Saints mentioned by St. Jude is not intirely delivered in the Scripture but we must seek for the rest in the Traditions of the Church Which Traditions say they are to be received as a part of the Rule of Faith with the same Religious Reverence that we do the Holy Scripture Now though this is not really the bottom of their heart as will appear before I have done but they finally rest for their satisfaction in matters of Faith somewhere else yet this being plausibly pretended by them in their own Justification that they follow Tradition and in their Accusations of us that we foresake Tradition I shall briefly let all our People see who are not willing to be deceived what they are to judge and say in this business of Tradition About which a great noise is made as if we durst not stand to it and as if they of the Roman Church stedfastly kept it without any variation neither of which is true I shall plainly shew in this short Discourse The meaning of the Word Which for clearness sake shall begin with the meaning of the word TRADITION which in English is no more than delivering unto another and by a Figure signifies the matter which is delivered and among Christians the Doctrine of our Religion delivered to us And there being two wayes of delivering Doctrines to us either by writing or by word of mouth it signifies either of them indifferently the Scriptures as you shall see presently being Traditions But custom hath determined this word to the last of these wayes and distinguished Tradition from Scriptures or writings at least from the Holy Writings and made it signifie that which is not delivered in the Holy Scriptures or Writings For though the Scripture be Tradition also and the very first Tradition and the Fountain of all true and legitimate Antiquity yet in common Language Traditions now are such ancient Doctrines as are conveyed to us some other way whither by word of mouth as some will have it from one Generation to another or by humane Writings which are not of the same authority with the Holy Scriptures How to judge of them Now there is no better way to judge aright of such Traditions then by considering these four things First The Authors of them whence they come Secondly the matter of them Thirdly Their Authority Fourthly The means by which we come to know they derive themselves from such Authors as they pretend unto and consequently have any authority to demand admission into our belief 1. For the first of these every body knows and confesses that all Traditions suppose some Author from whom they originally come and who is the diliverer of those Doctrines to Christian people who being told by the present Church or any person in it that such and such Doctrines are to be received though not contained in the Holy Scriptures because they are Traditions ought in Conscience to inquire from whom those Traditions come or who first delivered them By which means they will be able to judge what credit is to be given to them when it is once cleared to them from what Authors they really come Now whatsoever is delivered to us in Christianity comes either from Christ or from his Apostles or from the Church either in General or in part or from private Doctors in the Church There is nothing now called a Tradition in the Christian World but proceeds from one or from all of these four Originals 2. And the mater which they deliver to us which is next to be considered is either concerning that Faith and godly life which is necessary to Salvation or concerning Opinions Rites Ceremonies Customs and things belonging to Order Both which as I said may be conveyed either by writing or without writing by the Divine Writings or by Humane Writings though these two wayes are not alike certain 3. Now it is evident to every understanding that things of both sorts which are delivered to us have their Authority from the credit of the Author from whence they first come If that be Divine their Authority is Divine if it be onely Humane their Authority can be no more And among Humane Authors if their Credit be great the Authority of what they deliver it great if it be little its Authority is little and accordingly must be accepted with greater or lesser Reverence Upon which score whatsoever can be made appear to come from Christ it hath the highest authority and ought to be received with absolute submission to it because he is the Son of God And likewise whatsoever appears to have been delivered by the Apostles in his Name hath the same Authority they being his Ministers sent by Him as He was by God the Father and indued with a Divine Power which attested unto them In like manner whatsoever is delivered by the Church hath the same Authority which the Church hath which though it be not equal to the foregoing the Church having no such Divine Power nor infallible Judgement as the Apostles had yet is of such weight and moment that it ought to be reverenced next to theirs I mean the sense of the whole Church which must be acknowledged also to be of greater or lesser Authority as it was nearer or farther off from the times of the Apostles What was delivered by their immediate Followers ought to weigh so much with us as to have the greatest Humane Authority and to be looked upon as little less then Divine The Universal consent of the next Generation is an Authority approaching as near to the former As the Ages do one to another But what is delivered in latter times hath less humane Authority though pretending to come but without proof from more early dayes and hath no Authority at all if it contradict the sense of the Church when it was capable to be better acquainted with the mind of Christ and of his Apostles As for particular Churches their Authority ought to be reverenced by every Member of them when they profess to deliver sincerely the sense of the Church Universal and when they determine as they have power to do Controversies of Faith or decree Rites and Ceremonies not contrary to GOD's Word in which every one ought to acquiesce But we cannot say the same of that which comes from any private Doctor in the Church Modern or Ancient which can have no greater Authority than he himself was of but is more or less credible according as he was more or less diligent knowing and strictly religious 4. But to all this it is necessary that it do sufficiently appear that such Doctrines do really come from those Authours whose Traditions they pretend to be This is the great and the only thing about which there is any question among sober and judicious persons How to be sufficiently assured that any thing which is not delivered unto us in the Scriptures doth certainly come for instance from CHRIST or his holy Apostles For in this all Christians are
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
to this effect That Tradition which was of so much use in the Primitive Church was not unwritten Traditions or Customs commended or ratified by the supposed infallibility of any visible Church but did especially consist in the Confessions or Registers of particular Churches And the unanimous consent of so many several Churches as exhibited their Consessions to the Nicene Council out of such Forms as had been framed and taught before this Controversie arose about the Divinity of CHRIST and that voluntaâ—ily and freely these Churches being not dependent one upon another nor overswayed by any Authority over them nor misled by Faction to frame their Confessions of Faith by imitation or according to some patern set them was a pregnant argument that this Faith wherein they all agreed had been delivered to them by the Apostles and their Followers and was he true meaning of the holy Writings in this great Article and evidently proved that Arius did obtrude such interprerations of Scripture as had not been heard of before or were but the sense of some private persons in the Church and not of the generality of Believers In short the unanimous consent of so many distinct visible Churches as exhibited their several Consessions Catechisms or Testimonies of their own Forefathers Faith unto the Council of Nice was an argument of the same force and efficacy against Arius and his Partakers as the general consent and practice of all Nations in worshipping a Divine Power in all Ages is against Atheists Nothing but the ingrafted notion of a Deity could have induced so many several Nations so much different in natural disposition in civil Discipline and Education to effect or practise the duty of Adoration And nothing but the evidence of the ingrafied word as St. James calls the Gospel delivered by CHRIST and his Apostles in the holy Scriptures could have kept so many several Churches as communicated their Confessions unto that Council in the unity of the same Faith The like may be said of the rest of the four first General Councils whose Decrees are a great confirmation of our belief because they deliver to us the consent of the Churches of CHRIST in those great Truths which they assert out of the holy Scriptures And could there any Traditive Interpretation of the whole Scripture be produced upon the Authority of such Original Tradition as that now named we would most thankfully and joyfully receive it But there never was any such pretended no not by the Roman Church whose Doctors differ among themselves about the meaning of hundreds of places in the Bible Which they would not do sure nor spend their time unprofiâ—ably in making the best conjectures they are able if they knew of any exposition of those places in which all Christian Doctors had agreed from the beginning V. But more then this we allow that Tradition gives us a considerable assistance in such points as are not in so many letters and syllables contained in the Scriptures but may be gathered from thence by good and manifest reasoning Or in plainer words perhaps whatsoever Tradition justifies any Doctrine that may be proved by the Scriptures though not found in express terms there we acknowledge to be of great use and readily receive and follow it as serving very much to establish us more firmly in that Truth when we see all Christians have adhered to it This may be called a confirming Tradition of which we have an instance in the Doctrine of Infant-Baptism which some ancient Fathers call an Apostolical Tradition Not that it cannot be proved by any place of Scripture no such matter for though we do not find it written in so many words that Infants are to be baptised or that the Apostles baptised Infants yet it may be proved out of the Scriptures and the Fathers themselves who call it an Apostolical Tradition do alledge testimonies of the Scriptures to make it good And therefore we may be sure they comprehend the Scriptures within the name of Apostolical Tradition and believed that this Doctrine was gathered out of the Scriptures though not expresly treated of there In like manner we in this Church assert the authority of Bishops above Presbyters by a Divine right as appears by the Book of Consecration of Bishops where the persons to be ordained to this Office expresses his belief That he is truly called to this Ministration according to the will of our LORD JESVS CHRIST Now this we are perswaded may be plainly enough proved to any man that is ingenuous and will fairly consider things out of the holy Scriptures without the help of Tradition but we also take in the assistance of this for the conviction of gain-sayers and by the perpetual practice and Tradition of the Church from the beginning confirm our Scripture proofs so strongly that he seems to us very obstinate or extreamly prejudiced that yields not to them And therefore to make our Doctrine in this point the more authentick our Church hath put both these Proofs together in the Preface to the Form of giving Orders which begins in these words It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been three Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons I hope no body among us is so weak as to imagine when he reads this that by admitting Tradition to be of such use and force as I have mentioned we yield too much to the Popish Cause which supports it self by this pretence But if any one shall suggest his to any of our people let them reply That it is but the pretence and only by the Name of Tradition that the Romish Church supports it self For true Tradition is as great a proof against Popery as it is for Episcopacy The very foundation of the Popes Empire which is his succession in St. Peters Supremacy is uâ—terly subverted by this the constant Tradition of the Church being evidently against it And therefore let us not lose this Advantage we have against them by ignorantly refusing to receive true and constant Tradition which will be so far from leading us into their Church that it will never suffer us to think of being of it while it remains so opposite to that which is truely Apostolical I conclude this with the Direction which our Church gives to Preachers in the Books of Canons 1â—71 in the Title Concionatores That no man shall teach the people any thing to be held and believed by them religiously but what is consentaneous to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the Catholick Fathers and Ancient Bishops have gathered out of that very Doctrine This is our Rule whereby we are to guide our selves which was set us on purpose to preserve our Preachers from broaching any idle novel or popish Doctrines as appears by the conclusion of that Injunction Vain and old Wives Opinions and Heresies and Popish Errours abhorring from the Doctrine and
Faith of Christ they shall not teach nor any thing at all whereby the unskilful multitude may be inflaâ—ed either to the study of Novelty or to Contention VI. But though nothing may be taught as a piece of Religion which hath not the forenamed Original yet I must add that those things which have been universally believed and not contrary to Scripture though not written at all there nor to be proved from thence we do receive as pious Opinions For instance the perpetual Virginity of the Mother of GOD our Saviour which is so likely a thing and so universally received that I do not see why we should not look upon it as a genuine Apostolical Tradition VII I have but one thing more to adde which is that we allow also the Traditions of the Church about matters of Order Rites and Ceremonies Only we do not take them to be parts of GOD's worship and if they be not appointed in the holy Scriptures we believe they may be altered by the same or the like authority with that which ordained them So our Church hath excellently and fully resolved us concerning such matters in the XXXIV Article of Religion where there are three things asserted concerning such Traditions as these First It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies they are the very first words of the Article be in all places one or utterly alike for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of countries times and mens manners so that nothing be ordained against God's Word But then to prevent all disorders and confusions that men might make in the Church by following their own private fancies and humours the next thing which is decreed is this Secondly That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposelie doth openlie break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of GOD and be ordained and approved by common authority ought to be rebuked openlie that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common Order of the church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren Lastlie It is there declared That every particular or National church hath authority to ordain change and abolish ceremonies or Rites of the church ordained only by man's authority so that all things be done to edifying This is sufficient to shew what we believe concerning Traditions about matters of Order and Decency VIII As for what is delivered in matters of Doctrine or Order by any private Doctor in the church or by any particular church it appears by what hath been said that it cannot be taken to be more then the private Opinion of that man or the particular Decree of that church and can have no more authority then they have that is cannot oblidge all christians unless it be contained in the holy Scripture Now such are the Traditions which the Roman church would impose upon us and impose upon us after a strange fashion as you shall see in the Second Part of this Discourse unto which I shall proceed presently when I have left with you this brief Reflection on what hath been said in this First Part. Our people may hereby be admonished not to suffer themselves to be deceived and abused by words and empty names without their sense and meaning Nothing is more common then this especially in the business of Traditions About which a great stir is raised and it is commonly given out that we refuse all Traditions Then which nothing is more false for we refuse none truly so called that is Doctrines delivered by Christ or his Apostles No we refuse nothing at all because it is unwritten but merely because we are not sure it is delivered by that Authority to which we ought to submit Whatsoever is delivered to us by our LORD and his Apostles we receive as the very word of God which we think is sufficiently declared in the holy Scriptures But if any can certainly prove by any Authority equal to that which brings the Scriptures to us that there is any thing else delivered by them we receive that also The Controversie will soon be at an end For we are ready to embrace it when any such thing can be produced Nay we have that reverence for those who succeeded the Apostles that what they have unanimously delivered to us as the sense of any doubtful place we receive it and seek no farther There is no dispute whither or no we should entertain it To the Decrees of the Church also we submit in matters of Decency and Order yea and acquiesce in its authority when it determines doubtful Opinions But we cannot receive that as a Doctrine of Christ which we know is but the Tradition of man nor keep the Ordinances of the ancient Church in matters of Decency so unalterably as never to vary from them because they themselves did not intend them to be of everlasting obligation As appears by the changes that have been made in several times and places even in some things which are mentioned in the holy Scriptures being but Customs suted to those Ages and Countries In short Traditions we do receive but not all that are called by that name Those which have sufficient Authority but not those which are imposed upon us by the sole authority of one particular Church assuming a power oâ—er all the rest And so I come to the Second Part. PART II. What Traditions we do not receive AND in the first place we do not believe that there is any Tradition which contains another Word of God which is not in the Scripture or cannot be proved from thence In this consists the main difference between us and them of the Romish Perswasion who affirm that Divine Truth which we are all bound to receive to be partly written partly delivered by word of mouth without writting Which is not only the affirmation of the Council of Trent but delivered in more express tâ—rms in the Bresace to the Roman Catechism drawn up by their order where we finde these words towards the conclusion of it The whole Doctrine to be delivered to the faithfull is contained in the Word of GOD which Word of GOD is distributed into Scripture and Tradition This is a full and plain declaration of their mind with which we can by no means agree for divers unanswerable reasons 1. Not only because the Scriptures testifie to their own perfection which they assirm to be so great as to be able to compleat the divinest men in the Church of CHRIST in all points of heavenly wisdom 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. 17. but 2. Because the constant Tradition of the Church even of the Roman Church anciently is that in the Scriptures we may find all that is necessary to be known and believed to salvation I must not fill up this Paper with Authorities to this purpose but we avow this unto the people of
our Church for a certain Truth which hath been demonstrated by many of our Writers who have shewn that the ancient Doctors universally speak the language of St. Baul 1. Cor. 4. 7. Not to think above that which is written I will mention only these memorable words of Tertullian who is as earnest an Advocat as any for ritual Traditions but having to deal with Hermogenes in a question of Faith Whither all things in the beginning were made of nothing urges him in this manner I have no where yet read that all things were made out of a subject matter If it be written let those of Hermogenes his shop shew it if it be not written let them fear thâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is alloted to such â—â— adde or take away The very same Answer should our People make to those that would have them receive any thing as an Article of Faith which is not delivered to them by this truly Apostolical Church wherein we live If it he written let us see it if it be not take heed how you adde to the undoubted Word of GOD. We receive the holy Scriptures as able to make us wise to Salvation So they themselves tell us and so runs the true Tradition of the Church which you of the Romish perswasion have forsaken but we adhere unto 3 And we have this farther reason so to do because if part of God's Word had been written and part unwritten we cannot but believe there would have been some care taken in the written Word not onely to let us know so much but also inform us whither we should resort to find it and how we should know it if it be absolutely necessary for us to be acquainted with it But there is no such notice nor any such directions left us nor can any man give us any certain Rule to follow in this matter but onely this To examine all Traditions by the Scripture as the supreme Rule of Faith and to aâ—mit only such as are conâ—ormable thereunto 4. For which we have still this farther reason that no sooner were they that first delivered and received the holy Scriptures gone out of the world but we find men began to adde their own fancies unto the Catholick Truth which made it absolutely necessary to keep to the Tradition in the holy Scriptures all other growing uncertain This is observed by Hegesippus himself in Euseb l. 3. c. 32 that the Church remained a chast Virgin and the spouse of Christ till the Sacred Quire of the Apostles and the next Generation of them who had had the honour to be their Auditonrs were extinct and then there began a plain Conspiracie of impious atheistical errour by the fraud of Teachers who delivered other Doctrine Which was a thing Saint Paul feared even in his own life time about the Church of Corinth 2 Cor 1. 3. lest the Devil like a wily Serpent should beguil them and corrupt their minds from the original simplicity of the Christian Doctrine wherein they were first instructed And if it were attempted then it was less difficult and therefore more endeavoured afterward as shall appear anone by plain History which tells how several persons pretended they received this and that from an Apostle Some of which Traditions were presently rejected others received and afterwards found to be impostures Which shews there was so much false dealing in the case that it was hard for men to know what was truely Apostolical in those dayes if it came to them this way onely and therefore impossible to be discerned by us now at this great distance of time from the Apostles who we know delivered the true Faith but we have no reason to rely upon mere Tradition without Scripture for any part of that Faith when we see what Cheats were put upon men by that means even then when they had better helps to detect them then we have It is true the Fathers sometime urge Tradition a as proof of what they say But we must know that the Scriptures were not presently communicated among some barbarous Nations and there were some Hereticks also who either denied the Scriptures or some part of them and in these cases it was necessary to appeal to the Tradition that was in the Church and to convince them by the Doctrine taught every where by all the Bishops But that mark this I pray you of which they convinced them by this Argument was nothing but what is taught in the Scripture 5. With which we cannot suffer any thing to be equalled in authority unless we would see it confirmed by the same or equal Testimony This is the great reason of all why we cannot admit any unwritten Traditions to be a part of the Word of GOD which we are bound to believe because we cannot find any truths so delivered to us as those in the holy Scriptures They come to us with as full a Testimony as can be desired of their Divine Original but so do none of those things which are now obtruded on us by the Romish Church under the name of Tradition or unwritten Word of God For the Primitive Church had the very first Copies and authentick Writings of those Books called the New Testament delivered by the Apostles own hands to them And those Book confirm the Scriptures of the Old Testament and they were both delivered to Posterity by that Primitive Church witnessing from whom they received them who carefully kept them as the most precious Treasure so that this written Word hath had the general approbation and testimony of the whole Church of Christ in every Age untill this day witnessing that it is Divine And it hath been the constant business of Doctors of the Church to expound this Word of GOD to the People and their Books are full of Citations out of the Scripture all agreeing in substance with what we now read in them Nay the very Enemies of christianity such as Celsus Porphyry Julian never questioned but these are the Writings of which the Apostles were the Authors and which they delivered Besides the Marks they have in themselves of a Divine Spirit which indited them they all tending to breed and preserve in men a sense of GOD and to make them truly vertuous Not one word of which can be said for any of those unwritten Traditions which the Roman Church pretend to be a part of GOD's Word For we have no testimony of them in the holy Scriptures Nor doth the Primitive church affirm she received them from the Apostles as she did the written Word Nor have they the perpetual consent and general approbation of the whole church ever since Nor are they frequently quoted as the words of Scripture are upon all occasions by the Doctors of the Church Nor do we find them to be the Doctrine which was constantly taught the People Nor is there any notice taken of them by the enemies of our Faith whose Assaults are all against the Scriptures In short they are
from what hath been now said That there being so little credit to be given to the Roman Church onely we cannot receive those Doctrines of Truth which that Church now presses upon our belief upon the account of Tradition For instance That the Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistriss of all other Churches That the Pope of Rome is the Monarch or Head of the universal visible Church That all Scriptures must be expounded according to the sense of this Church That there are truly and properly seven Sacraments neither more nor less instituted by our blessed Lord himself in the New Testament That there is a proper and propiciatory Sacrifice offered in the Mass for the quick and dead the same that Christ offered on the Cross In short the half communion and all the rest of the Articles of their New Faith in the Creed published by Pope Pius IV. which are Traditions of the Roman Church alone not of the Universal and rely solely upon their own Authority And therefore we refuse them and in our Disputes about Traditions we mean these things which we reject because they have no foundation either in the holy Scripture or in universal Tradition but depend as I said upon the sole Authority of that Church which witnesses in its own behalf For whatsoever is pretended to make the better shew all resolves at last into that as I intimated in the beginning of this Discourse Scripture and Tradition can do nothing at all for them without their Churches definition Though their whole infallible Rule of Faith seem to be made up of those three yet in truth the last of these alone the Churches definition is the whole Rule and the very bottom upon which their Faith stands For what is Tradition is no more apparent then what is Scripture according to their Principles without the Authority of their church which pretends an unlimited power to supply the defect even of Tradition it self In short as Tradition among them is taken in to supply the defect of Scripture so the Authority of their Church is taken in to supply the defect of Tradition But this Authority undermines them both because neither Scripture nor Tradition signifie any thing without their Churches Authority Which therefore is the Rule of their Faith that is they believe themselves To which absurdity they are driven because it is made evident by us that there have been great diversities of Traditions and many changes and alterations made even in things called Apostolical c. And therefore they have no other way but to fly to the judgment of the present Church to determine what are Traditions Apostolical and what are not by which Judgment all mankind must be governed that is we must believe them and they believe themselves which they would have done well to have said in one word without putting us to the trouble of seeking for Traditions in Books and in other Churches But they would willingly colour their pretences by as many fair words as possible and so make mention of Scripture Tradition Antiquity which when we have examined they will not stand to them but take fanctuary in their own Authority saying They are the sole Judges what is Scripture and what Tradition and what Antiquity nay have a power to declare any new point of Faith which the Church never heard of before This is the Doctrine of Salmeron and others of his fellows That the Doctrine of Faith admits of additions in essential things For all things were not taught by the Apostles but such as were then necessary and fit for the Salvation of Believers By which means we can never know when the Christian Religion will be perfected but their Church may bring in Traditions by its sole Authority without end Nay some among them have been contented to resolve all their Faith into the sole Authority of the present Roman Bishop according to that famous saying of Cornelius Mussus promoted by Paul the Third to a Bishoprick upon the fourteenth Chapter to the Romans To confess the truth ingenuously I would give greater credit to one Pope in those things which touch the mysteries of Faith then to a thousand Hierom's Austin's Gregory's to say nothing of Richard's Scotus's c. For I believe and know that the Pope cannot erre in matters of Faith Which contemptuous Speech he would never have uttered to the discredit of those greatmen whom they pretend to reverence if he had not known more certainly that the Tradition which runs among the ancient Fathers is against them then he could know the Pope to be infallible There is no Tradition I am sure for that nor for abundance of other things which rest merely upon their own credit as is fairly acknowledged in two great Articles of their present Creed by our Countrey-man Bishop Fisher with whose words I conclude this particular Many perhaps have the less confidence in Indulgences because their use seems to have been newer in the Church and very lately found among Christians To whom I answer that it doth not appear certainly by whom they began to be first delivered For the Ancients make no mention or very rare of Purgatory and the Greeks to this very day do not believe it nor was the belief either of Purgatory or of Indulgences so necessary in the Primitive Church as it is new And as long as there was no care about Purgatory no body sought for Indulgences for all their esteem depends upon that If you take away Purgatory to what purpose are Indulgences Since therefore Purgatory was so lately known and received in the Catholick Church who can wonder that there was no use of Indulgences in the beginning of our Religion Which is a full Confession what kind of Traditions that Church commends unto us things lately invented their own private Opinions of which the ancient Christians knew nothing In one word their Tradition is no Tradition in that sense wherein the Church alwayes understood it IV. And what hath been said of them must be applied to other particular Churches though some have been more sincere then they None of them hath any Authority to commend any thing as an Article of Faith unto Posterity which hath not been commended to them by all foregoing Ages derived from the Apostles For Vincentius his Rule is to guide us all in this That is Catholick and consequently to be received which hath been held by all and in all churches and at all times V. Which puts me in mind of another thing to be briefly touched that the Ecclesiastical Tradition contained in the Confessions or Registers of particular Churches in these days wherein we live is not received by us nor allowed to have the same Authority which such Tradition had at the time of the Nicene Council for the conviction of Heresie The joynt consent I mean of so many Bishops as were there assembled and the unanimous Confessions of so many several Churches of several Provinces as were there delivered hath not
not tell how and when it came in yet it would be the wildest and most extravagant thing in the world to set up a pretended Demonstration of Reason against plain Experience and matter of Fact This is just Zeno's Demonstration of the impossibility of motion against Diogenes walking before his Eyes For this is to undertake to prove that impossible to have been which most certainly was Just thus the Servants in the Parable might have demonstrated that the Tares were Wheat because they were sure none but good seed was sown at first and no man could give any account of the punctual time when any Tares were sown or by whom and if an Enemy had come to do it he must needs have met with great resistance and opposition but no such resistance was made and therefore there could be no Tares in the field but that which they call'd Tares was certainly good wheat At the same rate a man might demonstrate that our King his Majesty of great Britain is not return'd into England nor restor'd to his Crown because there being so great and powerful an Army possess'd of his Lands and therefore oblidged by interest to keep him out it was impossible He should ever come in without a great deal of fighting and bloud shed but there was no such thing therefore he is not return'd and restor'd to his Crown And by the like kind of Demonstration one might prove that the Turk did not invade Christendom last year and besiege Vienna because if he had the most Christian King who had the greatest Army in Christendom in a readiness would certainly have imployed it against him but Monsieur Arnauld certainly knowes no such thing was done And therefore according to his way of Demonstration the matter of fact so commonly reported and believed concerning the Turks Invasion of Christendom and besieging Vienna last year was a perfect mistake But a man may demonstrate till his head and heart ake before he shall ever be able to prove that which certainly is or was never to have been For of all sorts of impossibles nothing is more evidently so then to make that which hath been not to have been All the reason in the world is too weak to cope with so tough and obstinate a difficulty And I have often wonder'd how a man of Monsieur Arnaulds great wit and sharp Judgement could prevail with himself to engage in so bad and baffled a cause or could think to defend it with so wooden a Dagger as his Demonstration of Reason against certain Experience and matter of Fact A thing if it be possible of equal absurdity with what he pretends to demonstrate Transubstantiation it self I proceed to the Third pretended Ground of this Doctrine of Transubstantiation and that is The Infallible Authority of the present Church to make and declare new Articles of Faith And this in truth is the ground into which the most of the Learned Men in their Church did heretofore and many do still resolve their belief of this Doctrine And as I have already shewn do plainly say that they see no sufficient reason either from Scripture or Tradition for the belief of it And that they should have believed the contrary had not the determination of the Church oblidged them otherwise But if this Doctrine be obtruded upon the world merely by vertue of the Authority of the Roman Church and the Declation of the Council under Pope Gregory the VII or of the Lateran Council under Innocent the III. then it is plain Innovation in the Christian Doctrine and a new Article of Faith impos'd upon the Christian World And if any Church hath this power the Christian Faith may be enlarged and changed as often as men please and that which is no part of our Saviour's Doctrine nay any thing though never so absurd and unreasonable may become an Article of Faith oblidging all Christians to the belief of it when ever the Church of Rome shall think fit to stamp her Authority upon it which would make Christianity a most uncertain and endless thing The Fourth pretended ground of this Doctrine is the necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive it But there is no colour for this if the thing be rightly consider'd Because the comfort and benefit of the Sacrament depends upon the blessing annexed to the Institution And as Water in Baptism without any substantial change made in that Element may by the Divine blessing accompanying the Institution be effectual to the washing away of Sin and Spiritual Regeneration So there can no reason in the world be given why the Elements of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper may not by the same Divine blessing accompanying this Institution make the worthy receivers partakers of all the Spiritual comfort and benefit designed to us thereby without any substantial change made in those Elements since our Lord hath told us that verily the flesh profiteth nothing So that if we could do so odd and strange a thing as to eat the very natural flesh and drink the bloud of our Lord I do not see of what greater advantage it would be to us then what we may have by partaking of the Symbols of his body and bloud as he hath appointed in remembrance of him For the spiritual efficacy of the Sacrament doth not depend upon the nature of the thing received supposing we receive what our Lord appointed and receive it with a right preparation and disposition of mind but upon the supernatural blessing that goes along with it and makes it effectual to those Spiritual ends for which it was appointed The Fifth and last pretended ground of this Doctrine is to magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle And this with great pride and pomp is often urg'd by them as a transcendent instance of the Divine Wisdom to find out so admirable a way to raise the power and reverence of the Priest that he should be able every day and as often as he pleases by repeating a few words to work so miraculous a change and as they love most absurdly and blasphemously to speak to make God himself But this is to pretend to a power above that of God himself for he did not nor cannot make himself nor do any thing that implies a contradiction as Transubstantiation evidently does in their pretending to make God For to make that which already is and to make that now which alwayes was is not only vain and trifling if it could be done but impossible because it implies a contradiction And what if after all Transubstantiation if it were possible and actually wrought by the Priest would yet be no Miracle For there are two things necessary to a Miracle that there be a supernatural effect wrought and that this effect be evident to sense So that though a supernatural effect be wrought yet if it be not evident â—o sense it
or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion then this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery then contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcilable Enemies to Popery as we are to Phanaticism and desire that all the World may know iâ— but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Phanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best Instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way then in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now J judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Dayes But I doubt whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has lest a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without the Information we receive by the Scripture I cannot Divine and yet we may as easily know that there is a Church as we can know which is the true Church without the Scripture For there is no other means of knowing either that there is a Church or what this Church is or what are the Properties of a True and Sound and Orthodox Church but by Revelation and we have no other Revelation of this but what is contained in the Holy Scriptures As for the Second That the Church is the means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures it is in some sense very true in some sense very false 1. It is in some sense true and acknowledged by all sober Protestants As 1. If by the Church we understand the Universal Church of all Ages as we receive the Scriptures themselves handed down by them to our time so what ever Doctrines of Faith have been universally received by them is one of the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture For the nearer they were to the times of the Apostles the more likely they were to understand the true sense of their Writings being instructed by the Apostles themselves in the meaning of them And thus we have a certain Rule to secure us from all dangerous Errors in expounding Scripture For the great and fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion are as plainly contained in the Writings of the first Fathers of the Church and as unanimously asserted by them as the Authority of the Scriptures themselves and therefore though we have not a Traditionary Exposition of every particular Text of Scripture yet we have of the great and fundamental Doctrines of Faith and therefore must never expound Scripture so as to contradict the known and avowed sense of the Catholick Church And this course the Church of England takes she receives the Definitions of the four first General Councils and requires her Bishops and Clorgy to Expound the Scriptures according to the profest Doctrines of those first and purest Ages of the Church 2. We ought to pay great deference to and not lightly and want only oppose the Judgement and Authority of the Particular Church wherein we live when her Expositions of Scripture do not evidently and notoriously contradict the sense of the Catholick church especially of the first and best Ages of it For it does not become private men to oppose their Sentiments and Opinions to the Judgement of the church unless in such plain cases as every honest man may be presumed a very competent Judge in the matter and no church nor all the churches in the World have such Authority that we must renounce our senses and deny the first principles of Reason to follow them with a blind and implicite Faith And thus the church that is the sense and Judgment of the catholick church is a means for the finding out the true sense of Scripture and though we may mistake the sense of some particular Texts which the Romanists themselves will not deny but that even infallible councils may do who tho' they are infallible in their conclusions yet are not alwayes so in the Arguments or Mediums whither drawn from Scripture or Reason whereby they prove them yet it is Morally impossible we should be guilty of any dangerous mistake while we make the catholick Doctrine of the church our Rule and in other matters follow the Judgment and submit to the Authority of the church wherein we live which is as absolutely necessary as Peace and Order and good Goverment in the church 2. But then this is very false if we mean that the church is the only means of finding out the true sense of the Scriptures on if by the church we understand any particular church as I suppose this Person does the Roman Catholick that is the particular universal church of Rome or if we mean the church of the present Age or by Means understand such a Decretory sentence as must determine our Faith and command out Assent that we must seek
Governed by Apostolical Men when we cannot reasonably suspect any Deviation from the Primitive Practice and this is the Rule which the Church of England owns in such matters and by which she rejects and confutes both the Innovations and corruptions of the Church of Rome and the wild pretences of Phanaticism So that we do in the most proper sense own the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best means for Expounding Scripture We do not leave every man to Expound Scripture by a private Spirit as our Adversaries of the Church of Rome reproach us we adhere to the ancient Catholick Church which the Church of Rome on one side and the Phanaticks on the other have forsaken And though we reject the new invention of an infallible Judge yet we are no Friends at all to Scepticism but can give a more Rational account of our Faith then the Church of Rome can Had we no other way of understanding the sense of Scripture but by Propriety of the Language and the Grammatical construction of the Words and the scope and design of the Texts their connexion and Dependence on what goes before and what follows and such like means as we use for the understanding any other Books of humane composition I doubt not but honest and diligent Inquirers might discover the true meaning of Scripture in all the great Articles of our Faith but yet this alone is a more uncertain way and lyable to the Abuses of Hereticks and Impostors The Socinians are a famous Example what Wit and Criticism will do to pervert the plainst Text and some other Sectaries are as plain a demonstration what wâ—rk Dullness and Stupidity and Enthusiasm will make with Scripture but when we have the practice of the Catholick Church and an ancient and venerable summary of the Christian Faith which has been the common Faith of Christians in all Ages to be our Rule in Expounding Scripture though we may after all mistake the sense of some particular Texts yet we cannot be guilty of any great and dangerous mistakes This use the Church of England makes of the Catholick Church in Expounding Scripture that she Religiously maintains the ancient Catholick Faith and will not suffer any man to Expound Scriptures in opposition to the ancient Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church But though the Belief and Practice of the Catholick Church be the best means of understanding the true sense of Scripture yet we cannot affirm this of any particular Church or of the Church of any particular Age excepting the Apostolick Age or those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles Notwithstanding this the Church of Rome may be no good Expositor of Scripture for the Church of Rome though she usurp the name of the Catholick Church as presuming her self to be the Head and Fountain of catholick Unity yet she is but a part of the catholick Church as the Church of England and the Churches of France aind Holland are and has no more right to impose her Expositions of Scripture upon other Churches then they have to impose upon her If there happen any controversie between them it is not the Authority of either Church can decide it but this must be done by an appeal to Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of it For when we say that the belief and Practice of the Catholick Church is the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture we do not mean that the Church is the Soveraign and absolute Judge of the sense of Scripture but the meaning is that those Churches which were founded by the Apostles and received the Faith immediately from them and were afterwards sor some Ages governed by Apostolical men or those who were taught by them and convers'd with them are the best Witnesses what the Doctrine of the Apostles was and therefore as far as we can be certain what the Faith of these Primitive Churches was they are the best Guides for the Expounding Scripture So that the Authority of the Church in Expounding Scripture being only the Authority of Witnesses it can reach no farther then those Ages which may reasonably be presumed to be Authentick and credible Witnesses of the Doctrines of the Apostles and therefore if we extend it to the four first general councils it is as far as we can do it with any pretence of Reason and thus far the Church of England owns the Authority of the Church and commands her Ministers to Expound the Scriptures according to the Catholick Faith owned and profess'd in those days but as for the later Ages of the church which were removed too far from the Apostles dayes to be Witnesses of their Doctrine they have no more Authority in this matter then we have at this day nor has one church any more Authority then another 3. And therefore if by the church being the means of knowing the sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures be understood the Judgment and Sentence and Decree of the church that we must seek no farther for the reason of our Faith then the infallible Authority of the church in Expounding Scripture this also is absolutely false and absurd This is more then Christ and his Apostles assumed to themselves while they were on Earth they were indeed infallible Interpreters of Scripture but yet they never bore down their Hearers meerly with their Authority but Expounded the Scriptures and applied ancient Prophesies to their Events and took the vail off of Moses's Face and shewed them the Gospel state concealed under those Types and Figures they confirmed their Expositions of Scripture by the force of Reason and appealed to the Judgments and consciences of their Hearers whither these things were not so Christ commands the Jews nor meerly to take his own word and to rely on his Authority for the truth of what he said but to study the Scriptures themselves and the Bereans are commended for this generous temper of mind that they were more noble then those of Thessalonica for they daily search'd the Scriptures to see whither the Doctrine the Apostles preach'd were to be found there or not Now I think no Church can pretend to be more infallible then Christ and his Apostles and therefore certainly ought not to assume more to themselves then they did and if the Church of Rome or any other Church will convince us of the truth of their Expositions of Scripture as Christ and his Apostles convinc'd their Hearers that is by enlightning our Understandings and convincing our Judgments by proper Arguments we will gladly learn of them This course the Primitive Christians took as is evident in all the Writings of the ancient Fathers against Jews and Hereticks they argue from the Scriptures themselves to prove what the sense of Scripture iâ— they appeal indeed sometimes to the sense of the Catholick Church not as an infallible Judge of Scripture but as the best Witnesses of the Apostolical Doctrine Thus
found there as the Churches infallibility is But however that be after all this boast of infallibility a Papist has no more infallible Foundation for his Faith then a Protestant has nor half so much We believe the Articles of the Christian Faith because we find them plainly taught in Scripture and universally received as the sense of Scripture by the Catholick church in the best and purest Ages of it A Papist believes the Church to be Infallible because he thinks he finds it in Scripture though the Catholick church for many Ages never found it there and the greatest part of the Christian church to this day cannot find it there Now if they will but allow that a Protestant though a poor fallible Creature may reason about the sense of Scripture as well as a Papist and that the Evidence of reason is the same to both then we Protestants stand upon as firm ground as the Papists here and are at least as certain of all those Doctrines of Faith which we find in the Scripture and are ready to prove by it as they are of their Churches infallibility but then we have an additional Security that we Expound the Scriptures right which they want and that is the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church which confirms all the Articles of our Faith and Rules of Worship and Discipline but gives not the least intimation that the Pope or Church of Rome was thought infallible by them and if the Primitive Church was ignorant of this which is the best witness of Apostolical Tradition it is most probable that no such thing is contained in Scripture though some mercenary Flatterers of the Pope have endeavoured to perswade the World that they found it there So that we have a greater assurance of all the Articles of our Religion from Scripture and Catholick Tradition then a Papist can have of the Churches Infallibility and yet he can have no greater assurance of any other Doctrines of Religion which he believes upon the Churches Infallibility then he has of Infallibility it self So that in the last Resolution of Faith the Protestant has much the advantage of the Papist for the Protestant resolves his Faith into the Authority of the Scriptures Expounded by the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church the Papist resolves his into the Infallibility of the Church which he finds out only by Expounding Scripture by a private Spirit without the Authority of any church but that whose Authority is under dispute And as the Doctrine of Infallibility is of no use in the last Resolution of Faith so it is wholly useless in disputing with such Hereticks as we are who deny Infallibility for it is a vain thing to attempt to impose any absurd or groundless and uncatholick Doctrines upon us by the Churches infallible Authority who believe there is no such infallible Judge but are resolved to trust our own Eyes and to adhere to Scripture and the Catholick Faith of the Primitive Church in these matters And therefore the great Advocats for the Church of Rome are forced to take the same course in confuting Heresies as they call them that we do They alledge the Authority of Scripture the Authority of Fathers and Councils to justifie their Innovations and here we willingl joyn issue with them and are ready to prove that Scripture and all true Antiquity is on our side and this has been often and unanswerably proved by the learned Patrons of the Reformation But there are some very material things to be observed from hence for our present purpose For either they think this a good way to prove what they intend and to convince Gain-sayers the Authority of Scripture and Primitive Antiquity or they do not If they do not think this a good way to what purpose are there so many Volumes of Controversie written Why do they produce Scripture and Fathers and Councils to justifie the Usâ—â—pations of their Church and those new Additions they have made to the Christian Faith and Worship If this be not a good way to convince a Heretick why do they give themselves and us such an impertinent trouble If this be a good way then we are in a good way already we take that very way for our satisfaction which by their own Confession and Practice is a very proper means for the conviction of Hereticks and to discover the Truth and after the most diligent inquiries we can make we are satisfied that the Truth is on our side If the Authority of Scripture signifie any thing in this matter then it seems Hereticks who reject â—he Authority of an Infallible Judge may understand Scripâ—ure without an Infallible Interpreter by the Exercise of Reason and Judgment in studying of them otherwise why do they pretend to expound Scripture to us and to convince us by Reason and Argument what the true sense of Scripture is If the Authority of the Primitive Church and first Christian Writers be considerable as they acknowledge it is by their appeals to them then at least the present Pope or Church is not the sole infallible Judge of controversies unless they will say that we must not Judge of the Doctrine or Practice of the Primitive Church by ancient records and then Baronius his Annals are worth nothing but by the Judgement and Practice of the present Church The sum is this There is great reason to suspect that the Church of Rome her self does not believe her own Infallibility no more than we Protestants do for if she does she ought not to suffer her Doctors to dispute with Hereticks from any other Topick but her own Authority when they vie Reasons and Arâ—uments with us and dispute from Scripture and Antiquity they appeal from the infallibility of the present church to every mans private Reason and Judgment as much as any Protestant does and if the Articles of the Christian Faith may be establish'd by Scripture and Antiquity without an infallible Judge as they suppose they may be by their frequent attempts to do it this plainly overthrows the necessity of an infallible Judge In a word not to take notice now how weak and groundless this pretence of Infallibility is it is evident that it is a very useless Doctrine for those who believe the churches Infallibility have no greater assurance of their Faith then we have who do not believe it and those who do not believe the churches Infallibility can never be confuted by it So that it can neither establish any mans Faith nor confute any Heresies that is it is of no use at all The Church of England Reverences the Authority of the Primitive Church as the best witness of the Apostolical Faith and practice but yet resolves her Faith at last into the Authority of the Scriptures She receives nothing for an Article of Faith which she does not find plainly enough taught in Scripture but it is a great confirmation of her interpretation of Scripture that the Primitive church owned the
lay so much stress upon it Bellar. Tom. 2. p. 286. if these are Innovations creept into their Church who was the first Author of them when did he begin in whose Reign and in what place did he live who did oppose him what company believ'd on him and what his new Opinions were as they instance in Arrianism and other Heresies And because they fancy we cannot make all these particulars so absolutely plain therefore they say we have falsely charged the Romish Church with new errours and that their Faith is truly ancient and by an uninterrupted Succession of Infallible Bishops hath been convey'd down from Christ and his Apostles in its full purity to this present Age. To satisfie their curiosity the defenders of the Reformation have done this but suppose they could not have been so particular about the birth of these new Errours or had made some mistakes in the compass of time yet however the charge of Innovation against the Romish Church stands firm and good upon these accounts 1. That Reformation carries not so much a respect to the Errour when it began as to the Errour it self Not whither it be sooner or later but whither it be an errour contrary to the true Christian Faith It may serve some honest purposes to know the who and the when the where and the how and other circumstances of its begining and proceeding but the necessity of Reformation springs from the nature of the Errour which came from the invention of men and not the Authority of Christ And matters not much whither Simon Magus who was contemporary with the Apostles was the first Author of it or Pope Hildebrâ—â—d at so great a distance 'T is enough that we are certain and sure that the Popish Doctrines which we condemn by comparing them with the Scriptures are not Christs and his Apostles have none of their Images or Superscriptions upon them who only had full Authority to make them current and true Articles of Faith They have indeed indeed Christianity among them but like Joseph's coat so dipt in blood so over-laced with Fopperies and undecent Ceremonies and so many new pieces stitch'd to the old Cloath that the old Fathers if alive would scarce know it to be the true Joseph's and would not trouble themselves so much to ask the time when this came to pass as lament the sadness of the change And the Apostles did not so much care to tell the punctual time to the Disciples when Antichrist should discover himself as to make them stand upon their guard to defend that Faith which he would invade where and whensoever he should come or whosoever he was 2. The difficuity of knowing the precise and punctual times when Errours first began In many sorts of Changes or Innovations 't is hard to know the nice time of their beginning but some latitude of Judging is allow'd and why not in things especially relating to Religion Are there not wild Opinions left upon Record among the Pagan Writers whose Authors are either unknown or which are fasely fathered upon others and as hard to be known as the head of Nile Can the nicest Romanist tell us what Rabbi and in what place and age first superinduc'd the several false Glosses and Senses to the Law of Moses yet our Saviour though he knew them well thought it sufficient to tell them that in the beginning it was not so and by comparing the Mosaick Religion it plainly appears they were new additions to the good old way And how many Errours sprung up in times of Christianity of whose Original and other Circumstances both the Romanists and our selves are yet uncertain And how many things of this nature more near our own times are we puzled about and the difficulty of knowing them ariseth principally from this twofold account 1. From the subtilty of the contrivers of Errours Which many times are the cunning and the wise in their Generation which the necessity of their cause requires Truth being strong and Errour nuturally weak and that slie deceiving Spirits lends it his utmost assistance to serve the design Such men know how to disguise new Falshoods in the old habits of Truth to make them look ancient and venerable they feel and know the temper of the age and fit their Opinions to the interest and pleasure of it They prepare their errours to be received by degrees and one part must draw on the other and the whoâ—e must be insâ—â—sibly swallowed down So it hapned in the adoration and invocation of Saints and Images and the whole structure of the Romish Religion which by severall steps and in many ages advanc'd to its mighty bulk The cunning knew the consequences of their own positions how far theâ— would reach which the vulgar eye discern'd not they well foresaw how their Hey and Stuble variety of Phrases and changes of Syllables would at â—ength fire the Foundation of Religion yet being invented at first by the Angelical Doctours and leaders of an Age for fame and reputation sake they their followers first defended them for bare Truths afterwards for Sacred and Fundamental ones and things at first only piously believed soon after have been adopted into a Creed and men of Rashness and Superstition only great in Place and Office have vented opinions whose fatal conclusions they at first we hope did not know yet the cunning many times have hatcht what they left and improv'd it fatally to Religion the greatness of the man whither an Innocent or an Hildebrand gave the errour its first reputation and the cunning of others its strength and argument Many of the great and knowing heads of the World being corrupted unto the Roman side to defend those errours which had got footing in the Church But how can we unlock the secret methods of Rome or describe the wayes and policies by which the mystery of Iniquity works Yet we are sure it 's carried on by the windings and turnings of the Serpent and men that he imploys upon design to ruin truth for when the Apostle describes the sad Apostacies and defections from the Faith they are said to be wrought by men of Skill Eph. 4. 14. and Art who lie in wait to deceive 2 From the Passions and Infirmities of other men These give the false and busie deceiver an easie Victory When Opinions are so contriv'd as to serve the designs of Pride and Covetousness Ambition and Lust and other Vices they easily pass for mighty Truths their Original is not enquir'd into the Judgment is brib'd and they bear the title of ancient and Primitive or what the deceiver pleaseth For these Passions have effeminated the mind made it soft and slugâ—ish and any bold errour shall slip down rather then be at the charge of a farther search and enquiry to know whither these things be so or no. The Roman Religion being so well cut out in its different Doctrines to hit mens Vices and Passions Gaiety or Melancholy Enthusiasm or Fury
agreed that whatsoever was delivered by CHRIST from GOD the Father or by the Apostles from CHRIST is to be embraced and firmly retained whither it be written or not written that makes no difference at all if we can be certain it came from Him or them For what is contained in the Holy Scripture hath not its Authority because it is written but because it came from GOD. If CHRIST said a thing it is enough we ought to submit unto it But we must first know that he said it and let the means of knowing it be what they will if we can certainly know He said it we yield to it But how we can be certain at this distance of time from his being in the World that any thing now pretending to it was said by CHRIST which is not recorded in the Holy Scriptures there is the business And it is a matter of such importance that it cannot be expected any man should be satisfied without very good evidence of it but he may very reasonably question whither many things be not falsely ascribed unto Him and unto his Apostles which never came from them Nay whither those things which are affirmed to be the Doctrines of the Primitive Church and of the whole Church be not of some later Original and of some particular Church or private Doctors in the Church unto whose Authority that Reverence is not due which ought to be paid and which we willingly give unto the former Now according to this state of the matter any good Christian among us who is desirous to know the Truth and to preserve himself from Errour may easily discern what Traditions ought to be received and held fast and what we are not bound unto without any alteration and what are not to be received at all but to be rejected and how far those things are from being credible which the Roman Church now would obtrude upon us under the name of Apostolical or ancient Traditions without any Authority from the Holy Scriptures or in truth any Authority but their own and some private Doctors whose Opinions cannot challenge an absolute submission to them But to give every one that would be rightly informed fuller satisfaction in this business I shall not content my self with this General Discourse but shall particularly and distinctly shew what Traditions we own and heartily receive and then what Traditions we cannot own but with good reason reâ—use These shall be the two Parts of this short Treatise wherein I shall endeavour that our people may be instructed not merely to reject Errours but also to affirm the Truth PART I. What Traditions we receive 1 AND in the first place we acknowledge that what is now Holy Scripture was once only Tradition properly so called that is Doctrine by word of mouth In this we all agree I say that the whole Gospel or Doctrine of CHRIST which is now upon record in those Books we call the Scriptures was once unwritten when it was first preached by our blessed Saviour and his Apostles Which must be noted to remove that small Objection with which they of the Roman Church are wont to trouble some peoples minds merely from the Name of Traditions which St. Paul in his Epistles requires those to whom he writes carefully to observe particularly in that famous place 1. Thess 2. 15. Where we find this Exhortation Therefore Brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whither by word or our Epistle Behold say they here are things not written but delivered by word of mouth which the Thessalonians are commanded to hold Very true should the people of our Church say to those that insist upon this but behold also we beseech you what the Traditions are of which the Apostle here writes and mark also when it was that theâ— were partly unwritten For the fiâ—st of these it is manifest that he means by Traditions the Doctrines which we now read in the holy Scriptures For the very first word therefore is an indication that this verse is an inference from what he had said in the foregoing Now the things he before treated of are the grand Doctrines of the Gospel or the way of Salvation revealed unto us by Christ Jesus from God the Father who hath from the begining saith he v. 13 14. chosen you to Salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth whereunto he hath called you c. This is the sum of the Gospell and whatsoever he had delivered unto them about these matters of their Sanctification or of their Faith or of their Salvation by obtaining the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ to which they were chosen and called through their Sanctification and Faith this he exhorts them to hold fast whither it was contained in this Epistle or in his former preaching for he had not occasion now to write all that he had formerly delivered by word of mouth Which afterward was put in writing for mark which is the second thing the time when some things remained unwritten which was When this Epistle was sent to the Thessalonians Then some things concerning their salvatâ—on were not contained in this Letter but as yet delivered only by word of mouth unto this Church I say to this Church for it doth not follow that all Churches whatsoever were at the time of the writing of this Epistle without the Doctrine of the Gospel compleatly written because among the Thessalonians some Traditious or Doctrines were as yet unwritten Which can in reason be extended no farther then to themselves and to this Epistle which did contain all the Evangelical Doctrine though other writings which it is possible were then extant in some other Churches did And I say as yet unwritten in that Church because the Thessalonians no doubt had afterward more communicated to them in writing besides this Epistle or the former either viz. all the Gospels and the Acts of Apostles and other Apostolical Epistles which we now enjâ—y Which Writings we may be confident contain the Traditions which the Apostle had delivered to the Thessalonians by Word concerning the Incarnation Birth Life Miracles Death Resurrection and Ascension of our blessed Saviour and concerning the coming of the holy Ghost and the mission of the Apostles and all the rest which is there recorded for our everlasting instruction And therefore it is in vain to argue from this place that there are still at this day some unwriten Traditions which we are to follow unless the Apostle had said Hold the Traditions which ye have been taught by word which shall never be written And it is in vain for us to inquire after any such Traditions or rely upon them when they are offered unto us unless we were sure that there was something necessary to our Salvation delivered in their Sermons which was never to be delivered in writting and unless we know where to find it as certainly as we do that which they have committed to writing And
now such a force to induce belief as it had then The reason of which is given by the same Vicentius who so highly commends that way which was then taken of reproving Heresie but adds this most wise Caution in the last Chapter but one of the first part of his commonitorium But you must not think that all Heresies and all wayes are thus to be opposed but only new and fresh Heresies when they first rise up that is before they have falsified the Rules of the ancient Faith c. As for inveterate Heresies which have spred themselves they are in no wise to be assaulted this way because in a long tract of time many opportunities may have presented themselves to Hereticks of stealing Truth out of the ancient Records and of corrupting the Volumes of our Ancestors Which if it be applied to the present state of things it is evident the Roman Church hath had such opportunities of falsifying Antiquity ever since the first acknowledgment of the Papal Supremacy that we cannot rely merely upon any written Testimonies or unwritten Traditions which never so great a number of their Bishops met together shall produce which amount not to so much as one legal Testimony but they are to be look'd upon or suspected as a multitude of false Witnesses conspiring together in their own cause How then may some say can Heresies of long standing be confuted The same Vincentius resolves us in this in the very next words We may convince them if need be by the sole authority of the Scriptures or eschew them as already convicted and condemned in ancient times by the general Councils of Catholick Priests The Tradition which is found there must direct all future councils not the Opinions of their present churches IV. I will adde but one thing more which is That the Tradition called Oral because it comes by word of mouth from one Age to another without any written Record is the most uncertain and can be least relied upon of all other This hath been demonstrated so fully by the Writers of our Church and there are such pregnant instances of the errours into which men have been led by it that it needs no long discourse Two instances of it are very common and I shall adde a third 1. The first is that which Papias who lived presently after the Apostles times and conversed with those who had seen them set on foot His way was as Eusebius relates out of his Works not so much to read as to enquire of the Elders what Saint Andrew or Saint Peter said what was the Saying of Saint Thomas Saint James and the rest of the Disciples of our LORD And he pretended that some of them told him among other things that after the resurrection of our Bodies we shall reign a thousand years here upon Earth which he gathered saith Eusebius from some Saying of the Apostles wrong understood But this Fancy was embraced very greedily and was taught for two whole Ages as an Apostolical Tradition no body opposing it and yet having nothing to say for it but only the antiquitie of the man as Eusebius his words are L. 3. cap. ult who delivered it to them yet this Tradition hath been generally since taken for an imposture and teaches us no more then this That if one man could set a going such a Doctrine and make it pass so current for so long a time upon no other pretence then that an Apostle said so in private discourse we have great reason to think that other Traditions have had no better beginning or not so good especially since they never so universally prevailed as that did 2. A second instance is that famous contention about the observation of Easter which miserably afflicted the Church in the dayes of Victòr Bishop of Ròme by dividing the Eastern Christians from the Western One pretending Tradition from Saint Jòhn and Saint Philip the other from Saint Peter and Saint Paul Concerning which I will not say as Rigaltius doth in his sharp note upon the words of Firmilian who pretended Tradition for the rebaptizing of Hereticks That under the Names and Persons of great men there were sottish and sophistical things delivered for Apostolical Traditions by Fools and Sophisters But this I affirm that there are many more instances of mens forwardness and they neither Fools nor Sophisters but onely wedded to the Opinions of their own Churches to obtrude things as Apostolical for which they had no proof at all For when they knew not how to defend themselves presently they flew to Tradition Apostolical 3. A third instance of whose uncertainty we have in Irenaeus L. 2. c. 39. concerning the age of our blessed Saviour when he died which he confidently affirms to have been forty if not fifty years and saith the Elders which knew St. John and were his Scholar◠received this relation from him And yet all agree that he beginning to preach at thirtie years of age was crucified about three years and an half after The like relation Clement makes of his preaching but one year which he calls a secret Tradition from the Apostles but hath no more truth in it then the other Now if in the first Ages when they were so near the fountain and beginning of Tradition men were deceived nay such great men as these were deceived and led others into errours in these matters we cannot with any safety trust to Traditions that have passed men pretend from one to another until now but we can find no mention of in any Writer till some Ages after the Apostles and then were by some body or other who had authority in those dayes called Apostolical Traditions merely to gain them the more credit Thus Andreas Caesariensis in his commentaries upon the Book of Revelation p. 743. Saith that the coming of Enoch and Elias before the second coming of Christ though it be not found in Scripture was a constant report received by Tradition without any variation from the Teachers of the Church Which is sufficient to shew how ready they were to father their own private Opinions upon ancient universal Tradition and how little reason we have to trust to that which was so uncertain even in the first Ages and therefore must needs be more dubious now Thus I have endeavoured to lay before the eyes of those who will be pleased to look over this short Treatise what they are to think and speak about Tradition It is a calumny to affirm that the Church of England rejects all Tradition and I hope none of her true Children are so ignorant as when they hear that word to imagine they must rise up and oppose it No the Scripture it self is a Tradition and we admit all other Traditions which are subordinate and agreeable unto that together with all those things which can be proved to be Apostolical by the general Testimony of the Church in all Ages nay if any thing not contained in Scripture which the Roman Church now
Testament expresly told what this Idolatry is which supposes that we must learn what it is from some antecedent Laws and there were no such Laws in being but the Laws of Moses The only thing that can be said in this case is that the Apostle refers them not to any written Law but to the natural notions of Idolatry but with what reason this is said will soon appear if we consider to whom the Apostle writes and they were but Jewish and Heathen Converts As for the Heathens they had corrupted all their natural notions of Idolatry and had no sense at all of this sin till they were converted to Christianity and therefore they were not likely to understand the true notion of Idolatry without being taught it and it is not probable the Apostles would leave them to guess what Idolatry is As for the Jews God would not from the beginning trust to their natural notions but gave them express Laws about Idolatry which though they are the same Laws which natural reason dictates to us as most agreeable to the nature and worship of God yet since the experience of the world which was over-run by Idolatrous worship sufficiently prove that all men do not use their reason aright in these matters God would not trust to the use of their reason in the weighty concernments of his own worship and glory but gives them an express positive Law about it and Christ and his Apostles having done nothing to repeal this Law they leave them under the authority of it and when they warn them against Idols and Idolatry without giving them any new Laws about it must in all reason be presumed to refer them to those Laws which they already had SECT V. 4. AS a farther proof of this I observe that Christ and his Apostles did not abrogate but only complete and perfect the Mosaical Laws Our Saviour with great zeal and earnestness disowns any such intention or design Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil plerosai to fill it up by fulfilling the types and prophecies 5. Mat. 17. of it by exchanging a ceremonial for a real righteousness or by perfecting its moral precepts with new instances and degrees of vertue And therefore he adds For verily I say unto you Till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled And St. Paul who was lookt on by the believing Jews as a great enemy to the Law of Moses does renounce all such pretences Do we then make void the Acts 21. 21. 22. Rom 3. 31. Law through Faith God forbid yea we establish the Law Indeed had Christ or his Apostles attempted to have given any new Laws contrary to the Laws of Moses it had justified the Jews in their unbelief for God by his Prophet Isaiah had given this express rule to examine all new Doctrines by To the law and the testimony if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them and that Isai 8. 20. Christ himself is not excepted from this rule appears in this that this is joyned with the prophecie of the Messias both before and after as you may see in Isai 8 13. 14. and Ch. 9. 6. 7. and therefore Christ his Apostles alwayes make their appeals to the writings of the Old Testament and St. Paul in all his disputes with the Jews urges them with no other authority but the Scriptures and thö the Miracles which were wrought by the Apostles did move the Jews to hearken to them and greatly dispose them to believe their Doctrine yet it was the authority of the Scriptures whereon their Faith was founded As S. Peter tels those to whom he wrote that though they preach'd nothing to them concerning the coming of Christ but what they were eye-witnesses of and though God had given testimony to him by a voice from Heaven which they heard when they were with him in the holy Mount yet he adds We have also a more sure word of prophecie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as to a light Pet. 1. 16. 7. 18. 19. that shineth in a dark place untill the day dawn and the day-star arise in your hearts That is the Scriptures of the Old Testament and therefore the Jews of Berea are greatly commended for their diligence in searching the Scriptures and examining St. Pauls Doctrine by them and this is assigned Acts 17. 10. 11. as the reasons why many of them believed To apply this then to our present purpose I observe 1. That if Christ did not make any new Laws in contradiction to the Law of Moses then he could make no alteration in the object of Religious Worship He could not introduce the worship of Saints and Angels without contradicting that Law which commands us to worship no other Beeing but the one Supreme God For the worship of Saints and Angels together with the Supreme God is a direct contradiction to that Law which commands us to worship God alone though we should suppose that in the nature of the thing the worship of Saints and Angels were consistent with the worship of the Supreme God yet it is not consistent with that Law which commands us to worship none but God So that let this be a natural or positive Law or whatever men please to call it it is a very plain and express Law and Christ never did contradict any express Law of God It is true that Typical and Ceremonial Worship which God commanded the Jews to observe is now out of date under the Gospel and does no longer oblidge Christians but the reason of that is because it has received its accomplishment and perfection in Christ Christ has perfected the Jewish Sacrifices and put an end to them by offering a more perfect and meritorious sacrifice even the sacrifice of himself The Circumcision washings Purifications of the Law are perfected by the Laws of internal purity The external Ceremonies of the Law cease but they are perfected by an Evangelical righteousness But this I say that Christ never repealed any Mosaical Law but by fulfilling and perfecting it He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil Now methinks I need not prove that the worship of Sainâ—s and Angels is not a fulfilling but a destroying that Law which commands us to worship none but God And it is not enough to say that these are positive Laws given to the Jews though that be said without any reason for let them shew me any positive Law relating to the worship of GOD which Christ has wholly abrogated without fulfilling it 2. Yet as a farther proof that Christ has made no alteration in the object of our worship that he has not introduced the worship of Saints or Angels or Images into the Christian Church which was so expresly forbid by the Jewish Law I observe
this was not done why we are not directed to pray to Saints and Angels and Images c. but the argument lies in this that there can be no alteration made in the object of worship without an express Law and therefore there is no alteration made because there is no such Law in the Gospel The Jews were expresly commanded to worship no other Beeing but the Lord Jehovah as I have already proved which Law appropriates all the acts of Religious worship to one God and therefore all those who were under the obligation of this Law as to be sure all natural Jews were could not without the guilt of Idolatry give any Religious worship to any other Beeing till this Law were expresly repeated and express leave given to worship some other Divine Beeings besides the Supreme God so that at least our Saviour himself while he was on Earth and subject to the Law and his Apostles and all believing Jews were oblidged by this Law to worship none but God unless we can shew where Christ by his Legislative Authority or his Apostles by Commission from him have expresly repealed this Law nay indeed unless we can shew that Christ himself repealed this Law and taught the worship of Saints and Angels Mat. 28. 20 the Apostles themselves could have no authority to do it for their Commission was only to teach what Christ had commanded them which though it does not extend to matters of order and discipline and the external circumstances of worship yet it does as to all essentials of Faith and worship and I think the right object of Worship is the most essential thing in Religious Worship From hence it appears that at least all the Jewish Christians in the Apostles dayes and all succeeding Ages to this day cannot worship Saints and Angels without Idolatry because the Law which was given to them and never yet repealed commands them to worship none but God and if Gentile Converts were received into the Jewish Christian Church and Christ has but one Church of Jews and Gentiles they must also be oblidged by all those Laws which were then and are still obligatory to all believing Jews and therefore Gentile as well as Jewish Christians are still bound to worship none but God Now I think I need not prove that an express Law can be repealed onely by an express Law That Law which commands us to worship God and him only must continue in full force till GOD do as expresly declare that he allows us to pay some degree of Religious Worship to other Beeings besides himself When a Law-giver has declared his will and pleasure by a Law it is not fit that Subjects should be allowed to guess at his mind and dispute away an express Law by some surmises and consequences how probable soever they may appear for at this rate a Law signifies nothing if we may guess at the will of our Law-giver without and against an express Law And yet none of the Advocates of the Church of Rome though they are not usually guilty of too much modesty ever had the confidence to pretend an express Law for the worship of Saints and Angels and Images c. and though they sometimes alledge Scripture to prove this by yet they do not pretend that they are direct proofs but only attempt to prove some other Doctrines from Scripture from which they think they may prove by some probable consequences that which the Scripture no where plainly teaches nay the contrary to which is expresly taught in the Scripture And if this may be allow'd I know no law of God so plain and express but a witty man may find wayes to escape the obligation of it This is a consideration of great moment and therefore I shall discourse more particularly of it The Law of Moses expresly commands us to worship GOD and him only Our Saviour Christ owns and confirms the authority of this Law in the Gospel the Church of Rome notwithstanding this Law gives Religious Worship to Creatures the question then is how she avoids the force of this Law since it is no where expresly repealed and she does not pretend that it is Now the Patrons of Creature-worship thinks to justifie themselves from the breach of this Law these three ways 1. By consequences drawn as they pretend from other scripture-Scripture-Doctrines 2. By distinctions And 3. By authority Let us then examine whither all this have any force against an express Law which was never expresly repealed 1. By consequences drawn as they pretend from other scripture-Scripture-Doctrines and I shall discourse this with a particular reference to the Invocation of Saints For when they would prove the lawfulness of praying to Saints they alledge no direct proof of this from Scriptureâ— but because they must make a shew of saying something from Scripture when they are to deal with such Hereticks as will be satisfied with no less authority they endeavour to prove something else from Scripture from whence they think by an easie consequence they can prove the lawfulness of praying to Saints Thus they very easily prove that we may and ought to pray for one another and to desire each others prayers while we are on Earth and from hence they presently conclude that we may as lawfully pray to Saints in Heaven to pray for us as beg and desire their prayers while they are one Earth And to confirm this they endeavour to prove that some extraordinary Saints whose merits are very great do directly ascend up into Heaven unto the immediate presence of God and a participation of his Glory and hence they conclude that they have authority and power to help us and to intercede for us and that they are so far advanced above us in this mortal state that they deserve some kind of Religious Honour and Worship from us as being Dii per participationem Gods by participation that is by partaking in the Divine Nature and Glory by their advancement to Heaven And if after all this they can prove that the Saints in Heaven do pray and intercede for us on Earth they think the demonstration is complete and perfect that therefore * Bonum atque utile esse suppliciter Sanctos invocare ad beneficia impetranda a Deo per filium ej us Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum qui solus noster Redemptor Salvator est ad eorum orationes opem auxlium que confugere Conc. Trin. 16. 25. de Invocat It is good and profitable as the Council of Trent words it huâ—bly to invock the Saints after the manner of Suplicants and to â—â—y to their prayers and help and aid to obtain blessings of God by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord who is our only not Intercessor and Advocate but Redeemer and Saviour Now how they prove all this is not my business at present to enquire but my inquiry is whither such arguments as these be sufficient to oppose against the authority of an express Law and if
penalties then of temporal death and Eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of so false a Doctrine and to lay open the monstruous absurdity of it And in the handling of this Argument I shall proceed in this plain method I. I shall consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine II. I shall produce our Objections against it And if I can shew that there is no tollerable ground for it and that there are invincible Objections against it then every man is not only in reason excused from believing this Doctrine but hath great cause to believe the contrary FIRST I will consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine Which must be one or more of these five Either 1. The Authority of scripture Or 2ly The perpetual belief of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an belief of of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an evidence that they alwayes understood and interpreted our Saviour's words This is my body in this sense Or 3ly The authority of the present Church to make and declare new articles of Faith Or 4ly The absolute necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive this Sacrament Or 5 ly To magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle 1. They pretend for this Doctrine the Authority of Scripture in those words of our Saviour This is my Body Now to shew the insufficiency of this pretence I shall endeavour to make good these two things 1. That there is no necessity of understanding those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation 2. That there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise First That there is no necessity to understand those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation If there be any it must be from one of these two reasons Either because there are no figurative expressions in Scripture which I think no man ever yet said or else because a Sacrament admits of no figures which would be very absurd for any man to say since it is of the very nature of a Sacrament to represent and exhibit some invisible grace and benefit by an outward sign and figure And especially since it cannot be denied but that in the institution of this very Sacrament our Saviour useth figurative exressions and several words which cannot be taken strictly and literally When he gave the Cup he said This Cup is the new Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you and for many for the remission of Sins Where first the Cup is put for Wine contained in the Cup or else if the words be literally taken so as to signifie a substantial change it is not of the Wine but of the Cup and that not into the bloud of Christ but into the new Testament or new Covenant in his bloud Besides that his bloud is said then to be shed and his body to be broken which was not till his Passion which followed the Institution and first celebration of this Sacrament But that there is no necessity to understand our Saviour's words in the sense of Transubstantiation I will take the plain concession of a great number of the most learned Writters of the Church of Rome in this Controversie a de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. Bellarmine b in 3. dis 49. Qu. 75. Sect. 2. Suarez and c in 3. part dis 150. Qu. 75. art 2. c. 15. Vasquez do acknowledge Scotus the great Scholman to have said that this Doctrine cannot be evidently proved from Scripture And Bellarmine grants this not to be improbable and Suarez and Vasquez acknowledge d in sent l. 4. dist 11. qu. 1. n. 15 Durandus to have said as much e in 4. sent Q. 5. quod 4. q. 3. Ocham another famous schoolman sayes expresly that the Doctrine which holds the substance of the Bread and Wine to remain after the consecration is neither repugnant to Reason nor to Scripture f in 4 sent Q 6. art 2. Petrus ab Alliaâ—â— Cardinal of Cambray say plainly that the Doctrine of the substance of Bread and Wine remaining after Consecration is more free from absurdity more rational and no wayes repugnant to the authority of scripture nay more that for the other Doctrine viz. of Transubstantiation there is no evidence in scripture g in canon Miss Lect. 40. Gabriel Biel another Schoolman and Divine of their Church freely declares that as to any thing express'd in the Canon of the scripture a man may believe that the substance of Bread and Wine doth remain after Consecration and therefore he resolves the belief of Transubstantiation in to some other Revelation besides scripture which he supposeth the Church had about it Cardinal h in Aquin 3. part Qu. 74 art 1. Cajetan confesseth that the Gospel doth no where express that the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ that we have this from the authority of the Church nay he goes farther that there is nothing in the Gospel which enforceth any man to understand these words of Christ this is my body in a proper and not a metaphorical sense but the Church having understood them in a proper sense they are to be so explained Which words in the Roman Edition of Cajetan are expunged by order of Pope i Aegid â—â—nink de sacrâ—â—â— Q. 75. art 1. n. 13. Pius V. Cardinal k de sacram l. 2. c. 3. Contarenus and l Loc. Theolog l. 3. c. 3. Melchior Canus one of the best most judicious Writers that Church ever had reckon this Doctrine among those which are not so expresly found in scripture I will add but one more of great authority in the Church and a reputed Martyr m contra captiv Babylon c. 10 n. 2. Fisher Bishop of Rochester who ingenuously confesseth that in the words of the Institution there is not one word from whence the true presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in our Mass can be proved So that we need not much contend that this Doctrine hath no certain foundation in Scripture when this is so fully and frankly acknowledged by our Adversaries themselves Secondly If there be no necessity of understanding our Saviours words in the sense of Transubstantiation I am sure there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise Whither we consider the like expressions in scripture where our Saviour sayes he is the door and the true Viue which the Church of Rome would mightily have triumph'd in had it been said this is my true Body And so likewise where the Church is said to be Christ's body and the Rock which followed the Israelites to be Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. They drank of that Rock which followed them and that Rock was
Palaestinians Egyptians Thebaeans Libyans Mesopotamians a Persiaâ— a Socrat. â— Hâ—l c. 8. p. 19. Scythian Bishop and many others from other Countries But there was but one Bishop for Africa one for Spain one for Gaul two Priests as Deputies of the infirm and Aged Bishop of Rome Whilst for Instance sake there were seventeen Bishops for the small Province of * V. Concil Labb Tom. 2. p. 50. c. Isauria yet such Councils are very useful such we reverence but God did not set them up as the only and the infallible Guides of Faith If there were such Guides what Guided the Church which was before them By what rule was Ebion judged before the Council of Nice How can we be infallibly Guided by them in Controversies of Faith not determined by them nay not brought before them nay scarce moved till these latter dayes Such for the purpose are the Controversies about the vertue of the Sacrifice of Christ and of Justification by the Faith of meere recumbence upon his Merits Or how shall a private Man who erres in the Faith be delivered from his Heresy seing he may die some years ere a Council can assemble or being assembled can form its decrees Arius vented his Heresie about ten years before the Council of Nice was called for the suppressing of it And soon after he had given vent to it it spread throughout Egypt and Lybia and the upper Thebes as Socrates †has reported And in a short time many other Provinces and Cities were Socr. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 6. p. 9. infected with the contagion of it And in the pretended Council of Trent no less then five Popes were successively concerned and it lasted in several places longer then two legal lives of a Man * From A. 1545. to A. 1563. There was indeed a Canon in the Western Church †V. Council Const sess 39. for the holding of a Council once in the space of each ten years But that Canon has not been hitherto obeyed and as affairs stand in the Church it is impracticable For the Pope will exclude all the Greek and Reformed Bishops He will crowd the Assembly with Bishops of his own Creation and with Abbots also he will not admit of former Councils unless they serve his purpose not so much as that of Nice it self * V. Greg. magn Ep. 6. 31. Leo. 1. Ep. 53. Gelas 1. Ep. 13. He will be the Judge though about his own Supremacy He will multiply Italians and others who upon Oath †Concil Labb Tom. 10. p. 23. 379. Pontific Roman owe their votes to him He will not hold a Council upon the terms approved by all Romish Princes Nor did they agree at their last Council the Emperour would noâ— send his Bishops to Bologna nor the French King his to Tren ' And though the French Church believed the Doctrines of that Synod yet they did not receive them from the Authority of it but they embraced them as the former Doctrines of the Roman Church And the Parisian ' Faculty a A. D. 1542 in coll Soâ—b See Richer H. conc general vol. 4. p. 162 163. c. prepared the way to the Articles of Trent Notwithstanding all this we firmly believe that at least the first four general Councils did not err in Faith and it is pious to think that God would not suffer so great a temptation in the Church on Earth Yet still we believe those Councils not to be infallible in their constitution but so far as they followed an infallible rule For the greaâ—est Truth is not alwayes with the greatest number And great numbers may appear on contrary sides The Council of Constantinople under Constantine Copronymus consisting of three hundred thirty eight Bishops decreed against the use of Images in Churches Yet the 2d Synod of Nice consisting of about three hundred and fifty Bishops determin'd for it And a while after in the West the council of Frankford consisting of about three hundred Bishops reversed that decree And after that the council of Trent did re-establish it though there the voting Persons were not fifty With such uncertain doubts of belief must they move who follow a Guide in Religion without reference to a farther rule But here there is offered to us by the Guide in Controversiâ—â— * an Objection of which this is the sum The fifth Canon of the Church of England does declare Object R. H. Annot. on D. Stil Answer p. 82 83. that the thirty nine Articles were agreed upon for the avoidance of the diversities of opinions and the establishing of consent touching true Religion Consent touching true Religion is consent in Matters of Faith Establishing of consent relateth both to Layety and Clergy The third and fourth Canons of 1640. Decree the Excommunication of those who will not-abjure their holding Popery and Socinianism The Reformed Churches in France teach the like Doctrine threatning to cut them off from the Church who acquiesce not in the resolution of a National Synod ‡ Art 31. ch 5 du consisâ—â—ire si un ou plusieurs c. The same course was taken with the Remonstrants in the Synod of Dort * Syn. Dord sess 138. Wherefore Protestants ought not to detract from the Authority of general Councils whilst they assume to themselves so great a Power in their particular Synods The force of this Objection is thus removed Answer Every Church hath Power of admitting or excluding Members else it hath not means sufficient to its end the order and concord of its Body Every particular Church ought to believe that it does not erre in its deflnitions for it ought not to impose any known error upon its Members But though it believes it does not erre it does not believe it upon this reason because God hath made it an infallible Guide but rather for this because it hath sincerely and with Gods assistance followeth a rule which is infallible And upon this supposition it imposeth Doctrines and excludeth such as with coâ—umacy dissent from them a See Artic. 20. 21 22. 4. This Guide is not the present Church declaring to particular Christians the sense of the church of former Ages How can this declaration be made seing Churches differ and each Church calls it self the true one and pretendeth to the Primitive pattern The Church of Rome hath on her side the suffrages of all the Councils and Fathers the first the middle the last if Campiain the Jesuite may be believed b camp Rat. 3. p. 180. Rat. 5. p. 185. On the other hand Monsieur Larroque hath Written a Book of the confirmity of the Protestant churches in France with the Discipline of the Christian Ancient church taking it for granted that their Doctrine was catholick And we likewise pretend both to the Doctrine and Discipline of it All of us cannot be in the right The Roman church without any proof calleth her self the church catholick and she pretendeth to
plain a case as Heresie if our Church thinketh a private Man may without an infallible Guide on Earth judge aright of it it does but believe as Pope Adrian believed as he professed in a Synod of Rome of which profession report is made in the 2d Synod of Nice †Syn. Nic. 2. art 7 sec vers Anastasii Licet enim Honorio post mortem anathema sit dictum ab Orientalibus sciendum tamen est quia fuerat super haeresi accusatus propter quam solam licitum est minoribus majorum suorum moribus resistendi vel pravos sensus libere respuendi c. For speaking of the Sentence against Pope Honorius he excuseth it in point of good behaviour because it was given in the case of Heresie For in that case and that case alone he allowed Inferiors so he was pleased to call the Oriental Bishops to reject the corrupt sense of those who are superiour to them I will hasten to the next Proposition after I have added one thing more which relates to the guidance of Ecclesiastical Authority And it is this Those of the unlearned Laity who are Members of the Church of England have much more of the just guidance of Ecclesiastical Authority than the like order of Men in the Church of Rome For the Authentick Books of that Church being all written in the Latin Tongue the illiterate People resolve their Faith into the ability and honesty of their Confessor or Parish Priest They take it upon his word that this is the Doctrine this the Discipline this the Worship of their Church Whereas each Minister in our Church can direct the People to the Holy Bible to the Books of Homilies Articles Canons Common-Prayer Ordination as set forth in their native Tongue by publick Authority Of this they may be assured by their own Eyes as many as can but competently read They do not only take this from the mouth of a Priest but from the Church it self Where the Laws of the Church and the Statutes of the Civil Government are written in an unknown Tongue there the Unlearned depend more upon private than publick Authority for they receive the Law from particular Priests or Judges Though Ecclesiastical Authority be a help to our Prop. VI. Faith yet the Holy Scripture is the only infallible Rule of it and by this Rule and the Ministeral Aids of the Christian Church we have sufficient means without Submission to papal Infallability to attain to certainty in that Faith which is generally necessary to Salvation I do not mean that by believing the whole Canon of the Scripture in the gross we thereby believe all the necessary Articles of the Faith because they are therein contained That looks too like a fallacy and it giveth countenance to an useless Faith For he that believes on this manner hath as it were swallow'd a Creed in the lump only whereas it is necessary for a Christian to know each particular Article and the general Nature Tendency of it Otherwise his Faith will not have a distinct influence upon his Christian behaviour to which if it were not useful it were not necessary To believe in general as the Scripture believes is with the Blind and Flexible Faith of a Romanist to believe at adventure He believes as his Church believes but he knows not what is the belief of his Church and therefore is not instructed by that Faith to behave himself as a Member of it The Scripture is that rule of Faith which giveth us all the particular Articles which are necessary to eternal Life By this rule the Primitive Fathers govern'd themselves and this they commended to the Churches And Clemens Alexandrinus a Cl. Alex. Strom. 2. Kanon Ekklesiastikos he Synodia c. Strom. 7 Alethon kai pseudon kriterion does in terms call the Consent of the Old and New Testament the Ecclesiastical Canon and the Touch-stone of true and false I will not multiply Testimonies enough of them are already collected b V. Davenant de Judice normā fidei c. 12. p. 53. c. D. Till Rule of Faith part 4. sect 2. p. 320. c. I will rather pursue the Argument before me in these three Assertions First a Protestant without the submission of his Judgement to the Roman Church may be certainly directed to the Canonical Books of Holy Scripture Secondly He may without such submission sufficiently understand the Rule of Faith and find out the Sense of such places in those Canonical Books as is necessary to the belief of a true Christian Thirdly This rule of Faith is the principal means of Union in Faith in the Christian Church First a Protestant without the submission of his Assert I. Judgement to the Roman Church may be certainly directed to the Holy Scriptures It is commonly said by Men of the Roman perswasion but injudiciously enough that we may as well receive our Creed from them as we do our Bible The Scribes and Pharisees might have said the like to the People of the Jews But with the good Text they conveighed down to them a very false gloss and misinterpreted the Prophesies as meant of a pompous temporal Messiah But for the Reformed they have received neither Creed nor Bible from the Church of Rome The first enumeration of those Books they find in the Apostolical Canons and in those of the Council of Laodecea no Westren writings They have received the Scriptures from the Universal Church of all Ages and Places the Copies of them having been as widely dispersed as the Christians themselves And they receive them not from the infallibility of any particular Church but upon the validity of this sure principle that all the Christian World so widely dispersed could not possibly conspire in the imposing of false Books upon them For particular Churches we may of all others suspect the Roman in reference to the Scriptures For what sincerity of dealing may we hope for from such a Cabal of Men as has forged decrees of Councils and Popes obtruded upon the World Apocryphal Books as Books Canonical purged out of the writings of the Fathers such places as were contrary to their Innovations depressed the Originals under an imperfect Latin Copy and left on purpose in that Copy some places uncorrected for the serving of turns For example sake they have not either in the Bible of Sintus or in that of Clement both which though in War against each other are made their Canon changed the word She in the third of Genesis a Gen. 3. 15. for That or He. But contrary to the Hebrew Text to the Translation of the Seventy to the Readings of the Fathers They persist in rendring of it after this manner She shall break thy Head They believe this Reading tendeth most to the Honour of the blessed Virgin whom they are too much inclined to exalt in the Quality of a Mother above her Son The English Translation of Doway hath followed this plain
Tertulliâ—â— argues against Hereticks in his Book De Praescriplionibus â—â—t when they reason about the sense of Scripture they never direct us to any infallible Judge but use such Arguments as they think proper to convince Gain-sayers Nay this is the way which was observed in all the Ancient Councils the Bishops of the church met together for common counsel and advice and in matters of Discipline and Government which were subject to their Authority they considered what was ' most for the publick benefit of the church and determined them by their Authority not as infallible Judges but as Supreme Governours of the church In the disputes of Faith they reason from Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not from their own Authority and what upon a serious debate and inquiry they found to be most agreeable to the sense of Scripture and the Doctrine of the church of former Ages that they determined and decreed to be received in all churches as the catholick Faith That this is so is evident from all the Histories of the most Ancient and celebrated councils which any man may consult who pleases Now I would ask some few Questions about this matter 1. Whither-these councils took a sure and safe way to find out Truth If they did not what reason have we to believe that they determined right If they did then we may use the same way which they did for that which is a good way in one Age is so in another and then there is no necessity of an Infallible Judge to find out the sense of Scripture because we have other certain wayes of doing this the same which all the ancient Councils observed 2. I would know whither it be not sufficient for every Christian to receive the Decrees and Determinations of these councils upon the same Reason and Authority which moved the Fathers assembled in council to make these Decrees Whither for instance we must not believe the Eternal God-head of Christ and that he is of the same substance with his Fatherâ— for the same Reasons for which the Nicene Fathers believed this and required all christians to believe it If we must then Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not the Authority of a general council or any Infallible Judge is the Reason of our Faith For the Nicene Fathers who were the first that met in a General council could not believe this upon the Authority of any other General council much less upon their own Authority unless we will say that they first Decreed this then believed it because they themselves Decreed it If Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church antecedently to the determinations of a General council or any other pretended Infallible Judge be not a sufficient foundation for our Faith then the whole christian World before the council of Nice which was the first general council had no sufficient Foundation for their Faith for there was no particular Bishop or church in those dayes which pretended to be the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures We Protestants have the same way to understand the Scriptures have the same Reason and Foundation of our Faith which the Nicene Fathers themselves had or which any christan could have before there was any general council and if the church of Rome do not think this enough we cannot help that we are abundantly satisfied with it The Authority of a general council in those dayes was deservedly sacred and venerable not as an infallible Judge which they never pretended to but as the most certain means they could possibly have to understand what was and in all Ages had been the received Doctrine of the catholick church They met together not to make new Articles of Faith which no council in the World ever had any Authority to do but to declare what was the truly ancient and. Apostolick Faith and to put it into such words as might plainly express the catholick sense and meet with the distempers of that Age. For this end Grave and Reverend Bishops assembled from all parts of the christian World not meerly to give their private Opinions of things but to Declare what was the received Doctrine oâ— those churches over which they presided and I know no better Argument of an Apostolick Tradition then the consent of all churches as remote from each other as East and West which were planted by several Apostles and differed very much from each other in some External Rites and Usages but yet all agreed in the same Faith And this is the true Authority of those ancient councils that they were most likely to understand the true sense of Scripture and of the Catholick Church This is the Protestant Resolution of Faith and the Nicene Fathers themselves had no other way nor pretended to any other Nay the church of Rome her self as much as she talks of Infallibility makes very little use of it She has never given us an infallible comment on Scripture but suffers her Doctors to write as fallible comments and in many things as contrary to each other as any Protestant Divines do And I cannot imagine what good Infallibility does if an infallible Church has no better means of understanding Scripture then the comments of fallible men that is no better means then every fallible Church has for no man can understand the Scripture ever the better for the Churches being infallible unless this infallible Church improve this glorious Talent of Infallibility in Expounding Scripture which she has not done to this day and I believe never will Indeed it is apparent that infallibility as it is pretended to by the church of Rome can be of no use either in the Refolution of Faith or in confuting Hereticks who deny this Infallibility and then I cannot imagine what it is good for but to multiply Disputes instead of ending them As for the Resolution of Faith suppose I ask a Papist why he believes such Articles as the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the dead to be contained in Scripture If he answer as he must do Because he is taught so by the church which is infallible my next Question is How he knows the Church to be infallible If he says he learns this from Scripture I ask him how he comes to understand the Scripture and how he knows that this is the sense of it If he know this by the infallible interpretation of the church then he runs round in a circle and knows the Scripture by the church and the church by the Scripture as I observed before if he can find out the Churches infallibility by the Scripture without the help of an infallible Judge then it seems the Scripture is to be understood without the infallible interpretation of the Church and if men can find out infallibility in Scripture without the Church I am confident they may find out any thing else in Scripture as well without the Churches infallibility For there iâ— no Article of our creed so hard to be
but had great numbers of Disciples a visible Society of Christians who followed their Judgements Some of these sadly bewailed the degenerate state of the Roman church others petitioned for and advised not only the correction of the abuses of good Doctrines and innocent Institutions but the Reformation of gross Errours and scandalous Additions to the christian Faith and others in great Authority promised an amendement and to reduce the whole frame of christianity to its Primitive sense Model And the famous council of Trent was promis'd and begun to rectifie Errours and Abuses creept into the Romish Faith and Government yet after a long Sitting it fatally concluded confirming those corruptions which was hop'd after so many complaints and addresses with strong reasons for them should have been throughly redrest and reform'd The Original of their barbarous Inquisition will be a standing record of the frequent and stout oppositions that were made against the Romish Innovation in the christian Faith And so long as the Blood of the numerous Albigenses and Waldenses cryes to Heaven for Vengeance against the Papal cruelty we have a cloud of Witnesses for this Truth who resisted unto Death the new Doctrines of Rome The carriage of old Wicliff and his Followers tells us plainly in story that the corruptions of Rome had no such quiet possession but ever and anone some or other inconsiderable numbers did endeavour to eject them out of their hold though they paid dear for it And so long as the Treachery of their council of Constance about the safe conduct granted to poor Huss and his Disciples in number above forty thousand remains upon record never to be forgotten or forgiven so long we have clear evidences of strong resistance made to the Romish Religion before the times of Luther And in most Countries and times where and when the Romish corruptions began from small and obscure beginings to be gross and plain some or other in greater or lesser numbers began to Renounce and Protest against them What though some of these early Reformers might hold some erroneous Opinions which we our selves condemn yet however they opposed the Romish Church in her corruptions and these tended to a Reformation which was compleated only by degrâ—eâ—â— and 't is no wonder some Stumbled in such a night of Ignorance And have not the Agents of Rome destroyed the Papers and Records disguis'd their Adversaries and falsify'd their Opinions to serve the power and Interest of their great Mistriss They therefore branded the Waldenses with the name of Manichaism and that they affirmed two Principles or Originals of all things because they asserted that the Emperour was independent of the Pope and that they denyed CHRIST to be the Son of GOD because they could not believe a crust of Bread to be CHRIST And they have fram'd as lewd stories against many excellent Men of the latâ—r Ages who withstood the approaches of their Doctrine and Government which we certainly know and the more ingenuous among them confess to be notoriously false Though we have reason to believe because of the severity and industry of the Romish Factors ever warm against those who opposed her Practises a great number of Honest and Learned Men as those Ages would afford are buried in obscurity and their names unknown there being an Expurgatorian Index for the merits of such Men as well as Books and Editions yet we have a sufficient Catalogue of them who kept up the Title and claim of old Christianity would not suffer their new Errors to plead prescription 2. By shewing what Errours and Mistakes are included in the Question 1. That these new Errors of Rome are absolutely necessary to the being of a Christian Church For though we believe all that Christ and his Apostles taught all things that are contain'd in the Holy Scriptures all things that undoubted Tradition or good Reason proves to drive themselves from both or either yet because we do not assent and Subscribe to the new Articles of Faith that Rome hath invented for us we cease to be a Christian Church are mark'd for Hereticks which are worse than Pagans with them and must be certainly damn'd Nay should we embrace all the other Doctrines of Rome and deny only the Popes Authority and Supremacy that Epitome of their Christianity it would avail us little we are Heathens still Should we reject but one Article of Pope Pius's Creed suppose the Doctrine of Purgatory or Merit yet because this questions Infallibility the centâ—e of all their Religion we are in the state of Damnation still Should we receive their Doctrines as probable and in a larger and more favâ—urable meaning yet because we do not entertain them as Articles of Faith in the sense of the Church our case is not mended we shall meeâ— with Fires here and hereafâ—er for our reward Should we wink and swallow them all down with a good Catholick stomach yet iâ— the Bishop of Rome should give out a new Edition of Faith enlarged with many more monstrous Doctrines and Opinions yet if we boggle and kick at them all our former Righteousness shall not not be remembred we are Apostates worse than Truks and Infidels and who can tell what this Infallible and powerful Guide of â—â—â—â—stendom will do For when things obscure or of an indifferent Nature when things wherein they differ among themselves and only serve a temporal Interest when Opinions which they can dispense withal upon occasion when only the modes and manner of Truth when Contradictories and Doctrines directly leading unto impiety and things Barbarous and Blasphemous have been christened Articles of Faith and Fundamentals of Religion have we not just reason to suspect as ill or worsé may be done again And the intrigues of Trent may be acted once more and as many new Articles of Faith as Titular Bishops by the same Spirit moving in the same manner were not the first and early Christians sound Members of Christs Body though they never thought of such wild Opinions as these and publish'd truths directly contrary to them And could I suppose them to have known these Innovations out of Zeal and Fidelity to their trust would have detested and abhor'd them Was Christ negligent in the discharge of his mighty Office and his Apostles defective in their Duties and Ministry not to acquaint the first Christians with these great truths and were they reveal'd in the Tridentine Council only to us upon whom the ends of the world are come These Primitive Disciples of Christ thought themselves secure of Heaven by this short Creed that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God And the contrary was the character of the Man of Sin that denied that Jesus was come in the Flesh that he was the God incarnate and the true Messiah and were scandalized at his meanness and obscurity S. Paul told the Jaylor that certainly he would be saved if he believed that Jesus was the Christ all other Fundamentals of Christianity one
it is to no more purpose to shew us the word Tradition in other places of St. Paul's Writings particularly in the third Chapter of the same Epistle v. 6. where by Tradition St Chrysâ—ston understands the Apostles Example which he had given them and so it follows v. 7. For your selves know how you ought to follow us c or it may refer to the commandment he had given them in his former Epistle 4. 11. which the Reader may be pleased to compare with this but cannot with any colour be expounded to signifie any Doctrine of Faith about which the Roman Church now contends with us For it is plain it hath respect to their good manners and orderly living for the information of which we need go no where but to the holy Scriptures wherein we are taught full enough how we ought to walk and please GOD in all things The same may be said of that place 1 Cor. 11. 2. Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Traditions or Ordinances as we render it or Precepts as the vulgar Latine it self hath it as I have delivered them unto you For we are so observant of what he hath delivered that we are confident if Saint Paul were now alive and in this Church he would praise us as he doth the Corinthians for keeping the Traditions as be delivered them and on the contrary reprove and condemn the Roman Church for not keeping them as they were first delivered And we have good ground for this confidence there being an instance in that very Chapter which demonstrates our fidelity in preserving the very first Traditions and their unfaithfulness in letting them go For he tells us v. 23. that he had delivered to them what he had received of the Lord and that which he received and delivered was about the whole Communion as you may read there and in the following verses 24 25. in both kinds the Cup as well as the Bread Thus he saith the Lord appointed it and thus he delivered it and this Tradition we keep intire as he received it of the Lord and delivered it to his Church in this Epistle which is a part of the holy Scripture whereas they do not keep it but have broken this Divine Tradition and give the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood otherwise than St. Paul delivered keeping the Cup from the People By which I desire all that love the Lord Jesus in sincerity to judge which Church keeps closest to the Apostolical Tradition foâ— so St. Paul calls this Doctrine of the Communion in both kinds that which he delivered or left as a Tradition with them they that stick to what is unquestionably the Apostolical Doctrine or they that leave it to follow those Doctrines or Presumptions rather which at the best are very dubious and uncertain And farther I desire all that read this Paper to consider whither it be reasonable to think that those Riâ—es which have no Authority in the holy Scripture but were instituted perhaps by the Apostles have been kept pure and uncorrupâ—ed according to their first intention when these sacred Rites for instance the holy Eâ—charist are not preserved intire which are manifestly ordained in the holy Writings And so much may serve for the first thing for it would be too long to explain all the rest of the places of holy Scripâ—ure which they are wont to alledge though the word Tradition be not mentioned in them to give a colour to their present pretences how pertinently may be judged by these places now considered II. Secondly then That Word of God which was once unwritten being now written we acknowledge our selves to be much indebted to the Church of God in all foregoing Ages which hath preserved the Scriptures and delivered them down to us as his Word which we ought to do unto those that shall succeed us as our Church teacheth us in its Twentieth Article where the Church is affirmed to be a Witness and a keeper of holy Writ This Tradition we own it being universal continued uninterrupted and undenied Though in truth this is Tradition in another sense of the word not signifying the Doctrine delivered unto us but the manner and means of its delivery And therefore if any Member of our Church be pressed by those of the Romish Perswasion with this Argument for their present Traditions that Scripture it self is come to us by Tradition let them answer thus Very right it is so and we thank God for it therefore let this be no part of our dispute it being a thing presupposed in all Discourses about Religion a thing agreed among all Christian people that we read the Word of GOD when we read the holy Scriptures Which being delivered to us and accepted by us as his Word we see no necessity of any other Tradition or Doctrine which is not to be found there or cannot be proved from thence for they tell us they are able to make even the men of God wise unto Salvation And if they press you again and say How do you know that some Books are Canonical and others not is it not by a constant Tradition Answer them again in this manner Yes this is true also and would to GOD you would stand to this universal Tradition and receive no other Books but what have been so delivered But know withal that this universal Tradition of the Books of Scripture unto which you have added several Apocryphal Writings which have not been constantly delivered as tâ—â—se we receive is no part of the Tradition or Doctrine delivered That is no Doctrine distinct from the Scriptures but only the instrument or means of conveying that Doctrine unto us In short it is the fidelity of the Church with whom the Canon of Scripture was deposed but is no more a Doctrine not written in the Scripture then the Tradition or delivery of the Code or Book of the Civil Law is any Opinion or Law not written in that Code And we are more assured of the fidelity of the Church herein then the Civilians can be assured of the Faithfulness of their Predecessours in preserving and delivering the Books of their Law to them because these holy Books were alwayes kept with a greater care then any other Books whatsoever and in the acceptance of them also we find there was a great caution used that they might not be deceived all Christians looking upon them to be of such importance that all Religion they thought was concerned in them Of which this is an Argument that they who sought to destroy the Christian Religion in the Primitive times sought nothing more then to destroy the Bible Which they were wont to demand of those who were suspected to be Christians to be delivered up to them that they might burn it And according as men behaved themselves in this trial so they were reputed to be Christians or not Christians And the Traditours as they were called that is they who delivered
so far from having any true authority that counterâ—eit Testimonies and forged Writings have been their great Supporters Besides the plain drist of them which is not to make all men better but to make same richer and the manifest danger men are in by many of them to be drawn away from GOD to put their trust and confidence in Creatures As might be shewn if this Paper would contain it in their Doctrines of Papal Supremacy Purgatory Invocation of Saints Image Worship and diverse others Concerening which we say as Saint Cyprian doth to Pompeius about another maâ—ter If it be commanded in the Gospels or in the Epistles of the Apostles or in their Acts that they should not be baptized who return from any Heresie but only be received by imposition of hanâ—s LET THIS DIVINE and HOLY TRADITION BE OBSERVED The same say we if there be any thing in the Gosples in the Epistles in the Acts concerning Invocations of Saints concerning the praying Souls out of Purgatory c. Let that divine that holy Tradition be observed But if it be not there What obstinacy is this as it follows a little after in that Epist l. 24. what presumption to prefer human Tradition before the Divine Disposition or Ordinance A great deal more there is in that place and in others of that holy Martyr to bring all to the source the root the original of the Divine Tradition for then human errours ceases which original Tradition he affirms to be what is delivered in the holy Scriptures which delivering to us the whole Will of GOD concerning us we look after no other Tradition but what explains and confirms and is consonant to this For we believe that what is delivered to us by the Scriptures what is delivered by true Tradition are but two several waves of bringing us acquainted with the same Christian Truth not with different parts of that Truth And so I have done with the first thing the sum of which is this We do not receive any Tradition or Doctrine to supply the defect of the Scripture in some necessary Article of Faith which Doctrines they of Rome pretend to have one and the same Author with the Scripture viz. God and therefore to be received with the same pious affection and reverence But cannot tell us where we may find them how we shall discern true from false nor give us any assurance of their Truth but we must take them purely upon their word Now how little reason we have to trust to that will appear in the second thing I have to adde which is this 11. That we dare not receive any thing whatsoever merely upon the Credit of the Roman Church no not that divine that holy Tradition before spoken of viz. the Scripture Which we do not believe onely upon their testimony both because they are but a part of the Church and therefore not the sole Keepers of Divine Truth and they are a corrupted part who have not approved themselves faithful in the keeping what was committed to them Let our People diligently mark this That Traditions never were nor are now onely in the keeping of the Roman Church and that these things are widely different the Tradition of the whole Church or of the greatest and best part of it and the Tradition of one part of the Church and the least part of it and the worst part also and most depraved What is warranted by the Authority of the whole Church I have shewn before we reverently receive but we cannot take that for current Tradition which is warranted only by a small part of the Church and we give very little credit to what is warranted only by that part of it which is Roman Because 1. First This Church hath not preserved so carefully as other Churches have done the first and orginal Tradition which is in the Scriptures but suffered them to be shamefully corrupted Every one knows that there is a Latin Vulgar Edition of the Bible which they of that Church prefer before the Original none of which they preserved heretofore from manifest depravations nor have been able since they were told of the faults to purge away so as to canonize any Edition without permitting great numbers in their newest and most approved Bibles Isidore Clarius in his Preface to his Edition complains that he foâ—nd these holy Writings defaced with innumerable errours Eight thousand of which that he thought most material he saith he amended and yet left he knew not how many lesser ones untouched After which the Council of Trent having vouched this Vulgar Latine Edition for the onely authentick Pope Sixtus the Fifth published out of the several Copies that were abroad one which he straightly charged to be received as the onely true Vulgar from which none should dare to vary in a tittle And yet two years were scarce passed before Clement the Eight found many defects and corruptions still remaining in that Edition and therefore published another with the very same charge that none else should be received Which evidently shews they have suffered the holy Books to be so fouly abused that they know not how to amend the errours that are crept into them nor can tell which is the true Bible For these two Bibles thus equally authorized as the onely authentick ones abound not only with manifest diversities but with contradictions or contrarieties one to the other Whereby all Romanists are reduced to this miserable necessity either to make use of no Bible at all or to fall under the curse of Sixtus if he make use of that of Clement or the curse of Clement if he use the Bible of Sixtus For they are both of them enjoyned with the exclusion of all other Editions and with the penalty of a Curse upon them who disobey the one or the other and it is impossible to obey both This might be sufficient to demonstrate how unfaithful that Church hath been in the weightiest concerns Whereby all the Members of are plunged beyond all power of redemption into a dismal necessity either of laying a side the Scriptures or of offending against the sacred Decrees as they account them of one or other of the heads of their Church which some take to be infallible and being accursed of them 2 But for every one 's fuller satisfaction it may be fit farther to represent how negligent they have been in preserving other Traditions which were certainly once in the Church but now utterly lost There is no question to be made but the Apostles taught the first Christians the meaning of those hard places which we find in their and other holy Writings But who can tell us where to find certainly so much as one of them And therefore where is the fidelity of this Church which boasts so much to be the Keeper of sacred Traditions For nothing is more desirable then these Apostolical Interpretations of Scripture nothing could be more useful and yet we have no hope to meet with them
either there or indeed any where else Which is no reproach to other Churches who do not pretend to more then is written but reflâ—cts much upon them and discredits them who challeng the power of the whole Church intirely and would pass not onely for the sole Keepers and Witnesses of Divine Truth but for careful preservers of it For of what should they have been more careful then of these useful things whereof they can tell us nothing when of unprofitable Ceremonies they have most devoutly kept if we could believe them a very great number 3. They tell us indeed of some doctrinal Traditions also which they have religiously preserved but mark I beseech you with what sincerity For to justifie these they have forged great numbers of Writings and Books under the name of such Authors aâ— it is evident had no hand in them which is another reason why we cannot give credit to their reports if we have no other authority There are very few persons now that are ignorant how many Decretal Epistles of the ancient Bishops of Rome have been devised to establish the Papal Empire and how shamefully a Donation of Constantine hath been pretended wherein he gave away the Roman Empire and all its Rights to the Pope Which puts me in mind as a notorious proof of this of the Forgeries that are in the Breviary it self where we read of Constantine's Leprosie and the cure of it by Sylvester's baptizing him which are egregious Fables and of the Decrees of the second Roman Synod under that Pope Sylvester wherein the Breviary affirms Photinus was condemned when all the world knows that Photinus his Heresie did not spring up till diverse years after the death of Sylvester And there are so many other Arguments which prove the Decrees of that Synod to be a vile forgery that we may see by the way what reason they have to keep their Liturgy in an unknown Language least the people perceiving what untruths they are taught instead of God's Word should abhor that Divine Service as justly they might which is stuffed with so many Fables It would be endless to shew how many passages they have foisted into ancient Writers to countenance their Traditions particularly about the Papal Supremacy by which so great a man as Thomas Aquinas was deceived who frequently quotes Authorities which are mere Forgeries though not invented by him I verily think but imposed upon him by the fraud which had been long practised in that Church For we find that the Canons of so famous and universally known Council as that of the first at Nice have been falsely alledged even by Popes themselves Boniface for instance and Zosimus alledged a counterfeit Nicene Canon to the African Bishops in the sixth Council of Carthage who to convince the false dealing of these Popes sought out with great labour and diligence the ancient and authentick Copies of the Nicene Canons and having obtained them both from Alexandria and from Constantinople they found them for number and for sense to be the very same which themselves already had but not one word in them of what the Popes pretended The same I might say of Pope Innocent and others whom I purposely omit because I study brevity 4. And have this farther to adde that as they have pretended Tradition where there is none so where there is they have left that Tradition and therefore have no reason to expect that we should be governed by them in this matter who take the liberty to neglect as they please better Tradition then they would impose upon us None are to be charged with this if it be a guilt more then themselves For instance the three Immersions i. e. dipping the Persons three times in Baptism was certainly an ancient practice and said by many Authors to be an Apostolical Tradition and to be ordained in signification of the blessed Trinity into whose name they were baptized And yet there is no such thing now in use in their Church no more then in ours who justifie our selves as I shewed above by a true opinion that Rites and Ceremonies are not unâ—lterable which it is impossible for them to do unless they will cease to press the necessity of other Traditions upon us which never were so generally received as this which is now abolished To which may be added the custome of giving the Eucharist to Infants which prevailed for several Ages and is called by St. Austin an Apostolical Tradition the custome of administring Baptism onely at Easter and Whitsontide with a great heap more which would be too long to enumerate Nor it is necessary I should trouble the Reader with them these being sufficient to shew the partiality of that Church in this matter and that we have no reason to be tied to that merely upon their Authority which they will not observe though having a far greater Nay all discreet persons may easily see what a wide difference there is between them who have abrogated such Traditions as had long gone even in their Church under the name of Apostolical and us who therefore do not follow pretended Traditions now because we believe them not to be Apostolical but merely Roman He is strangely blind who doth not see how much more sincere this Church is then that in this regard 5. Besides this we can demonstrate that as in these things they have forsaken Traditions so in other cases they have perverted and abused them turning them into quite another thing As appears to all that understand any thing of ancient Learning in the business of Purgatory which none of the most ancient Writers so much as dream'd to be such a place as they have now devised but only asserted a Purgatory-Fire through which all both good and bad even the blessed Virgin her self must pass at the great and dreadful day of Judgement This was the old Tradition as we may call it which was among Christians which they have changed into such a Tradition as was among the Pagans 6. But it is time to have done with this else I should have insisted upon this a while which I touched before and is of great moment That the Tradition which now runs in that Church is contrary to the certain Tradition of the Apostles and the universal Church particularly in the Canon of Scripture In which no more Books have been numbered by the Catholick Church in all Ages since the Apostles time then are in the VI. Article of Religion in the Church of England till the late council of Trent took the boldness to thrust the Apoeryphal Books into the holy Canon as nothing inferiour to the acknowledged Divine Writings This hath been so evidently demonstrated by a late Reverend Prelate of our Church in his Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scriptures out of undoubted Records that no fair answer can be made to it But I must leave a little room for other things that ought to be noted III. And the next is a consequence
in a different manner according to the condition of those they had to do with or the temper of him that managed them yet they must needs seem more or less grievous to all when power sufficient was not left to the greatest Monarchs to defend themselves or protect their Subjects preserve the peace or promote the welfare and provide for the security of their own Countries Then no marvel if some of them grow weary of so insupportable oppressions and at last take courage to grapple with and extricate themselves from such manifest encroachments upon their own and the Peoples Civil Rights as well as the Ecclesiastical of the Church in their Dominions and be forced to some harsh and almost violent methods when the more gentle and benign could prevail nothing 3. But beside these more publick Invasions upon Church and State that which made the usurpation more odious and insufferable was the farther abuse of the same extravagant power to bring in strange and dangerous Doctrines corrupt and unlawfull practices into the Church and impose them upon all in their Communion exactly fitted to feed their Ambition enrich their Coffers secure their Authority and promote their ease and Luxury Such of the first sort are their Doctrine of Transubstantiation and Purgatory of Merit and Supererogation the multiplicity of Vows and delusions in the Principles of Repentance and ministration of Penance Of the latter sort are the Invocation of Saints and Angels Adoration of Reliques and Images their half Communion the Scripture lock'd up and Divine Service performed in an unknown tongue c. These and diverse like them have proved great Scandals abroad and stumbling blocks at home and whatever varnish they may put upon them by the fairest pretences or however they may cast a mist before the eyes of their Disciples by nice distinctions yet they have so disfigured the face of Christianity that he who compares the late appearances of it in the world with the model of it laid down in Scripture or the Records of the Primitive Church can hardly believe it the same thing But the particulars are not here to be disputed they have sufficiently been confuted and exposed by Protestant Writers and were by several before excepted against and disclaimed though some suffered severely for so doing and many more we may suppose waited an opportunity to free themselves from their pressure That which I am now most to insist upon is this that if the charge we draw up against these of falshood in judgment gross Superstition or Idolatry in Worship and immorality in manners be true and impartial as we have been ever ready to make good and shall do against all the Artifices of the Defendants Then no Authority whatever regularly founded or unexceptionably conveyed can oblidge us to these against the revealed Will or Word of God the Dictates of our Consciences as we hope carefully and righty informed the sense and reason of mankind and the Belief and practice of the Church in the first and purest Ages Greater cause was there to endeavour by all lawful means to throw off such an usurped power that made so ill use of what it had unjustly gotten and to restore Religion to its primitive beauty in Doctrine Worship and Precepts of Life But alas many difficulties lay in the way of its accomplishment and all possible struglings and contentions by force and policy were used by the adverse Party to prevent its beginning or obstruct it Progress Great was their Interest in every place Strong was the influence they had upon persons in Authority Numerous were their Assistants and Dependants at home and abroad Weighty was their concern which lay at stake and many were the advantages which they had of any that opposed them So that no wonder if a Reformation so long wish'd for and much wanted were so slowly effected It is rather more strange that in so many places it did master these and such like incumbrances and in so short a time made so considerable a progress If in some places it proceeded with less Order Uniformity and calmness then could have been wish'd for in a Religious Reformation Necessity in part with many perplexed difficulties and incumbrances may in some measure excuse what no Law before hand fully warrants IV. But leaving others to answer for themselves in my next particular I am to consider how regularly and sedately it proceeded in the church of England within the bounds of catholick Unity 1. With the concurrence and encouragement all along of the Supreme Power to free it from any but suspicion of Rebellion So it began at first with the breaking of the Papal yoke of Supremacy the Translation of the Bible and some like preparatives to Reformation under Henry the Eight and the united Suffrages of his Parliaments and the Bishops themselves therein It proceeded suitably to a further improvement in most particulars under his Son Edward the Sixth And at last it came to its full settlement and establishment under Queen Elizabeth The beginning and carrying on of the Reformation here was by such loyalty of Principles and Practices that we challenge any Church in the World to a Comparison therein Indeed this was so notorious that her Roman Adversares have turned her Glory into a Reproach by upbraiding her though most invidiously with the name of a Parliamentary Religion because it received all along so much countenance and assistance from those great Assemblies of all the three Estates of the Kingdom under their Head and Soveriagn 2. But farther to clear her of all just imputation from hence it must be added that the whole work was carried on with the advice and mature deliberation of the Clergy assembled in Convocation representing the intire body of them and therein a National Council That they from their Education and presumed Knowledge as well as from their Office and Ecclesiastical Authority are ordinarily fittest to judge debate and determine of Religious matters will be soon granted But that the civil Power may and ought sometimes to remind them of their Duty and restrain them from gross Defections from it may be proved by several Scripture Examples in the Old Testament and the Supereminence of their place But happy is that Order and Unity in which both Powers are joyned together for the service of GOD the security of his Church and promotion of his true Religion as it was here though it could not be expected but the first attempts would meet with several difficulties fierce Debates and Controversies yet still the entire establishment was ratified by the regular determination of the Clergy so assembled as before as well as was after confirmed by the Royal Assent 3 Yet farther to justifie themselves from any affected innovation in such a change all was done with the greatest Reverence Respect and Deference to the Ancient Church to clear their continued Unity therewith 1. In Doctrine The ancient Creeds were taken for the foundation of its Confession the four
or thing make the same inclosures about the Catholick as about the Roman Church and are as free in their severest censures of all others and as haughty in what they assume to themselves alone as they were though not proceeding upon the same grounds But what that holy Father every where presseth upon them reacheth as nearly our Antagonists the indispensable necessity of Charity that great bond of Unity in the Church and principal evidence of the Divine Spirit which animates the whole without which the highest gifts and most Sacred Ministrations are rendered ineffectual This is one of the prime characteristick notes of the true Catholick Church and every living Member thereof and nothing is more opposit to their Principles and Practices who have formally excluded all other christians and churches from any share therein not only those in the West that have deservedly cast off that Power which they had unjustly arrogated and tyrannical exercised but also the Greeks and others in the East that never owned any subjection to them But most securely may the Church of England glory in true Catholicism which to all her other priviledges and advantages that she may boast of above almost any other Church still maintains and evidences the greatest charity to others of any that I know in the world makes no other inclosures then those which GOD himself hath made not assuming any Authority to command yea or to pass hasty judgment upon any but only to provide for her own the best she can and with such tender regard to common Christianity and the Rights of all other Churches that she seems designedly to have chalk'd out the way of restoring the most desirable â—â—uits of Christian Unity throughout the whole Church and we should have been sensible of considerable effects by it had other Churches pursued like methods That Church sure is most Catholick that makes provision for the most Catholick Communion Peace and Unity and which imposes no other terms or conditions of it but those most universally received throughout all Ages in all places and by almost all Christians which may soon decide the competition whither the Church of England more truely vindicates to her self a part of the Catholick Church or they of Rome arrogate to themselves the whole Or which are the Schismaticks from it they which exclude none whom they own no power over but invite all to them and joyn with any in what is good and agreeable to the Institutions of our common LORD or they who shut out all but those who will subject themselves to their usurp'd Authority and most unjustfiable Impositions a Firmilianus de Stephano Episcopo Rom. ad Cyprianum Ep. 7â— p. 228. Ox. Ed. Siquidem ille vere Schismaticus qui se a Communione Ecclesiasticae unitatis Apostatam fecerit dum enim putas omnes a te abstineri posse solum te ab omnibus abstinuisli Farther the term Catholick is sometimes taken for Orthodox and so the Catholick Church interpreted for that which holds the Catholick Faith opposed to heretical Opinions and Doctrines as well as to Schismatical Separations b S. Cyril Hieros Cat. 18. p. 2. Catholike men â—â—â— kaletai dia to kata pases einai tes oihoumenes apo peraton ges heos peraton kai dia to didaskein catholikes kai anellei pos hapanta ta cis guosin anthropon elthein ophelonta dogmata Sozomen Hist L. 7. c. 4. In this sense the Church of England hath as good a claim in the Catholick Church as any whatever Receiving all the Articles of Christian Faith delivered in Scripture and received in the Primitive Ages for more than five hundred years No Principles having been so formally declared then and for some time after as the catholick Faith of all christians and as such necessary to be own'd which she rejects whatever private opinions there might be then among some eminent Doctors of the Church in which they oft differed one from the other or although there might be some observances then generally received which she thinks her self not bound to retain But ill will this charecter agree to the Romanists who have added so many new dangerous Articles to the common Faith of Christians not only beside the original Rule which they cannot but own with us but too often against it and the professed belief of the first and best Ages of the church Wherefore we reject not these Innovations meerly from negative arguments because not sufficiently proved and yet that way of arguing hath been alwayes allowed in the Fundamentals of Faith which must be grounded upon express Divine Authority and Testimony But we lay the greatest stress of our aversations to them upon that direct opposition which we undertake to prove most of them have to the common Faith and revealed Will of GOD which they and we both own And surely that Church in this acceptation is most Catholick that relies on such Catholick Principles and refers all others to be examined by this touchstone V. But in the fifth place some Objections lie in our way fit to be answered Object 1. They urge against us that we reject several Doctrines since formally determined in the Church by the known and received Authority thereof in Councils more general or particular which they pretend were believed through all Ages but then established when they came first to be called in question Answ We are not much concerned in the first part of the objection though very many exceptions might come in especially as to the formality and regularity of those Councils but as to the latter part in which the main stress lies here we never refused a fair trial thereof 1. From Scripture against which no Authority Civil or Ecclesiastical in single persons or the greatest Assemblies no time or custome of whatever date can prescribe a Tertullian de velandis virginibus c. 1. p. 172. hoc exigere veritatem cui nemo prescribere potest non spatium temporum non patrocinia personarum non privilegium regionum S. Cyprian Ep. 63. p. 155. Quare si solus Christus audiendus est non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putaverit sed quid qui ante omnes est Chriflus prior fecit neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem S. Basil de judicio Dei T. 2 p. 392. ejus moral T. 2. p. 423. S. Hierom. adv Joh. Hieros T. 2. p. 185. in eodem T. ex Ep. Aug. ad Hierom. p. 353. 359 c. This hath been ever received till of late as the perfect and intire Rule of all necessary doctrines of Faith and practice of which abundant Testimonies may be seen in most Protestant Writers 2. We appeal also to the Primitive and best Ages of Christianity which either knew nothing of these Additions that we can find or sometimes give as express declarations against them as could be expected at this distance But to take off much of the strangeness of
ages whither good or bad Spirits the case is the same whoever perswaded them to worship any other Beeing with or besides the Supreme God was to be rejected by them for this is the sense of the Mosaical Laws concerning the worship of one Supreme God as I have already proved and the serving other Gods in this place is opposed to the worship of one God and therefore must include whatever according to the Law of Moses is contrary to the worship of one Supreme Beeing 2. This Law makes the worship of one God eternal and unâ—â—â—geable There is no way of altering any Divine Laws but by a new revelation of Gods will and there is no way to give Authority to such a revelation but by Miracles or Prophesie but in this case Miracles and Prophesie it self can give no authority because God himself has expresly forbid us to hearken to any Prophet whatever signs or wonders are wrought by him who teacheth the worship of any other Beeing besides the one Supreme God So that the Law of Moses having expresly forbid the worship of any other Beeing besides God and as expresly forbid us to hearken to any Prophet though a worker of Miracles who teaches any other worship it is impossible this Law should ever be altered because we are before-hand warned by God himself not to give credit to any Prophet whatever he be or whatever he do who attempts any alteration of it And therefore had Christ or his Apostle taught the worship of Saints and Angels it had been a just reason for the unbelief of the Jews notwithstanding all the Miracles that were wrought by them and it is well the Jews never had any just occasion to make this objection against our Saviour for if they had I know not how it would have been answered I say a just occasion for the Jews did urge this very Law against him before Pilate We have a Law and by our Law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God In which they refer to Joh. 19. 7. that discourse of our Saviour John 10. 29 30. where he affirms that God is his Father and plainly tells them I and my Father are one for which saying they attempt to stone him for blasphemy and that being a man he made himself a God v. 33. But though he did indeed as the Jews rightly inferred make himself a God by this saying yet he did not preach any new God to them but affirmed himself to be one with the Father that same Supreme God the Lord Jehovah whom they were commanded to worship by their Law he made no alteration in the object of their worship but onely did more clearly and distinctly reveal the Father to them as manifesting himself in and by his only begotten Son And therefore he did not offend against this Law by seducing them to the worship of any other Gods besides the Lord Jehovah which if he had done their accusation had been just and all the Miracles which he did could not have secured him from the guilt and punishment of an Impostor Which shews us what force there is in that Argument which the Church of Rome urges from these Miracles which have been wrought at the Tombs of Martyrs to prove the Religious invocation of them if such Miracles were ever wrought it was in testimony to the truth of Christianity for which they suffered not to betray men to a superstitious and idolatrous worship of them ten thousand Miracles should never convince me of the lawfulness of praying to Saints departed while I have such a plain and express Law against believing all Miracles upon any such account Nor can it reasonably be said that this Law was given only to the Jews and therefore oblidges none but them for we must remember that Christ was originally sent to the Jews to the lost sheep of the house of Israel and therefore by this Law he was bound not to teach the worship of any other Beeings under the penalty of death and they were bound not to own and receive him if he did and therefore it was impossible for the true Messias to introduce the worship of any Beeing besides the one supreme God and if Christ could not teach any such Doctrine I know not how the worship of Saints and Angels should ever come to be a Doctrine of Christianity For what Christ himself cannot do none of his Followers may who had no other Commission but to teach those things which they had learn'd from him and he could not give commission to preach such Doctrines as he himself had no authority to preach So that though this Law was not originally given to the Gentiles but only to the Jews yet it equally oblidges the Christian Church whither Jews or Gentiles because Christ himself who was the Author of our Religion was oblidged by it The worship of one Supreme God and of none else is as fundamental to Christianity as it is to Judaism for Christianity is now or ought to be the Religion of the Jews as well as Gentiles and yet the Jews are expresly forbid by this Law ever to own any Religion which allows the worship of any Beeing besides God and therefore the worship of one God and none else must be fundamental in Christianity if the people of the Jews are or ever were bound to embrace the Faith of Christ SECT IV. 2 ANd therefore I observe in the next place that Christ and his Apostles have made no alteration at all in the object of our worship Christ urges that Old Testament Law in answer to the Devils Temptation It is written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Which it seems is as â— Matth. 10. standing a Law after the appearance of Christ as it was before He gives no other direction to his Disciples but to pray To their Heavenly Father and in that form of prayer which he gave them he teaches them to address their prayer neither to Saints nor Angels but to God only Our Father which art in Heaven When St. Paul charges the Heathens with Idolatry he does it upon this account that they joyned the worship of Creatures with the worship of the Supreme God Because that when they knew God they glorified him not as God neither were thankful but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkned Where the Apostle acknowledges that they did know God that Rom. 1. 21. they did own that Supreme and Soveraign Beeing who made the world and does suppose that they did worship him also For he does not charge them with renouncing the worship of that God who made the world but that they did not glorifie him as God which only taxes the manner of their worship And wherein that was faulty he declares in the following verses As that they made mean and vile representations of him that they vers 23. changed the Glory of the uncorruptible God into
that these Fathers whose authority they alledge mean'd no such thing by these Rhetorical flourishes as they extract out of them or else that they introduced a new and unknown worship into the Christian Church and then let them prove that some few Fathers of the fourth Century without the publick authority of the Church had authority enough of their own to change the object of worship contrary as the Church in former Ages believed to an express Divine Law which commands us to worship none but God 3. Nay I farther observe that these Fathers whose authority is urged for the invocation of Saints by the Church of Rome do no where dogmatically and positively assert the lawfulness of Praying to Saints and Angels and many Fathers of the same Age do positively deny the lawfulness of it which is a plain argument that it was not the judgement and practice of the Church of that Age and a good reasonable presumption that these Fathers never intended any such thing in what they said how liable soever their words may be to be expounded to such a sense Gregâ—ry Nazianzen indeed in this Book against Julian the Apostate speaks to the Soul of Constantius in this manner Hear O thou Soul of great Constantius if thou hast any sense of these things c. But will you call this a Prayer to Constantius does this Father any where assert in plain terms that it is lawful to pray to Saints departed a hundred such sayings as these which are no Prayers to Saints cannot prove the lawfulness of praying to Saints against the Doctrine of the Fathers of that Age. Thus is his Funeral Oration for his Sister Gorgonia he bespeaks her to this purpose that if she knew what he was now a doing and if holy Souls Greg. Naz. Orat. 2. in Gorg. did receive this favour from God to know such matters as these that then she would kindly accept that Oration which he made in her praise insteed of other Funeral Ocsequâ—es Is this a Prayer to Gorgonia to intercede for him with God by no means He only desires if she heard what he said of her which he was not sure she did that she would take it kindly Whereas in that very Age the Fathers asserted that we must pray only to God and therefore they define Prayer by its relation to God That Prayer is a request of some good things made Basil Orat in Julit Martyr Greg. Naz. Orat 1. de Oratione Chrys in Genes Homil. 30. Aug. De clvit Dei l 22 cap. 10. by devout Souls to God that it is a conference with God that it is a request offered with supplication to God Which is a very imperfect definition of Prayer were it lawful to pray to any other Being besides God St. Austin tells us that when the names of the Martyrs were rehearsed in their publick Liturgies it was not to invoke them or pray to them but only for an honourable remembrance nay he expresly tells us that the worship of dead men must be no part of our Religion for if they were pious men they do not desire this kind of honour but would have us worship Idâ—â— de vera Religione cap. â—5 GOD honorandi ergo sunt propter imitationem non adorandi propter Religionem they are to be honoured for imitation not to be adored as an act of Religion The Council of Laodicea condemned the Worship of Angels and so does Theodoret Oecumenius and others of that Age. It is notoriously known that the Arrians were condemned as guilty of Idolatry for worshipping Christ whom they would not own to be the true GOD though they owned him to be far exalted above all Saints and Angels and to be as like to GOD as it is for any creature to be and those who upon these Principles condemned the worship of the most perfect and excellent Creature could never allow the worship of Saints and Angels So that through the worship of Saints and Angels did begin abouâ— this time to creep into the Church yet it was opposed by these pious and learned Fathers and condemned in the first smallest appearances of it which shews that this was no Catholick Doctrine and Practice in that Age much less that it had been so from the Apostles and I think after this time there was no authority in the Church to alter the object of worship nor to justifie such an Innovation as the worship of Saints and Angels in opposition to the express law of God The sum of this Argument is this Since there is an express Law against the worship of any other Beeing besides the supreme God the Lord Jehovah which never was expresly repealed whatever plausible reasons â—ay be urged for the worship of Saints and Angels they cannot justifie us in acting contrary to an express Law of God THE END A DISCOURSE CONCERNING THE CELEBRATION OF Divine Service IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE UPon this Argument the Church of England doth fully declare it self in these words It is a Article 24. thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God and the Custome of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the church or to minister the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the people But if we consult the Doctors of the Church of Rome about it we shall find them as in most other Comment in Eccles 5. 1. points differing extremely amongst themselves Mercer a very learned person and Professor of Hebrew at Paris is so free as to say Temere fecerunt c. They amongst us have done rashly that brought in the Custome of praying in an Vnknown Tongue which very often neither they themselves nor our people understand And Cardinal Cajetan saith Melius est c. It is better for our Church that the publick Prayers in the Congregation be said in a Tongue common to the In 1. Ep. Corinth c. 14. Priests and People and not in Latine Others of them are of another Mind and say that the having Divine Service in a Tongue known to the people is new and prophane and the Doctrine requiring it Diaboli calliditatem sâ—pit smells of the craft of the Devil And that the Church in making use of the Latine Tongue therein received it by inspiration from the Holy Ghost as a late Author saith Stapleton Quaest quodl Quaest 2. Sixtus Senens biblioth l. 6. â—nnot 263. Portraiture of the church of Jesus Christ c 14. With what consistence soever the former sort may speak to Truth and Reason yet I am sure the later speak with consistence enough to the Opinion Declarations and Practice of their church as is evident from the Council of Treâ—t the present Standard of the Doctrine of the church of Rome which I find thus Englished to my Hands by a noted person of their Cone Trid. Sess 22. c. 8. S. c. Answ to Dr. Pierce c. 15. church Though the Mass contain great instruction for GODS faithful people yet it seemed
them as to the Succession of their Popes even since the Reformation began For the Election of Sixtus V Was most notoriously Simoniacal and yet one that comes by Simony into the Popedom is by their own Canon Law by the Bull or Constitution of Julius II. approved in the Council of Lateran An. 1513. To be looked on as a Magician Heathen Publican Septimi Decretal Lib. 1. Tit. 3. and Arch Heretick and his Election can never be made valid by any after act and yet several of the Popes since were either made Cardinals by this Sixius V. Or received that Dignity from those that received it from him which is the very case of this present Pope Innocent Eleventh As for their Vnity it is plain that they have more divisions among themselves then they can charge us with For they have not only such as openly dissent and seperate from them but great and violent dissentions among their own Members and such as live in the Communion of their Church one against another and each party pleads the Doctrine of the Church and Decisions of its Councils And yet the Pope himself notwithstanding his Infallibility and Authority either cannot or darr not determine which is in the Right or which Opininion is True So that what ever Power and Authority their Church hath it hath no effect to such ends and purposes to which Church-Power is designed to serve the encouragment of Holines and Vertue and the discountenancing of vice the Preservation of the Doctrine in Purity and of the Members at peace one with another It is true they are more able to see the Laws of their Church Duly executed but it is to their disparagement to have so much Power and yet to do so little good wâ—th it As for us we had rather deserve more then we have then that it should be said that we have more power then we deserve And whatever Power our Church wants and whatever loss Religion suffers by this means we justly Charge the Church of Rome with the guilt of it who have made all Princes jealous and affraid of all Church-Power by their invading their temporal Rights under pretence of a Spiritual Jurisdiction In short though somewhat may be said for the worst thing and a very bade Cause may have a great deal pleaded in its Vindication as we have seen in all the foregoing Helps and Instances of Devotion which the church of Rome boasts of yet if we consider them they all in some respect or other come short of what they pretend to several of them being very improper many plainly Nonsensical and Ridiculous they proceed from bad principles are done in an undue Manner and Measure or to serve some bad end or design or some such other way offend even the most severe practices which most resemble true Self-denial are countenanced or enjoyned rather to make a shew or to gratifie some tempers then to advance Devotion for excesses and over-actings are often Infirmities and the effects of Weakness steddiness being the most certain sign of Strength as the shaking palsy is a Disease and sign of weakness as well as the Dead one 3. I now come to consider such things in the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of Rome as tend directly to promote Debauchery of Manners and Carelesness in Devotion I 'll insist only on these few among very many First The unlimited Power which they ascribe to the Church or to the Pope as Head or Monarch of it For the people are taught that he can make null Duties that were made necessary by God and make necessary what was not so before The consequence of which Doctrine is plainly this that a Man may safely disobey and neglect the serving of God if he pay but his due respects to the Pope And yet their Casuists have defined that the Pope can dispense with Sins or give leave to do things forbidden by the law of God as well as pardon them when committed as in the Dispensations with unlawful Marriages And on the other side he can excuse them from doing what they are by their Duty to God bound to do as in his Dispensations with Vows though made never so solemnly to God himself That is he can Bind where God hath left us loose and he can loose where God has bound us Nay a Superiour can give a Dispensation even when he doubteth whither it be lawful or no because in a doubtful case the milder side is to be taken And if the Reason ceaseth for which the Dispensation was given yet the Dispensation doth not cease Nay a Dispensation may be granted where there is no Reason or Cause for it and yet the Dispensation is valide notwithstanding And not the People only but every Bishop and Priest hath his Share of this Power only there are some reserved and more profitable Cases which his Holiness only can dispense in And though I cannot tell what they think yet I am sure their Casuists are very shy of saying that theâ—e is any Case in which there may not be a Dispensation granted for the doing of it or a Pardon for it when it is done And all Indulgences are directly designed to hinder Devotion for they are given to free Men from Necessity of Mortification frequent Alms and Prayers c. Which else would have been enjoyned as Penance and yet we know that these are the chiefest parts of Devotion And as their general Doctrine concerning the validity of Pardons and Indulgences is very destructive of all true Piety and Religion So Secondly Their constant Practice of giving Absolution before Penance is in a more especial manner influential to that purpose For the People are taught to believe that by the Priests saying I absolve thee c. the sin is actually pardoned by God And though indeed their Guides of Confessors advise that Absolution should not be given till Penance be imposed and accepted yet when the Confessor thinks that the Penitent will acept of the Penance he may absolve him first That is the Person may be absolved before he accept the Penance or even promise to perform it but it is their constant Method to absolve him before Penance be actually perform'd Now if their Absolution be of force the Person is free from his sin and sure enough of Heaven whither he perform any penance or no Which Practice gives all imaginable Encouragement and License to Sin the fear of penance being the only restraint from Sin which they pretend to for if the sin be fully pardoned before Penance be accepted or performed I see not why a man should trouble himself much for the performance of his Penance he sees plainly that it is only an Appendix that is used to be annex'd to Absolution but is neither necessary in it self nor for Absolution the Sin is pardon'd already and at the worst there is only some temporal punishment to be satisfied for which he may get rid of several other wayes Nay indeed
is to all the ends and purposes of a Miracle as if it were not and can be no testimony or proof of any thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is alwayes a thing sensible otherwise iâ— could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the bread and wine in the sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand â—he reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done then it there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popâ—sh Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can buâ— have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier then to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what was before Every Man every day may work ten thousand such Mâ—racles And thus I have dispatch'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against II. it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justifie it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objections I shall reduce to these two Heads First the infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly the monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call sayes he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which be eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entered into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church of Rome blush if she can * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. I have travell'd sayes he over the World and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect. of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2. 10. the Man of Sin should come with power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falsehood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the mosâ— sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real Barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austine as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but only the appearance of it by its being done under the species of bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they
Credulity is certainly a fault as well as Infidelity And he who said blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed hath no where said blessed are they that have seen and yet have not believed much less blessed are they that believe directly contrary to what they see To conclude this Discourse By what hath been said upon this Argument it will appear with how little truth and reason and regard to the interest of our common Christianity it is so often said by our Adversaries that there are as good arguments for the belief of Transubstantiation as of the Doctrine of the Trinity When they themselves do acknowledge with us that the Doctrine of the Trinity is grounded upon the Scriptures and that according to the interpretation of them by the consent of the ancient Fathers But their Doctrine of Transubstantiation I have plainly shewn to have no such ground and that this is acknowledged by very many learned men of their own Church And this Doctrine of theirs being first plainly proved by us to be destitute of all Divine Warrant and Authority our Objections against it from the manifold contradictions of it to Reason and sense are so many Demonstrations of the falsehood of it Against all which they have nothing to put in the opposite Scale but the Infallibility of their Church for which there is even less colour of proof from Scripture then for Transubstantiation it self But so fond are they of their own Innovations and Errours that rather then the Dictates of their Church how groundless and absurd soever should be call'd in question rather then not have their will of us in imposing upon us what they please they will owerthrow any Article of the Christian Faith and shake the very foundations of our common Religion A clear evidence that this Church of Rome is not the true Mother since she can be so well contented that Christianity should be destroyed rather then the Point in question should be decided against her FINIS A DISCOURSE Concerning the ADORATION OF THE HOST As it is Taught and Practiced in the CHURCH of ROME Wherein an Answer is given to T. G. oâ— that Subject And to Monsieut Boileau's late book De Adoratione Eucharistiae Paris 1685. EDINEVRGH Re-printed by John Reid Anno DOM 1686. A DISCOURSE OF THE ADORATION Of the HOST c. IDolatry is so great a Blot in any Church what ever other glorious Marks it may pretend to that it is not to be wondred that the Church of Rome is very angry to be charged with it as it has alwayes been by all the Reform'd who have given in this among many others as a just and necessary Reason of their Reformation and it must be confessed to be so if it be fully and clearly made good against it and if it be not it must be owned to be great Uncharitableness on the other side which is no good Note of a Church neither as grievous Slander and most uncharitable Calumny which will fall especially upon all the Clergy of the Church of England who by their Consent and Subscription to its Articles and to the Doctrine of its Homilies and to the Book of Common Prayer do expresly join in it For it is not the private Opinion only of some particular and forward men in their Zeal and Heat against Popery thus to accuse it of Idolatry but it is the deliberate and sober and downright Charge of the Church of England of which no honest man can be a Member and Minister who does not make and believe it I might give several Instances to shew this but shall only mention one wherein I have undertaken to defend our Church in its charge of Idolatry upon the Papists in their Adoration of the Host which is in its Declaration about Kneeling at the Sacrament after the Office of the Communion in which are these remarkeable words It is hereby declared that no Adoration is intended or ought to be done either unto the sacramental Bread and Wine there bodily received or unto any corporal presence of Christs natural Flesh and Blood for the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their natural substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians Here it most plainly declares its mind against that which is the Ground and Foundation of their Worshipping the Host That the Elements do not remain in their natural Substances after Consecration if they do remain as we and all Protestants hold even the Lutherians then in Worshipping the consecrated Elements they worship meer Creatures and are by their own Confession guilty of Idolatry as I shall shew by and by and if Christs natural Flesh and Blood â—e not corporally present there neither with the Substance nor Signs of the Elements then the Adoring what there is most be the Adoring some things else then Christs body and if Bread only be there and they adore that which is there they must surely adore the Bread it self in the opinion of our Church but I shall afterwards state the Controversie more exactly between us Our Church has here taken notice of the true Issue of it and declared that to be false and that it is both Unfit and Idolatrous too to Worship the Elements upon any account after Consecration and it continued of the same mind and exprest iâ— is particularly and directly in the Canons of 1640. where it sayes a Canon 7. 1640. about placing the Communion Table under this head A Declaration about some Rites and Ceremonis That for the cause of the Idolatry committed in the Mass all Popish Altars were demolish'd so that none can more fully charge them with Idolatry in this point then our Church has done It recommends at the same time but with great Temper and Moderation the religious Gesture of bowing towards the Altar both before and out of the time of Celebration of the Holy Eucharist and in it and in neither a Ib. can 7. 1â—40 Vpon any opinion of a corporal presence of Christ on the Holy Table or in the mystical Elements but only to give outward and bodily as well as inward worship to the Divine Majesty and it commands all Persons to receive the Sacrament Kneeling b Rubric at Communion in a posture of Adoration as the Primitive Church used to do with the greatest Expression of Reverence and Humility tropo proskynesios kai sebasmatos St. Cyrill of Hierusalem speaks c Cyril Hierosolym Catech. Mystag 5. and as I shall shew is the meaning of the greatest Authorities they produce out of the Ancients for Adoration not to but at the Sacrament so far are we from any unbecoming or irreverent usage of that Mystery as Bellarmine d Controv. de Eucharist when he is angry with those who will not Worship it tells them out of Optatus that the Donatists gave it to Dogs and out of Victor Vticencis that the Arriaâ—s trod it under their Feet
te vivere te illi semper dulce sapere Rythmus St. Thom. ad Eucharist in Missal Sacrament which is before them Prayers they call them to the Eucharist f Laus sacratissimo Sacramento and 't is become a common form of Doxology amongst them instead of saying Praise be given to God to say Praise be given to the most holy Sacrament g Ad Sacram Eucharistiam Rithmus Rom. breviar as 't is in one of their Authors instead of ye shall pray to God ye shall pray to the Body of Christ i e. To the Sacrament h Orlandinus hist Sanders in his Book of the Supper of the Lord i Corpore sangiâ—â— Christi sub speciebus panis vini omnis honor Laus Gratiarum actio in secula seculerum Sanderus de caena Dom. instead of Glory be to the Father Son and Holy Ghost turns it thus To the Body and Blood of our Saviour under the species of Bread and Wine be all Honour and Praise and Thanksgiving for evermore as if it were another Person of the blessed God-head This Adoration is not only in the time of Communion when it is properly the Lords Supper and Sacrament but at other times out of it when ever it is set upon the Altar with the Candles burning and the Incense smoaking before it or hung up in its rich Shrine and Tabernacle with a Canopy of State over it And not only in the Church which is sanctified they say by this Sacrament as by the presence of God himself k Bellarm. de sanct c. 5. but when it is carried through the Streets in a solemn and pompous Procession as it is before the Pope when he goes abroad just as the Persian fire was before the Emperor l Curt. l 3. S. 3. meerly by way of state or for a superstitious end that he may be the better Guarded and Defended by the company of his God m Ad capit is illius sacri custodiam praesidialem patronalem perron de Euch. l. 3. c. 19. In all these times it is to be worshipped and adored by all persons as it passeth by as if it were the Glory of God which passed by They are like Moses to make hast and bow their heads to the Earth and worship n Exod. 34. â— but above all upon that high day which they have dedicated to this Sacrament as if it were some new Deity the Festum Dei as they call it the Feast of God or the Festum Corporis Christi the Feast of the Body of Christ for to call the Sacrament God is a general Expression among them as when they have received the Sacrament to say I have received my Maker to day and the Person who in great Churches is â—o carry the Sacrament to the numerous Communicants is called Bajulus Dei the Porter or Carrier of GOD and they alwayes account and so alwayes reverence it as Boileau falsly sayes o Eucharistiam pro praesente numine â—emper habuisse Veteres the Ancients did as a present Numen and Deity This Feast was appointed by Pope Vrban the 4th about the middle of the twelfth Century and again by â—lement the fifth in the begining of the 13th as is owned by themselves upon the occasion of a Vision to one Juliana who saw a crack in the Moon that signified it seems a great â—efect in the Church for want of this Solemnity such was the rise of this great Festival p Bzovii Annal in Contin Baron Anno Dom. 1230. and so late was its Institution in the Roman Church in which alone and in no other Christian Church of the World it is observed to this day And that the whole practice of the Adoration to the Host is Novel and unknown to the primitive Church and to the Ancient Writers I shall endeavour to make evident against that bold and impudent Canon of the Council of Trent which is the first Council that commanded it in these words q Siquis dixerit non esse hoc Sacramentum peculiari festivia celebritate venerandum neque in processionibus secundum laudabilem Vniversalem Ecclesiae sanctae ritum consuetudinem soleâ—niter circumgeslandâ—â— vel â—on publice ut adoretur populo proponendum ejus Adoratoresesse Idololatr as anathema sit Concil Trident. Can. 6. Sess 13. If any one shall say that the Sacrament is not to be worship'd by a peculiar Festival nor to be solemnly carried about in Processions according to the laudable and universal manner and custom of the Holy Church nor to be publickly proposed to the people that it may be adored by them and that the Worshippers of it are Idolaters let him be accursed To confront this insolent pretence of theirs that it was an universal custom of the church thus to carry the Sacrament in processions the ingenuous confession of their own Cassander is sufficient The Custom sayes he r Consuetudo quae panis Eâ—charistiae in publica pompa conspicuus circumferetur ac passim omnium oculis ingeritur praeter veterum morem ac mentem haâ—d ita longo tempore inducta recepta videtur Illi enim hoc mysterium in tanta religione ac veneratione habuerunt ut non modo ad ejus perceptionem sed ne inspectionem quidem admitterent nisi fideles quos Christi membra tanta participatione dignosesse existimarent quare ante Consecrationem Catecbumeni Energumeni poeniteâ—tes denique non Communicantes Diaconi voce Osliariorum Ministerio secludeb antur Cassand consult of carrying about the Sacramental Bread in publick pomp to be seen and exposed to all eyes is contrary to the mind and custom of the Ancients and seems to be lately brought in and received for they had this mystery in such religious Veneration that they would not admit any not only to the partaking but not to the sight of it but the Faithful whom they accounted members of Christ and worthy to partake of such a Mystery Wherefore all those who were but Catechumeni or were Energumeni or Penetents and not Communicants were alwayes put out and dismist at the Celebration of it Whither they be Idolaters for adoring the Sacrament I have considered already and their practice joyned with their Doctrine maks it more evident I shall now prove that this Adoration of theirs was neither commanded nor used by Christ or the Apostles nor by the Primitive Church nor is truely mean'd and designed by those Authorities of the Fathers which they produce for it and upon a general view of the whole matter That it is a very absurd and ridiculous thing that tends most shamefully to reproach and expose Christianity 1. That it was not used or commanded by Christ or the Apostles is plain from the account that all the Evangelists give us of Christs celebrating this Sacrament with his Apostles where is only mention of their taking and eating the Bread and drinking the Wine after it was blessed by