians pretended the Authority of General Councils and so do many other Hereticks and that the Authority of Pope and Councils are frequently pretended for contrary opinions among them and may be pretended by many an Heretick And will they therefore grant that the Decrees of Popes and Councils are no sufficient discovery of their Faith If Hereticks pretending to your Test of Faith disprove not that to be your Faith then Hereticks pretending to our Rule and Test of Faith which is the Holy Scripture is no proof that it is not our Rule of Faith I do therefore conclude that the Proof of a Succession of such Churches as have received the Holy Scriptures is a valid proof of a succession of Churches of our Religion seeing we have no Religion doctrinally but the Holy Scriptures And this as far as modesty will permit I challenge all the Jesuites on Earth to confute with any solid Reasons yet adding that we do ex superabundanti prove a succession also of Churches that never owned Popery even the greatest part of the Christian world But let these men themselves but prove to us a succession of their Church even such as they require of us Let them prove that from the Apostles days the Catholick Church or any one Congregation of twenty men did hold all that now their Councils and Popes have Decreed and are esteemed Articles of their Faith and I am contented to be their bondslave for ever or to bear a fagot or be used by them as cruelly as their malice can invent or flames or their strappado's execute Let my Head be at their Mercy if they can but prove that Succession of Popery as they require us to do of Protestancy or as I have produced of our Churches and Religion In the 15th and 16th Detection I have more largely spoken to them of this point to which I refer the Reader In the very principal point of their Papal Soveraignty they have nothing but this gross deceit to cheat the world with The Roman Emperors divers ages after Christ did give the Bishop of Rome a Primacy in their Empire and hence these men would perswade us that even from Christ they have had a Soveraignty over all the Christian world Wink but at these small mistakes and they have won the Cause 1. Suppose but Christs Institution to stand in stead of the Emperors 2. Suppose divers hundred years after Christ to have been in the Apostles days 3. Suppose Primacy to be Soveraignty or Universal Government 4. But especially grant them that the Roman Empire was all the Christian world and then they have made good that part of their Cause That there were many Nations without the reach of the Roman Empire that had received the Christian Faith is past doubt Socrates lib. 1. c. 15. saith that Thomas chose Parthia Bartholomew chose India Matthew Ethiopia to plant the Gospel in but the middle India was not converted till Constantines days by Frumentius and Edesius and Iberia by a Maid So Euseb l. 3. c. 3. tells us of Thomas his Preaching to the Parthians and Andrew to the Scythians Et in vit Const l. 4. c. 8. that there were many Churches in Persia cap. 91. how Constantine wrote for them to the King Godignus and others of them maintain that the Abassines did receive the Gospel from the beginning Besides Scotland and many other Countries that were not under the Roman Power And none of these were Governed by the Pope These three Arguments against the Papal Cause I shall here premise to more that follow 1. If all that part of the Christian world that was out of the reach of the Roman Empire did never submit to the Soveraignty of the Pope then hath he not been successively or at any time the actual Head of the Universal Church But the Antecedent is most certain therefore so is the Consequent How an old woman the Emperors Mother of Habassia did baffle their Jesuites by asking them How it came to pass if obedience to the Pope be necessary to salvation that they never had heard from him till now I have told you after from themselves If Primacy were Soveraignty and Emperors and Councils were Gods yet the Indians Abassines Persians and many more in the East and the Scots and Irish and Danes and Sweeds and Poles and Muscovites and most of Germany in the West and North should be no subjects of the Pope 2. If the Rule and Test of the Faith of Papists never had a Real Being or no succession from the Apostles then their Faith and Church hath either no Real Being or no such Succession But the Antecedent is true as I prove It is either General Councils or Popes or the Church Essential as they use to call it that is the Whole Body that is the Rule of their Faith If it be General Councils 1. They had no being from the Apostles till the Council of Nice therefore the Rule of the Papists Faith was then unborn 2. Yea they never had a being in the world There was never any thing like a General Council since the days of the Apostles to this day The first at Nice had none save one John of Persia who its like was some persecuted Bishop that was fled or if one or two more its not material but the Bishops of the Empire and out of the Western parts so few as was next to none The following Councils as Constantinop 1. c. were only out of one piece of the Empire The Council of Trent I disdain to reckon among the modester pretenders to an Universality 2. And if it be not General Councils but the Pope that is the Rule of their Faith then 1. Their Faith hath been interrupted yea and turned to Heresie and to Infidelity when the Pope hath so turned 2. And why then do they tell our people that they take not the Pope for the Rule of their Faith 3. If it be the Major part of the Universal Church 1. It 's known that two to one are against them or at least the Greater part therefore by that Rule their Faith in the Papal Soveraignty is false 2. And yet it would be hard if a man must be of no Belief till he have brought the world to the pole for it Argum. 3. If all the stir that the Papists make in the world for the Papal Government be but to rob Christian Princes and Magistrates of their Power then are they but a seditious Sect But the Antecedent is apparent For there are but two sorts of Government in the Church The one is by the Word applyed unto the Conscience which worketh only on the willing either by General exhortations as in Preaching or by personal application as in Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution And this is the work of the present Pastors and cannot be performed by the Pope Nor would he be
at Anatolius his rising and the equaling him with Rome but they never excepted one word that ever I found against the saying that it was because of the Empire that Rome by the Fathers had the Primacy given it And the Reason given by themselves Concil Constant Can. 5. is because Constantinople is new Rome But Binnius saith that Rome receiveth not the Canons of this Council neither but only their condemnation of Macedonius And he saith that every Council hath just so much strength and authority as the Apostolick seat bestoweth on it For saith he unless this be admitted no reason can be given why some Councils of greater numbers of Bishops were reprobated and others of a smaller number confirmed Bin. Vol. 2. p. 515. What would you have more Sirs Do you not see yet what the Popish Catholick Church is and what they mean when they mouth it out to you and ask you whether your private Judgement be safer or wiser then that of the whole Church or of all the Christian world You see they mean all this while but one man whom Gretser and others plainly confess they call the Church So that indeed it is General Councils and all the Christian world or Church that are the ignorant fallible and oft erring part and it is one man that sometime is reputed an incarnate Devil by a General Council too that is the unerring Pillar of the Church and wiser then all they Do you not see that they make a meer nothing or mockery of General Councils any further then they please the Pope And can you expect that any thing should please them that is against his Greatness or as Julius the second calls it his holding the place of the great God the Maker of all things and all Laws What a vile abuse is it then of the Pope to trouble the world by the meetings and Consultations of General Councils when he can sit at Rome and contradict them infallibly and Good man is fain to save the Catholick Church from the Errors that General Councils the Representative Catholick Church would else lead them into and therefore could he not with less ado infallibly make us Laws Canons and Scriptures without them For sure that which the Pope can do against a General Council he can do without them If he can Infallibly contradict a General Council and Infallibly Rule us contrary to their Judgement he may no doubt Infallibly Rule us without them And therefore of late times they have learnt so much wit that you may look long enough before you see a General Council And I think the Council of Constance were no better Prognosticators then William Lilly nor no more effectuall Lawgivers then Wat Tyler when they Prognosticated or Ordained Decennial Councils And I will be judged by all the world And here also you may see what account the Papists make even of the first General Councils It s all one with them to judge others Hereticks for contradicting especially the four first General Councils compared to the four Evangelists as the Scripture it self and yet who would have thought it they profess themselves to reject the Canons or Decrees of both these the first of Constantinople and that of Calcedon in part And now I think on it by this priviledge I cannot see but the Pope is priviledged from all possibility of being an Heretick personally But these things are on the by I return to the point in hand which is to prove to you that not only the Romish Universal Monarchy and Vice-godhead but even its Patriarchal Primacy was no Apostolical Tradition but an Humane Institution founded on this Consideration that Rome was the Imperial Seat and City 5. And Humane it must needs be 1. For we find that Councils did not declare it as any part of the Law of God but Ordain it as an act of their own 2. We find them adding the Patriarchate of Constantinople which was a new seat neither Patriarch nor Bishop residing there in the Apostles dayes or long after 3. Yea we find them giving this new Patriarch the second place and once making him equal with old Rome which they would never have presumed to do if they had thought that the Patriarchship of Alexandria Antioch or Rome had been of Divine Institution for what horrible arrogancy would that have been when the Holy Ghost by the Apostles had made Alexandria second and Antioch third and Rome first for a Council to set Constantinople before two of them and equal with the first 6. And therefore we have reason to think that if Patriarchs be desirable creatures there may more and more new ones now be made as lawfully as Constantinople was 7. And we do not think that a General Council or Pope can make a man of one Nation to be Patriarch of the Church in another Nation that perhaps may be in wars with the Prince of the first Nation but that each Prince with the Church under their Power hath more to do in it then either Pope or Council And if Portugal and France set up Patriarchs at home they do as lawfully as the Patriarch of Constantinople was set up 8. And therefore we must needs judge that to disobey the Pope or withdraw from his subjection if he had never forfeited his Patriarchship by the claim of an Universal Headship were no greater a sin then to disobey or withdraw from the Patriarch of Alexandria Antioch or Constantinople either the Government by Patriarchs and Arch-bishops is of Gods ordaining and approving or not if not as most of the Protestants hold then it is no sin to reject any of them If it be of God then to reject any of them though in simple error is a sin of disobedience through ignorance but is far from proving a man to be no member of the Catholick Church for sure Patriarchs are far from being Essential parts of the Catholick Church For 9. We conclude as in the Papists own Judgement the Catholick Church may be without the Patriarch of Constantinople Alexandria or Antioch so may it therefore without the Pope of Rome CHAP. XX. Detect 11. THE great endeavour of the Papists is to advance Tradition The Council of Trent Ses 4. hath equalled it with the Scriptures as to the pious affection and reverence wherewith they receive it On pretence of this Tradition they have added abundance of new Articles to the faith and accuse us as Hereticks for not receiving their Traditions And this is a principall difference betwixt us that we take the Scriptures to be sufficient to acquaint us with the will of God as the Rule of faith and holy living and they take it to be but part of the word of God and that the other part is in unwritten Tradition which they equal with this as afore For the maintaining of Tradition it is that they write so much to the dishonour of the holy Scripture as you may find in Rushworths Dialogues and Tho. Whites Defence of them and
taken or catcht How think you now in the Judgement of Augustine and Gerson whether there have any Novelties been brought into the Church and whether all your Presumptions and burdens and as Gerson calls them halters for souls have come from the Apostles or are your own When all is thus overcome with Novelty do you make any question whether any thing be new It seems that Bernard thought that humane Traditions were too much befriended when he thus describeth the Assemblies that he approveth Epist 91. Such a Council do I delight in in which the Traditions of men are not obstinately defended or superstitiously observed but they do diligently and humbly enquire what is the good and well pleasing and perfect will of God And it seems to me that General Councils by error introduced Novelties when Later Councils were fain to undo what the former had done For so doth blessed Augustine profess they did saying De Baptis cont Donat. lib. 2. cap. 6. And Councils themselves that are gathered through several Regions or Provinces do without any scruple yield to the authority of more plenary Councils that are gathered out of the whole Christian world and those same plenary Councils do often yield or give place the former to the later when by some experiment of matters that which was shut is opened and that which lay hid is known Sure here are alterations made even by General Councils that correct one another And what should hinder the Introduction of Novelty when General Councils do so often err Nay if such Councils be Morally and Interpretatively the whole Church as the Papists say then the whole Church doth err in the reception of some Novelty before they declare it by their decrees If you say that General Councils cannot err nor introduce such Novelties your Champion Bellarmine and many of your own will give you the Lie saith he De Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. Neque potest c. It cannot be answered that those Councils erred because they were not lawfull that is the Arrian and other Heretical General Councils at that at Sirmium Millanie Ariminum Ephesus several at Constantinople dissallowed by the Papists For to most of them there was nothing wanting but the Popes assent Yea the second at Ephesus was altogether like that at Basil For both were called by the Pope in both of them the Popes Legate was present at the beginning from both of them the Popes Legate shortly after went away in both of them the Pope was excommunicated and yet that the Council of Ephesus erred the adversaries will not deny Hence he concludeth that the chief Power Ecclesiastical is not in the Church nor in the Council the Pope being removed formaliter vel suppletivè And what should hinder when there is but one mans vote against it even the Popes but that Novelty and error may enter at any time and when that one man is oft so wicked and Heretical as he is For General Councils are but a meer name and mockery The packing of them shews it the Paucity and nonUniversality of them shews it The Management of their affairs shews it They do nothing since the Papal reign but what the Pope will excepting the condemned Councils They have no Being till he Will nor make any Decrees but what he Will Nor are their Decrees of any further power then he is pleased to give them So that his Will is the sense of the General Council or universal Church I need not turn you for this to Sleidan or Uergerius Bishop of Trent that tell us the Holy Ghost came to that Council in a Cloak-bag from Rome nor to Espensaeus in Tit. 1. pag. 42. seeing Bellarmine speaks it out De Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. saying We must know that the Pope is wont to send Legates instructed concerning the judgement of the Apostolick seat with this Condition that if the Council do consent to the Judgement of the Apostolick seat it shall be formed into a Decree If not the forming of the decree shall be deferred till the Pope of Rome being advised with shall return his answer And saith Bellarmine de Concil lib. 2. cap. 11. In the Council of Basil Ses 2. it was decreed by common consent together with the Popes Legate that a Council is above the Pope which certainly is now judged erroneous And the Council of Lateran and Florence decreed the contrary And Pighius saith Hierarch Eccles l. 6. that the Councils of Constance and Basil went about by a new trick and pernicious example to destroy the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and instead of it to bring in the Domination of a promiscuous confused popular multitude that is to raise again Babylon it self subjecting to themselves or to the community of the Church which they falsly pretended that they Represent the very Head and Prince of the whole Church and him that is the Vicar of Christ himself in this his Kingdom and this against Order and Nature against the clearest light of Gospel verity against all Authority of Antiquity and against the undoubted Faith and Judgement of the Orthodox Church it self Mark Papists General Councils with the Popes Nuncio may bring in Novelties in faith against the clearest light of the Gospel and the full Consent of Antiquity and yet these Councils affirmed their opinions to be de fide and the contrary to be Heretical and Damnable and contrary to all Antiquity You see then that Novelties are among you in matters of faith And the French to this day are guilty of those Novelties and also charge their Adversaries with Innovation Nay what will you say if General Councils themselves are but Novelties though they are the foundation of the faith of one half of the Papists as the Pope is of the other I say not so but judge whether your Champion Pighius say so Hierarch Eccles lib. 6. cap. 1. fol. 230. where he saith that Concilia universalia non habent Divinam c. General Councils have not a Divine or Supernatural Original but meerly an humane Original and are the Invention of Constantine a Prince profitable indeed sometimes to find out in Controversie which is the Orthodox and Catholick truth though to this they are not necessary seeing its a readyer way to advise with the Apostolick seat How now Sirs Is your Representative Church the foundation of your faith a Novelty of Constantines invention and yet are you in the old way and must we be put to prove you to be Novelists Do you think those Popes did go the Old way of whom Alvarus Pelagius speaks de planctu Eccles art 15. lib. 2. that they succeeded in authority but not in Sanctity intruding themselves procuring bargaining c. building Towers and Palaces in Babylon that is in Rome according to Hierom Some foul innovation sure they were guilty of that so re-edified Babylon So that this is my first proof that you are Novelists from the General Accusations of others and Confessions of your own 2. Another proof
to these witnesses some more of your worthies August Triumph de Ancon q. 5. art 1. saith To make a new Creed belongs only to the Pope because he is the Head of the Christian faith by whose authority all things belonging to faith are confirmed and strengthened Et Art 2. As he may make a new Creed so he may multiply new Articles upon Articles And in Praefat. sum ad Johan 22. he saith that the Popes power is Infinite because the Lord is great and his strength great and of his greatness there is no end And q. 36. ad 6. he saith that the Pope giveth the Motion of Direction and the sense of Knowledge into all the members of the Church For in him we live and move and have our being And the Will of God and consequently the Popes Will who is his Vicar is the first and chief cause of all motions corporall and spiritual And then no doubt may change without blame Abbas Panormitan in cap. C. Christus de haeret n. 2. saith The Pope can bring in a new Article of faith And Petr. de Anchoran in idic The Pope can make new Articles of faith that is such as now ought to be believed when before they ought not to be believed Turrecremat sum de Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 203. saith that the Pope is the Measure and Rule and Science of things to be believed And August de Ancona shews us that the Judgement of God is not higher then the Popes but the same and that therefore no man may appeal from the Pope to God qu. 6. art 1. And therefore be not offended if we suppose you to have changes A Confutation of a Popish Manuscript on this point Just as I was writing this I received another Popish M. S. sent from Wolverhampton to Sturbridge to which I shall return an answer before I go to the next point Pap. M. S. An Argument for the Church IT will not be denyed but that the Church of Rome was once a most pure excellent flourishing and Mother Church and her faith renowned in the whole world Rom. 1. 8. 6. 16. Whites Def. p. 555. King James speech to the Parliament Whitaker in his Answer to Dr. Sanders Fulk cap. 21. Thes 7. Reynolds in his fifth Conclusion This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall either by Apostacy Heresie or Schism Apostacy is not only a renouncing of the faith of Christ but of the name and Title of Christianity No man will say that the Church of Rome had such a fall or fell so Heresie is an adhesion or fast cleaving to some private or singular Opinion or error in faith contrary to the generally approved doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me in these particulars 1. By what General Council was she ever condemned 2. Which of the Fathers ever writ against her 3. By what Authority was she otherwise reproved For it seems to be a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemned by every private person who hath a mind to condemn her Schism is a departure or division from the unity of the Church whereby the bond and Communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided her self from any body of faithfull Christians or broke Communion or went forth from the Society of any Elder Church I pray you satisfie me in these particulars 1. Whose company did she leave 2. From what body went she forth 3. Where was the true Church she forsook For it appears not a little strange that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assigned any other Church different from her which from age to age since Christs time hath continued visible from whence she departed Thus far the Papists Manuscript An Answer to the foregoing Argument IF the Author of this Argument thinks as he speaks it s a case to be lamented with tears of blood that the Church of Christ should be abused and the souls of men deluded by men of so great ignorance But if he know that he doth but juggle and deceive it s as lamentable that any matter of Salvation should fall into such hands 1. This Argument I have before answered Detect 13. The word Church here is ambiguous and either signifieth 1. A particular Church which is an Association of Christians for personal Communion in Gods worship 2. Or divers such Associations or Churches Associated for Communion by their officers or delegates for unity sake 3. Or else it may signifie some one Mistris Church that is the Ruler of all the rest in the world 4. Or else it may signifie the Universal Catholick Church it self which containeth all the particular Churches in the world The Papist should not have plaid either the blind man or the Jugler by confounding these and never telling us which he means 1. For the first we grant him that Rome was once an excellent flourishing Church And so was Ephesus Hierusalem Philippi Colosse and many more 2. As to the second sence it is humane or from Church custom so to take the word Church for Scripture that I find doth not so use it But for the thing we are indifferent Though it cannot be proved that in Scripture times Rome had any more then a particular Church yet it s all one as to our cause 3. As to the third and fourth senses we deny as confidently as we do that the Sun is darkness that ever in Scipture times Rome was either a Mother to all Churches or the Ruler and Mistris of all or yet the Universal Church it self Prove this and I will turn Papist But there 's not a word for it in the Texts cited but an intimation of much against it Paul calleth Rome a Church and commendeth its faith True but doth he not so by the Thessalonians Colossians Ephesians Philippians c. and John by the Philadelphians Pergamus Thyatira and others as well And will not this prove that Rome was but such a particular Church as one of them The citation of Protestants are done it seems by one that never read them nor would have others read them which makes him turn us to whole books to search for them if we have nothing else to do and to miscited places But we know that all our Divines confess that Rome was once a true and famous particular Church but never the Universall Church nor the Ruler of the world or of all other Churches in Pauls dayes Would you durst lay your cause on this and put it to the tryal Why else did never Paul make one word of mention of this Power and honour nor send other Churches to her to be Governed And now I pray consider to what purpose is the rest of your reasoning What is it to me whether Rome be turned either
hath Articles besides those of the Creed But the Synod of Dort hath more But those in the Bull are new as Dr. Rivet will have it But very many learned men think otherwise that they are not new if they be rightly understood and that this appeareth by the places both of holy Scripture and of such as have ever been of great authority in the Church which are cited in the Margin of the Canons of Trent Pag. 35. And this is it which the Synod of Trent saith that in that Sacrament Jesus Christ true God truly man is really substantially conteined under the form of those sensible things yet not according to the naturall manner of existing but Sacramentally and by that way of existing which though we cannot express in words yet may we by cogitation illustrated by faith be certain that to God it is possible And the Council hath found words to express it that there is made a change of the whole substance of the bread into the Body and the whole substance of Wine into the Blood which conversion the Catholick Church calleth Transubstantiation Pag. 79. When the Synod of Trent saith that the Sacrament is to be adored with Divine worship it intends no more but that the Son of God himself is to be adored I le add no more but that which tells you who is a Papist with the Grotians and who is none Pag. 15. In that Epistle Grotius by Papists meant those that without any difference do approve of all the sayings and doings of Popes for honor or lucre sake as is usual Ibid. He tells us that by Papists he meaneth not them That saving the right of Kings and Bishops do give to the Pope or Bishop of Rome that Primacy which ancient custom and Canons and the Edicts of ancient Emperors and Kings assign them Which Primacy is not so much the Bishops as the very Roman Churches preferred before all other by common consent It 's well it hath so mutable a foundation so Liberius the Bishop being so lapsed that he was dead to the Church the Church of Rome retained its right and defended the cause of the Universal Church This and much more I had given the Reader before in Latine but because Mr. Pierce thinks that I wrong Grotius if you have it not in English I have born so much respect to his words and to the Reader as to remove the wrong and thus far to satisfie his desire Having told you some of the Occasion of this writing I shall add somewhat of the Reasons of it but the less because I have given you so much of them already in my foresaid Discovery of the Grotian Religion 1. My principal Reason is that before expressed that Popery may be pulled up by the very roots For Italians French and all build on this that the Church must have one visible Head 2. That I might take in those parties of the Papists that I have past by or said less to in the former Part of the Book 3. Because I see what Influence the conceit that I dispute against hath on the minds of many well-meaning less judicious people 4. Because I perceive in part what influence the design of Grotius had upon England in the changes that were the occasion of our late wars He saith himself Discuss pag. 16. That the labors of Grotius for the Peace of the Church were not displeasing to many equal men many know at Paris and many in all France many in Poland and Germany and not a few in England that are placid and lovers of peace For as for the now-raging Brownists and others like them with whom Dr. Rivet better agreeth then with the Bishops of England who can desire to please them that is not touched with their venom So that he had Episcopal Factors here in England And whereas some tell me that Grotius was no Papist because he professed his high esteem of the Church of England and say they had Church-preferment here offered him and thought to have accepted it I answer 1. Either it was Grotius in the first Edition or the Church of England in the second Edition then in the Press that this must be spoken of if true 2. Was not Franciscus a Sancta Clara still the Queens ghostly Father a Papist for all he reconciled the Doctrine of the Church of England to that of Rome Grotius and he did plainly manage the same design 3. Mr. Pierce assures you by his Defence that Grotius hath still his followers in England of the party that he called the Church of England And is it any more proof that Grotius was a Protestant for joyning with them then that they are Papists that joyn with him Is not his Doctrine here given you in his Englished words Do you doubt whether the Council of Trent were Papists This makes me remember the words of the late King to the Marquess of Worcester when the Marbuess came into the room to an appointed conference about religion with him leaned on D. Bayly's arm he told the King that he came leaning on a Doctor of his own Church and the King replyed My Lord I know not whether I should think the better of you for the Doctors sake or the worse of the Doctor for your sake or to this purpose And indeed the Doctor quickly shew'd by professing himself a Papist what an Episcopal Divine he was And I think we have as fair advantage to resolve us whether to think the better of Grotius for the Church of Englands sake or the worse of those that he called the Church of England and that were of his mind for Grotius sake In a late Treatise De Antiqua Ecclesiae Brittanicae libertate Diatribe written by I. B. a Divine of the Church of England and printed at Bruges 1656 pag. 34 35. Thes 4. it is averred That since the ancient liberty of the British Church was by the consent of the whole Kingdom resumed remaining Catholick in all other things it may retain that Liberty without losing its Catholicism and without any note of Schism or Heresie This Liberty then was the Reformation And this he saith was maintained by Barnes a Papist and Benedictine Monk and Priest in a M. S. entituled Catholico-Romanus Pacificus c. 3. and that for this sober work of his the Peaceable Monk though of unblamed life and unspotted fame was snatch out of the midst of Paris and stript of his habit and bound on a Horse-back like a Calf and violently carryed into Flanders and so to Rome and so to the Inquisition and then put among the Bedlams where he dyed and not contented with his death they defamed him to have dyed mad Though Rome give Peace no better entertainment the Learned Author thinks that France will and therefore adds concerning the French Church Quâcum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 optanda foret etiamnum veteris redintegratio concordiae quam constat plus mille ab hinc annis amicissime intercessisse inter
did consist in a General Council that must be fetched partly from the Antipodes they would have thought better on it before they had excommunicated Virgilius for saying that there were Antipodes or quod alius mundus alii homines sunt sub terras Dr. Heylin tels us in his Geography Lib. 1. pag. 25. that Bede de ratione temporum cap. 32. calleth it a fable that there are Antipodes and not to be believed and adds that Augustine Lactantius and some other of the Learned of those better times condemned it as a ridiculous incredible fable whose words saith he I could put down at large did I think it necessary And did that age dream that the Being or Unity of the Church or the salvation of the Believers soul depended on this Article that a General Council partly called from the Antipodes must be the Churches Head or Governours or that the Pope at least must be acknowledged and obeyed by every Christian soul that will be saved at the Antipodes And Sir Fradcis Drake and Cavendish would not have been so famous for compassing the world if men had understood that when the Gospel is spread through the earth so many poor old Bishops must ordinarily take half such Journies or voyages to do their business If the Decree of the Council of Constance had been executed to have had a General Council evry ten years many would scarce have had time to go and come But the charitable Church of Rome hath found out a Remedy not only by the rarity of their Councils let them decree what they will to the contrary but also by condemning the most of the Churches and the remotest as Hereticks and sending them to Hell to save them a journey to the General Council 12. Moreover such Councils are unjust because of the multi tude of Bishops that must there meet and cannot be heard speak As the case standeth already there are many more Bishops in the world then can meet and speak and hear in one or two or three Assemblies And many thousand more may be made If I should say that all the Rectors of particular Churches whom they call Parish Presbyters are Bishops and have votes in Councils they would easilyer deny it then disprove it or invalidate the proofs already brought But to proceed on their own grounds me thinks they that make him a Bishop who hath Presbyters and Deacons under him should admit all those Pastors of particular Churches that have Presbyters under them as their Curates which are many Or if they say that only Cities must have Bishops yet must they on their own grounds admit a Bishop for each City And if every City in a few Kingdoms in Europe had a Bishop in the Council there would be no room for all the rest of the world But how prove they that Countrey Parishes may not have Bishops Why may not on their own grounds every four or six parishes have one Hath God forbid it where and when sure they will not say it is of Divine institution that a Bishop have just so many Parishes and Presbyters under him and neither more nor less The number is confest to be left undetermined And what if Christian Princes Bishops and people agree to settle Bishops in every such small number of Parishes by what Law can they exclude them from a General Council If they say by the Canons of former Councils I answer 1. Those Canons are contrary to Scripture 2. They contradict one another 3. They themselves do not obey the Canons of many such Councils 4. Those Councils have no power to make Laws much less Laws that shall reach to this time and place But they will say Pauls command to Titus 1. 3 5. and the example Acts 14. 23. is only of ordained Elders or Bishops in every City therefore they may not ordain them any where but in Cities But I deny the consequence Most ancient interpreters by Elders Acts 14. 23. Understand meer Presbyters And then it would as much follow that Presbyters must be ordained no where but in Cities What if I can prove that the Apostles never gathered a solemn Assembly of Christians for Divine Worship any where but in Cities or that they never administred the Lords Supper any where but in Cities will it follow that therefore we ought not to Assemble or administer the Sacrament any where but in Cities But what if this were granted they cannot deny but every corporation such as most of our Burroughs and Market Towns in England are may truly be called Cities in that Scripture sence And if every such City had a Bishop Even England France Germany and Italy a little spot of the world would make Bishops enough for two or three Councils and more then could Assemble and do the work Two shifts they have against the over-greatness of the number One is the course now taken to have but one Bishop over many Cities and a very large Circuit of the Countrey The other is to depute one out of many from every Countrey to represent the rest and so it shall be a Representative General Council though not a Real But for the first 1. Who hath authority to make such diminutions 2. What if those that are supposed to have that authority shall be otherwise minded 3. It s apparently against the word of God and tendeth to the frustrating of the Office that true Bishops should be so rare By their own Rule each City should have one And let Brerewoods Enquiries or any such writers help you to conjecture how many that would be And for the other way 1. A Representative General Council is another thing quite different from a Real 2. What word of God have they to prove such a Representative Council Doubtless none And will they give us a Church form and center of Unity meerly of their own brains upon supposition that it is prudential 3. Men are of exceeding different degrees of understanding and of different judgements actually so that if e. g. England should send one or two or ten men to represent the rest to a General Council it s more then possible that they may give their judgements in many points so far contrary to the minds of those that sent them that twenty or an hundred to one at home may be against them For we cannot send our understandings and all our reasons with them to the Council when we send them And so no man can say that any such Council doth express the mind of the greater part of the Church 4. By this rule you may reduce a General Council to a dozen men or to the four or five Patriarks For all the rest may choose them as their representatives 5. But it s not to be expected that all the Churches should be satisfied of the lawfulness or fitness of such substitutions and representations And therefore they will not consent or elect men for such a power and work And who may justly force them 13. Moreover such
the said Headship of the Pope or Council 2. Because else most of the Christians of the world at this day are Apostates and unchristened Or if that seem a tolerable conclusion to the Romanists Yet 3. Because then Christ had no Church for some hundreds of years which I know they will not think so tolerable a conclusion For to dream that the ancient Christians did know any Head of the Church but Christ or were engaged in loyalty to the Pope or Council is a disease that few are lyable to except such as are strangers to the writings of those times or such as read them with Roman spectacles resolved what to find in them before hand Argum. 14. All Christians are bound to study or labor to be acquainted with the Laws of the Soveraign power of the Church All Christians are not bound to study or labor to be acquainted with the Laws of Popes and Councils Therefore the laws of Popes and Councils are not the Laws of the Soveraign power of the Church The Major is proved in that all subjects must obey the Laws of the Soveraign power But they cannot obey them unless they know them Therefore they are bound to endeavour to know them The Minor is proved 1. In that they being written in Latine and Greek which a very small part of the Christians of the world do understand and their Teachers not sufficiently expounding them and they being more copious and voluminous more obscure and uncertain of which next then for all private Christians to understand the people cannot learn these having enough to do to learn Gods Word 2. The Papists that deny the use of the Holy Scriptures to the people in a known tongue and deny the necessity of understanding them will sure say the same of their Decretals and Canons unless they mean to set them up above the Scripture as well as equal them thereto Argum. 15. The Soveraign Head of the visible Church and Center of our unity must be evident that all the Christian world may know it The Pope and General Council are not such Therefore neither of them are the Head of the Visible Church The Major is confessed by the Opponents and it 's plain because men cannot obey an unknown power The Minor is known by common experience For many a year together by Bellarmines confession learned and wise men could not tell which was the true Pope yea their Councils could not tell Most of the Christian world to this day cannot discern his Commission for that power which he pretendeth to A true General Council now no man can know because it is a non ens Their pretended General Councils are so ravelled in confusion that they are not agreed among themselves which are indeed such and which not but many are rejected and many suspected of which Bellarmine giveth us a list and those that one receiveth another rejecteth and the most by far are rejected by most of the Christian world And when some would take up with the four first and some with six and some with eight the Papists deridingly ask them whether the Church hath not as much authority now as it had then And how shall the Christian world know whether it were a true General Council or not Of which see the difficulties first to be resolved which I have recited in my Disputations against Popery Argum. 16. The Laws of the Soveraign Power of the Church must be certain or else how shall we know what to obey The Laws of Popes and General Councils are not certain Therefore c. The Minor is proved by experience The Popes Decretals are many unknown and many proved forgeries by Blondell ubi sup and many others beyond all question and none of them proved Laws to the Church The Canons of the first Council of Nice are not agreed on among the Papists Many others are proved forged Many are flatly contrary to each other as I have shewed ubi sup and how then shall Christians know what to obey The ancient Canons condemned the gesture of kneeling on the Lords day and consequently then at the Lords Supper the reading of the Heathens Books and many such things which are now taken for lawful The later Councils that contradict the former do seem to most of more questionable authority then they And what Councils are to be received and what rejected they are not agreed among themselves nor have any certain Rule to know by on which they are agreed Nor will their Popes or Councils yet resolve them this great question So that Christians are at a loss concerning these Laws and know not which of them they are obliged by and which not Argum. 17. If the Pope or Council be the Head of the Church then must their Laws be preached to the people by their Teachers But the Laws of Popes and Councils need not be preached to the people by their Teachers Therefore c. The reason of the Major is because the Laws that they must obey in matters spiritual in order to salvation the Ministers must preach to them But these are pretended to be such Therefore c. As to the Minor 1. It would be but an unhansome thing in their own hearing for Preachers to take their Texts out of the Canons or Decretals and preach these day after day to the people which yet they have need to do many a year if the obedience of them be our necessary duty 2. Ministers are commanded to preach only the Gospel and it is said to be sufficient or able to make us perfect and build us up to salvation Therefore we need not preach the Canons or Decretals Argum. 18. While a Visible Head cannot be agreed on even by those that would have the Church united in suoh a Head it is all one to them as if there were no such Head and the union still is unattainable by them But even among the Papists themselves a Visible Head is not cannot be agreed on Therefore c. What good will it do to say we must center some where and know not where and obey some body and know not who The Italians and Spanish make the Pope the Infallible Head and say a General Council without him may err and is but the body The French make the Council the Head and say the Pope may err and that the infallibility such as they plead for is in the Council It is not a Head but this Head in specie that is the form of the Church if any such be And therefore they must needs according to their own principles be of divers Churches while they place the Soveraignty in several sorts and persons Till they better agree among themselves in their Fundamentals and Essentials of the Church we have small encouragement to think of uniting on any of their grounds Argum. 19. The Soveraign Power or Headship over the Church is a thing undoubtedly revealeed in the Holy Scripture For we cannot imagine that the Scripture should be silent in so