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
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
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
same Doctrines which she does and she looks upon it as a just prejudice against any Expositions of Scripture if they contradict the common Faith of the first Christians and therefore when the words of Scripture are fairly capable of different senses she chooses that sense which is most agreeable with the Catholick Faith and practice of the Primitive Church but should any Doctrines be imposed upon her as Articles of Faith which are no where to be found in Scripture or which are plainly contrary to it as the new Trent Creed is whatever pretence there be for the Antiquity of such Doctrines she utterly rejects them she will not put out her Eyes to follow any other Guide and thanks be to God she needs not reject any truly Catholick Doctrine in this way We still retain the Faith of the Primitive Church and are greatly confirmed in it from that admirable consent there is between the Scriptures as Expounded by us and that Faith which was anciently owned and received by all Christians Having thus shewn in what sense the Church is the Interpreter of Scripture I proceed now to the Second thing contained in this Paper That this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now these few words contain a great many and very great mistakes The subject of the inquiry is how we may find out such a Church whose word we may safely take for the true sense and meaning of Scripture Now 1. The Author of this Paper whither ignorantly or designedly I know not alters the state of the Question and in stead of a Church which is an unerring and Infallible Interpreter of Scripture which would be very well worth finding he tells us how we may know a true Church now I take a true Church and and an infallible Interpreter of Scripture to be very different things A Church may be guilty of Schism and Heresie and yet may be a true Church though not a sound Orthodox and Catholick Church for a true Church is such a Church as has all things necessary and essential to the Beeing and Constitution of a Church this a Church may have and superadd other things which are destructive of the Christian Faith and very dangerous and fatal mistakes as we believe and are able to prove the Church of Râ—me has done and yet we acknowledge her a true Church because she retains the true Christian Faith though miserably Corrupted by Additions of her own as a man is a true man though he be sick of a mortal Disease Now if a true Church may corrupt the Christian Faith we have no reason to rely on the Authority of every true Church for the true sense and meaning of Scripture 2. Let us suppose that by a true Church he means an Infallible Church whose Authority we may safely rely on in Expounding Scriptures this Church he sayes is to be known by a continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now if this visible uninterrupted Succession be the mark of such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then 1. The Greek Church is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture for she has as visible uninterrupted a Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day as the Church of Rome has and so we have two infallible Churches not to instance in any more at present who have as good a Succession as either of them which are directly opposite to each other and what shall we do in this Case Must we believe Contradictions or must we dis-believe infallible Churches 3. If a visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles makes aâ—y church an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then all the churches which were planted by the Apostles were infallible All the churches which were planted by the Apostles have an equally visible Succession from Christ those churches which were planted by the Apostles may be presumed as infallible while the Apostles were present with them as they were afterwards and those churches which succeeded these Apostolical churches at the distance of an Age or two may be supposed as infallible as any church of this Age is for if a visible Succession from Christ makes a church infallible why should not a Succession of a hundred or two hundred years make them as infallible as a Succession of sixteen hundred years unless they think that Infallibility increases with the Age of the Church which I could wish true but we see very little sign of it Now according to these Principles all the churches which were planted by the Apostles and have a continual visible Succession from Apostolical Churches through all Ages since the time of the Apostles must be infallible for if a continual visible Succession confers Infallibility and is the mark whereby we must know it then every Church which ever had or has to this day this visible Succession must have Infallibility also which it seems is entailed on Succession And thus we have found out a World of infallibility and it is wonderful how any Apostolical Church came to be over-run with so many Errors and Heresies and to grow so corrupt and degenerate as to provoke GOD to root them up if every Apostolical Church was infallible I cannot imagine how whole Churches which visibly succeeded the Apostles should be infected with Heresie for if Infallibility it self will not secure a Church from Heresie the LORD have mercy upon us 3. This mark he gives how to find out such a true Church at is an infallible Interpreâ—er of Scripture viz. A continual visible Succession from Christ till this day includes another great mistake for it supposes that there is some church now in being on whose Authority we must rely for the sense of Scripture for otherwise there can be no use of a visible Succession to this day in this Controversie If as I have already Proved at large we must rely only on the Authority of the Primitive Church not of the church of this present Age for the sense of Scripture and that not as an infallible Judge buâ— as the most Authentick Witness of the Apostolical Doctrine and Practice then we cannot find out this church by a visible Succession to this day but by examining the ancient Records of the Primitive Church where we shall find what the Faith and Practice of the Church in those dayes was which is the safest Rule to guide us in the Exposition of Scripture Though there were no Church in the World at this day which could prove a continual visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles yet while we have the Scriptures and the Records of the Primitive church we have very sufficient means for the understanding the true meaning of Scripture So that of whatever use this talk of a continual visible Succession may be in other cases it is wholly impertinent in this A church which cannot prove such a continual visible Succession which was not founded by any Apostle
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
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
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
the known Will and Word of God For no Obligation whatsoever can tie me to communicate with another in that which he forbids and it will be a great temptation to more then suspect this danger when mens private opinions or fanciful transports are mingled with them which have little shew of Scripture or the general practice of the Church in all Ages to justifie them The readiest way I know of to prevent that hazard after all other care about the matters contained is to endeavour that these Offices be as near alike in all places as can well be yet every difference in Judgement when no violence is offered to the Foundation of Catholick Faith and Unity must not break this Communion according to that profession of St. Cyprian a P. 229. Ox. Ed. in Concil Carthaginensi de baptizandis Haereticis Neminem judicantes aut a jure communionis si diversum senserit amoventes Judging no man nor excluding him from the right of communion if he think otherwise where the dispute was thought of no mean concern especially in this cause Which b De Bapt. adv Donat. l. 2. T. 7. p. 391. sape ibid. St. Augustin oft alledges against the Donatists that boasted so much of St. Cyprians judgment against his declared practice To the same purpose may be applied the treatment of c Euseb Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 26. St. Polycarp in Rome by Anicetus the Bishop though they differed about the time of the celebration of Easter and in other points which could not be agreed between them yet this last not only invited the former to communion with him but also to celebrate the sacred Eucharist in his Church as the words are generally interpreted which St. Irenaeus not long after urges strongly against Victor who was hastening to excommunicate the Asian Churches for the same difference contrary to his Predecessors Practice As to the Fourth of Vnity of Discipline if Unity of Government in all parts be not indispensably necessary to it yet it will be so far as not to abrogate or invade the positive Institutions of our Saviour himself herein and be more then convenient that it be as conformable as it is in our power to make it in one place to what it is in another It seems horribly presumptuous violently to thrust out of the Church that Government under the influence of which Christianity hath been conveyed and preserved from the Age of the Apostles in the most distant places upon pretence of erecting a new better Scheme or model of our own or because of the intricate use of one or two terms in Scripture when the Church was in its first formation though against the plain current of it in other places and the uninterrupted tradition of the whole Church A Church indeed must be more or less perfect according to its Government for suitable will be the Exercise and Authority of its Discipline What allowance may be made for those who desire to come as near as they can to the Primitive Patern though it be not in their power to reach it in many considerable points I am not now to dispute But most inexcusable and highly obnoxious are they that by extreme violence and usurpation endeavour to destroy what they found regularly established to their hands III. But we are here most concerned with the bold claims of the Romanists amidst their most obvious Defections who have made it the principal Band of Unity in the Catholick Church to be subject to the See of Rome and the pretended Vicar of Christ therein as the Universal Head and Monarch of the Church this they have determined as de fide and put into their very Creed and excluded all that do not expresly own it But against this as a great breach of Christian Unity we have many just exceptions and been always ready to prove them so a Bishop Carleton of threefold jurisdiction Dr. Barrow's Treatise of the Popes Supremacy 1. In that no evidence from Scripture appears of any such Authority conferred upon him or them But many strong intimations of the contrary The places usually alledged to make good their Claim are so far fetcht and so little to their purpose that they contain alone a strong presumption against them and their own Authors sometimes speak of them with great distrust Here if any where sure we may safely argue without darring to prescribe Rules to the most High that in a matter of so great moment had it been designed It would have been most explicitly delivered and solemnly inculcated 2. But that it was not we have farther evidence from the silence of the most Ancient and best Fathers of the Church herein when they have occasion to explain the places insisted on b S. Cyprian de unitate Ecclesiae post loca communiter allegata p. 107. quamvis Apostolis omnibus parem potestatem tribuat c. paulo post Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis Idem alii in Concil Carthaginensi p. 229. Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit aut Tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegat suos adigit S. Hieron in Epist ad Euagrium T. 2. p. 329. Si authoritas quaeritur orbis major est urbe Vbicunque fuerit episcopus sive Romae sive eugubii sive Constantinopoli sive Rhegii sive Alexandriae sive Tanis ejusdem meriti ejusdem est Sacerdotii Potentia divitiarum paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit Caeterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt nay expresly expounding them to a quite different Sense and disowning any such Authority of one Church or Bishop over others And when the Roman Bishop began any thing tending towards this and grounded this claim upon a falsly alledged Canon of the Council of Nice not on any Divine Character after examination and proof of the Forgery other Bishops wholly disclaim it and declare against it and warn him for the future not to disturb their Regular proceedings by such unwarrantable practices c Vide Epist concilii Africani ad Bonifacium T. 2. p. 1670. 1674. Concil ult Ed. As the African Bishops and the great St. Austin among them in the case of Appeals It will be hard for them to find any thing like an argument or Example of it within the first five Centuries at least which was not disowned and condemned by the rest of the Church unless from such forged Writings which they themselves will scare now defend 3. In the following Ages we have as good Testimony from History as almost in any other matter of Fact by what steps and in what manner this still growing power of the Church and Bishop of Rome advanc'd it self to the height which it now claims d See D. Caves dissertation of ancient Church Government and Dr. Parker of the Government of the Church for the
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-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-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
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
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
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
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
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
so harsh an imputation at first sight wherewith we charge a great part of the Church for a considerable time and that they and we may be less scandaliz'd at the first mention of these defections 3. We may consider the various Cautions in the New Testament against corrupt Doctrines and Manners which at the least in general are foretold would creep into the Church if some of them we now charge be not particularly described therein 4. We may compare matter of fact with the experience of the like degeneracy of the Jewish Church in various instances so nearly resembling these as nothing more and from the same plea of Oral Tradition â—et against as clear evidence and as emphatical promises to preserve them from Apostacy as any particular Church at least can now pretend to 5. We may consult the tendency of laps'd mankind In the best how weak it is and apt to be imposed on In others how prone to corrupt and distort the best Institutions cast a mist before the clearest discoveries and offer violence to the strongest convictions to shelter their vices and promote their unwarrantable interests especially in times of ease plenty and outward prosperity In which we may compare common experience in lesser Societies which however wisely directed at first regularly founded and strongly guarded on all sides without a very careful Inspection and sometimes vigorus opposition so many corruptions will creep in as to need frequent reformations to reduce them back to their primitive Constitution And although an especial providence be concerned for the guard and conduct of Gods Church yet neither Scripture nor experience warrant us to expect its happy Influence by miracles now for the effecting of that which may be accomplished by the use of ordinary and regular means of his own appointment 6. We may reflect upon the particular Ages of the Church which we charge especially with these defections from about the eight century to the Reformation wherein if all or most of them did not come in yet they grew to that extravagant height as to gain establishment for Principles of Christianity These Ages are charged by their own Authors as well as ours and stand most sensibly convict of the grossest Barbarism Stupidity Ignorance depraved Manners and all such corrupt Inclinations in all Orders and Degrees especially the ruling part as were most likely to make way for such changes and Innovations 7. We have some farther sensible proof of a design in many within that time to impose upon the credulity of others and bring in strange Doctrines and unwarrantable Practices by the many Fabulous Stories feigned Apparitions and Revelations several of which they themselves will hardly now defend then brought into the Church to confirm these points in difference and which almost only the people then received for their Instructions to entice them first into an awful opinion of and then a confident relyance upon these things Nay farther among the many spurious Writings which then crept into the World under the most venerable names of the renowned Fathers of the Church now mostly discarded by themselves when their shameless Impudence hath been so full exposed yet few of them there are in which this contrivance is not legible throughout to advance these Opinions and Practices So that we are indebted to the Reformation those great men which laboured in it and some of the most moderate and learned of their own side with the Art of Printing then newly found out that almost all Ancient Authors and Records have not lost their Authority which would have been much endangered among such gross depravers of Antiquity whose constant business it was to mar good Authors by their Interpolations Additions or Substractions or vent new ones under counterfeit old names to serve corrupt ends But we are somewhat beholden to their ignorance and stupidity for doing it so grosly that there was need of little skill or observation to discover their Impostures 8. To which may be added in the last place against the supposed presumption in private persons or particular Churches to judge of publick Establishments by a seeming Superiour Authority that without some judgement of discretion in the former there is no room for a proper Moral Act much less are they capable of a truely Religious Obligation which an absolute implicite faith perfectly destroyes But whilst every man is bound to prove his own work and must bear his own burden he must examine the grounds of his assent according to his capacity and determine himself by the best motives he can procure and is concerned at his utmost peril to do it with all due respect to the Authority and Judgement of his Superiours as well as the evidence of the things themselves which are no where in any Government beside thought inconsistent These considerations duly weighed may obviate those first prejudices which usually lie in the way to intercept all thoughts of farther trial and examination of particular points in controversie and may silence or shame the late idle vaunts of such who pretend to reason us out of our senses and undertake to demonstrate it á priori impossible that ever any false opinion should get into the Church or prevail therein I wish these men would try their pains and subtilty to prove it impossible there could be any such thing as wilful sin in the world I presume they might have as good Topicks to pretend to it from all convictions of Reason or Interest But after the most artificial composures herein they would hardly believe themselves or be credited by others against their experience It were well if they might prevail to make that less frequent which all must own so unreasonable in it self and destructive to us Object 2. But our Adversaries will yet urge upon us that supposing not granting such a degeneracy in the Church and need of Reformation yet this should have been done in order to preserve Catholick Vnity by common consent in a general Council and with most mature deliberation and consultation Answ 1. This was most earnestly desired and insisted on by the first Reformers witness the great Importunities of Charles the Fifth with the Pope upon their instance 2. When this seemingly prevailed and a pretended Council was called it was far from being free or general The Italian and mere titular Bishops outnumbred all the rest and both one and the other were overawed by the Popes immediate Dependants or Delegates and all things carried by such stratagems of Policy or partiality of interest that the only care taken was to fix the disease and not provide for the cure by the best account we have of those transactions So that some Princes of their own communion entred their Protestations against its proceedings disowning any Obligation to be tied up to their determinations 3. As the divided state of Christendom now stands it is rather to be wish'd for then supposed almost possible From the different Interests and inclinations of Princes who will hardly
Though we should grant that God if he pleased might allow us to worship Saints and Angels as the Church of Rome does without any diminution of his own Glory which is the most that all their arguments can pretend to prove yet it does not hence follow that we may worship them when God by an express Law has declared that he will not allow it No arguments nor consequences can prove that God allows us to do that which by an express Law he has forbid us to do No reason can prove that to be Gods will which he has publickly declared in his Law to be against his will 4. That no reason or arguments can absolve us from our obedience to any express Law till it be as expresly repealed appears from this that our obligation to obedience does not depend meerly upon the reason of the Law but upon the authority of the Law-giver and therefore though the reason of the Law should cease yet while it is inforced by the same authority it oblidges still Thus I am sure it is in humane Laws and it is very fiting it should be so meer reason cannot make a Law for then every thing which is reasonable would be a necessary duty that which is reasonable may be fit matter for a Law but it is the authority of the Law-giver which makes the Law and the same authority which at first made it a Law continues it to be a Law while the authority lasts though the particular reason for which it was enacted into a Law may cease So that though the Church of Rome could prove that there is no reason now against the worship of Saints and Angels that all those reasons for which God forbad the Jews to worship any one but himself were now ceased yet till the Law be repealed too it is utterly unlawful to worship any Beeing besides the Supreme God and yet this is the most that all their reasonings come to that there is not the same reason for this Law under the State of the Gospel that there was under the Jewish Oeconomy They suppose that God forbad the Jews to worship any one but himself because they were in great danger of falling into Pagan Idolatries and worshipping the Gods of the Aegyptians and other Neighbour-Nations and that this was the case also of the Christian Church at the first planting of the Gospel but now there is no danger of worshipping false Gods we may very securely worship the Friends and Favourites of God They suppose that all the ancient Patriarchs who lived before the Resurrection of Christ were not received into Heaven and therefore not being in a state of Bliss and Glory themselves were not yet capable of Divine Honours could neither know our Prayers nor intercede for us But now at last some eminent Saints and Martyrs ascend directly into Heaven and are the Beati advanced to such a state of Happiness and Glory that they are fit objects of Religious Worship and are so powerful in the Court of Heaven that God denies them nothing which they ask and so tender and eompassionate to us that they readily undertake our Cause and intercede for us and therefore it is very good and profitable now to invoke their aid and assistance by solemn and devout Prayers And though the learndest men among them are put to miserable shifts to prove the least part of all this yet let us for argument-sake suppose all this to be true that things are mightily changed since the making of this Law and that there is not the same reason now to confine all Religious Worship to God alone that there was in the time of Moses what follows from hence that therefore we may now worship Saints and Angels notwithstanding this Law which forbids it by no means unless they can prove that the Law is repealed too as well as the reason ceased Here is the authority of the Law-giver still though we should supose that we had lost the reason of the Law till the Law is as expresly repealed as it was given it is God Will still and that is reason enough to bind the Law upon us though other reasons fail The reason if we speak of such reasons as these which the Church of Rome assigns for it is a different case if we speak of eternal and necessary reason which is nothing else but the eternal and immutable nature and will of God which is an eternal Law did not make the Law and the change of the reason cannot repeal it And since we see that God has not repealed this Law we rather ought to conclude that we are mistaken in the reasons for which God made this Law or that there are other reasons which we know not of for which he continues it we may indeed reasonably suppose that God will repeal a Law when the reasons for which it was given ceases though earthly Princes may not alwayes do so but still the Law binds till it be repealed and it is more reasonable to conclude that the reason of the Law continues while we see God does not repeal it then first to perswade our selves that the reason of Law is changed and thence infer the repeal and abrogation of the Law when we see no such thing done 5 That these arguments which the Roman Doctors urge to justifie their worship of Saints and Angels are of no force to repeal that Law which forbids the worship of any other Beeing besides the Supreme God appears from this that they had no force in them to prevent the making of this Law and therefore much less can they repeal it now it is made The reasons which they use had the same force then which they have now and if notwithstanding all the reasons God thoughâ— fit to forbid the worship of all Created Beings it is ridiculous to imagine that these reasons should supersede the obligation of that Law which is made in contradiction to all such reasonings as to shew this briefly They prove that we may pray to Saints and Angels to pray for us because we may desire good men on earth to pray for us Now suppose we could not assign the difference between praying to Saints in Heaven and desiring the prayers of Saints on earth yet I would desire to know whither good men did not pray for one another and desire each others prayers before and after God gave this Law on Mount Sinai which forbids the Religious worship and invocation of any other Beeing but himself if good men did in all ages pray for one another and desire one anothers prayers and God allowed and approved of this then it seems God did not think this a good reason for praying to Saints and Angels in Heaven because good men might beg each others prayers on earth for if he had he would not have made that Law which forbids such a Religious Invocation of any Creature And if notwithstanding this reason which had as much force then as it has now God made
prohibite the worship of all those Gods which were then worshipped in the world will any one in theirs wits hence conclude that if the folly and superstition of men should set up a new race and generation of Gods in after ages that the worship of these new Gods is not as well forbidden by this general Law as the worship of those gods which were worship'd at that time when this Law was given If this were true possibly Pagan Rome it self was not guilty of Idolatry for most if not all of their Gods might be of a later date then the giving the Law 3. Now since no such distinctions as these appear in Scripture it is impossible they should justifie the worship of Saints and Angels which is so expresly forbidden by the Law if we will acknowledge them to be distinct Beeings from the Supreme God for if they are not the Supreme GOD we must not worship them for we must worship none but God No distinctions can justifie us in this case but such as GOD himself makes for otherwise it were easie to distinguish away any Law of God Humane Laws will admit of no distinctions but such as they make themselves for a distinction does either confine and streighten or enlarge the Law and he who has power to distinguish upon a Law has so far power to make it If the Law says that we shall worship no other Beeing besides God and we have power if we have but wit enough to invent some new distinctions between the worship of good and bad spirits between Supreme and Subordinate absolute and relative worship this makes a new Law of it for it is one thing to say thou shalt worship GOD only and quite contrary to say thou shalt worship God only and good Spirits God with a supreme and absolute good Spirits with a subordinate and relative worship This I think is sufficient to shew that we must admit of no distinctions upon a Divine Law but what the Scripture it self owns and therefore since those distinctions with which the Church of Rome justifies her worship of Saints and Angels are no where to be found in Scripture they have no authority against an express Law 3. The next course the Papists take to justifie their Creature-worship in contradiction to that Law which expresly commands us to worship none but God is an appeal to such authorities as they think sufficient to decide this matter Now I shall not say much to this for I believe all Mankind will acknowledge that no Authority less then Divine can repeal a Divine Law and therefore unless God himself or such persons as act by a Divine Authority have repealed this Law no other Authority can do it That Christ and his Apostles have not repealed this Law I have already proved that the whole Church in after Ages had any Authority to repeal this Law I desire them to prove For the authority of the Church as to the essentials of Faith and Worship is not the authority of Law-givers but of Witnesses The Church never pretended in former Ages to make or to repeal any Divine Laws but to declare and testifie what the belief and practice of the Primitive and Apostolick Churches was and it is unreasonable to think that they should have any such Authority for then Christ and his Apostles preached the Gospel to little purpose if it were in the power of the Church to make a new Gospel of it when they pleased But indeed could it appear that the Apostles did teach the Christians of that Age and the Church in those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles did practise the worship of Saints and Angels we should have reason to suspect that we and not they are mistaken in the sense of that Law which commands us to worship none but God But then none can be admitted as competent witnesses of this matter but those who did immediately succeed the Apostles or conversed with Apostolical men and Churches And thanks be to God there is no appearance of creature-worship in those Ages we dare appeal to the testimony of Fathers and Councils for above three hundred years and those who come after come a little too late to be witnesses of what was done in the Apostolick Churches especially when all the intermediate Ages knew nothing of it I shall not fill up this discourse with particular â—itations which learned men know where to find since the Roman Doctors can find nothing in the Writings of the first Fathers to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels and the Protestant Writeâ—s find a great deal in those Ages against it Indeed at the latter end of the fourth Century some of the Fathers used some Rhetorical Apostrophes to the Saints and Martyrs in in their Orations which the Church of Rome interprets to be Prayers to them but though other See Bishops Ushers Answer to the Jesuits Challenge Learned men have vindicated those passages so far as to shew the vast difference between them and solemn and formal Invocation which is not my business at this time yet there are several things very well worth our observation towards the true stating of this matter As 1. That these Fathers came too late to be witnesses of the Apostolical practice which they could know no otherwise then we might know it if there had been any such thing viz. by the testimony and practice of the Church from the Apostles till that time This was no where pretended by them that the Invocation of Saints had been the practice of the Catholick Church in all ages and they could have no proof of this unless they had better Records of former times then we have at this day and such as contradicted all the Records which we now have of the Apostolick and Primitive Churches and I believe few men will be so hardy as to assert this and me thinks there should be as few who are so credulous as to believe it and I am sure there is no man living who is able to prove it 2. Nay the particular sayings of these Fathers by which the Romanists prove the Invocation of Saints do not prove that it was the Judgement and practice of the Church of that age They no where say that it was and it does not appear to be so by any other Records Let them shew me any Council before or in those times when these Fathers lived that is in the fourth Century which decreed the worship of Saints and Angels Let them produce any publick offices of Religion in in those dayes which allows this worship and if no such thing appears those men must be very well prepared to believe this who will without any other evidence judge of the practice of the Church only from some extravagant slights of Poets and Orators and if even in those dayes the worship of Saints was not received into the publick offices of the Church methinks we may as well live without it still and they must either grant
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
Tongue understood and spoken by none in a Nation or so few as are next to none and which if used in Divine Offices would be wholly unintelligible Such are Persick and Indian with us The use of all this niceness is partly to clear the state of the Question and partly to prevent many of the Objections which the case is cumbred with And without the observing of which the Dispute will be turned from the point that is contraverted to that which is not As it happens for the most part among those of the Church of Rome that undertake the management of this Cause who do either distinguish where they are not to distinguish or do not distinguish where they should distinguish For sometimes they oppose the Dialects of a Tongue to that Tongue of which they are the Dialects At other times they oppose the common Tongue to the Vulgar Sometimes they confound the Learned Tongue with the common And then again oppose the learned and utterly unknown as if these two were of as different kinds as known and unknown To give an instance of each of these Ledesma c. 9. n. 4 5. 9. c. 20. n. 2. Sanders orat de Ling. Offic. eccl Do they undertake to shew how unfit and unreasonable it is to translate the Service or Scriptures into a Vulgar Tongue They endeavour to make it out by shewing how unfit it is to think of Translating and how unreasonable it is to expect they should be translated into the several Dialects of each Tongue Would they farther shew that the Divine Offices c. were not of old so translated they attempt to prove it from their not having been translated into different Dialects As if the Dialects of a Tongue differed as much from each other and all from the main Tongue of a Nation as a learned Tongue differs from the Vulgar which is to speak charitably for want of observing that the Dialects are but several modes of speaking the same Tongue and that ordinarily there is some common Standard which as I have said over-rules the rest and iâ— a guide common to all As here in England notwithstanding there be several Dialects and that there is one in Scotland differs much from them all yet there is but one Translation of the Bible and one Service for the use of the whole and that is fully if not equally understood by all Farthermore would they prove that anciently the Christian Churches used not a Vulgar Tongue in Divine Lâ—desma c. 9. n. 6. Service they presently multiply Authorities to shew that in many places they used Greek and Latine and that Greek and Latine were oftentimes Likâ—â—â—â— de SS in vulg non vert p. 51. not the Vulgar Tongues where they were so used As if the common Tongue for such were those two in elder in times where they were not the Vulgar was opposed to the Vulgar as much as unknown is to knownâ— and each was inconsistent with the other Bellarm. de verbo l. 2. c. 15. Thus they tell us from S. Jerom That the Vulgar Tongue in Galatia was in effect the same with that of the Treviri in Germany And yet there and in the neighbouring Countries they had the Scriptures if not their Divine Service in Greek Not observing that Greek was the common Tongue of those parts and that both that and a Vulgar were there freely and generally spoken as Greek and Latine as well as the Gallick Tongues were so frequent in Massilia that it was called Trilinguis as S. Jerome shews in the same Dissertation of his So that these two the Common and Vulgar are so far from being inconsistent that notwithstanding the bold saying of our Countrey-man Sanders That the common people understand nothing but their Mother Tongue The experience of Orat. ut antea all Ages as well as our own shews that they are frequently met together But to proceed would they demonstrate that they do and may lawfully use the Latine now in Divine Service they attempt with great industry to prove that both that and the Greek were anciently Ledesma c. 9. n. 1. c. 27. n. 9. used therein And so they confound the learned and the common Tongues and compare those times and places in which the Latin and Greek were commonly known and understood with our times and places in which neither of them are understood but by the learned Lastly Would they shew that S. Paul in 1 Corinthiaâ—s Ledesma c. 27. n. 9. Sanders orat Bellarm. de verb. l. 2. c. 16. 14. doth not oppose Service in Latine they undertake to shew That he opposeth no other Service then what is altogether unknown and no Body understands as Persick and Arabick and that he doth not condemn a Learned Tongue thereby supposing the Learned Tongue and Tongue altogether unknown to be different in kind whereas they only differ so that the one is rarely understood and by very few in comparison and other is understood by none Now in all this they say litle or nothing to the purpose For if they plead for their Latin Service as Greek was in Galatia and Latin in Africa who is their Adversary For these Tongues were as I have shewed in those and the like places as well or litle less spoken and understood then the Vulgar and Mother Tongues And the Protestants do not think it unlawful to have the common Service in a Tongue which is commonly understood though it be not the Vulgar Tongue of the Nation especially in Maritim and Provincial Countries where there is a concourse of diverse Nations and where either these several Languages are understood or there is a componnd Language that serves for all as the Lingua Franca before spoken of But if they plead for Latin as it is now when a Dead and Learned Tongue that is where it is not known at all as in the West-Indies where yet it is as much used by those of the Roman communion in Mass as in Europe or where it is not known to the Vulgar people as it is with us and every where else then they speak to the purpose for that the Reformed do oppose but then the way of arguing hitherto taken notice of is of no use to them in the World and is no more to the purpose then if they would undertake to prove that there is at this day a famous University at Athens and that Latin is the Vulgar Tongue now at Rome because these were so formerly So that if we will know where the Controversie lies and what is contended for and against we must restore things to their proper places and I think all may be brought to an Issue by puting and resolving this plain Question viz. SECT II. Qu. Whither it be lawful and expedient to use such a Tongue in the publick Worship of GOD as is not vulgarly or commonly understood by the people acording to the way at this day required and practised in the Church of Rome If we
Militant in general but in particular for those whose persons and conditions were well known to them on Earth and these are cunningly shufled in by the Romish Doctors as proofs for invocation of them with a design to impose on the unwary vulgar who are supposed not to take notice of the difference but 't is a wonder if they should not for 't is wide enough betwixt their Praying for us and our Praying to them Neither is this the only instance wherein those cunning Sophisters play this game First alter the Nature of the Question and then where they have no Adversary to Triumph in demonstrating the truth of it If the Question be whither the Bishop of Rome be the Supreme head of the Church and has an absolute Jurisdiction and Monarchy over all other Bishops and Churches they shall bring Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 15. 16. you a number of Testimonies out of both Greek and Latin Fathers to prove St Peter had a Primacy of Honour and Authority If the be Question be whither the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament be Substantially turned into the body Bellar. de Euchar l. 2 and blood of Christ they shall write a whole Volum to prove the Truth and Reality of Christ's presence in it which we own as well as they but after a Spiritual manner not corporally and by the way of Transubstantiation If the Question be about Purgatory a place prepared for the Purification of those Souls that depart hence not quite cleansed they shall alledge you Fathers and those St. Ambr. Hil. Orig. Hierom. c. not a few of unquestionable name to prove the utter Consumption of all things by Fire at the end of the World So here when the Question is whither we ought to Pray to Saints departed they bring innumerable Fathers to prove that the Saints departed do Pray for us hence we hear of that of St. Ignatius My spirit salutes you not only Epist ad Tral now but also when I enjoy God and of St. Chrysostom in his Oration to those that were to be Baptized Remember me when that Kingdom receives you 4. They produce the sayings and practices of some few in the Church for the general and allowed Doctrine and Practice of the whole Church If the story should be true that Justina a Christian Virgin did in great distress jointly supplicate the blessed Virgin with God and Christ does it follow that it was the practice of all to do so It cannot be denied but that many of the Fathers let slip in the heat of their Affection and Oration many unwary speeches to this purpose and that many otherwise good Men were guilty of this excess of Devotion to the Martyrs the many miracles God was pleased to work at the Memorials of the Martyrs for the Honour and Confirmation of the Faith reasonably begat a custom amongst Christians to resort to those places and there to offer their Prayers to God and thinking it may be they could not easily honour those too much whom God was pleased after so wonderful a manner to declare his esteem of from Praying to God at their Tombs they began to Pray to them themselves But now We are to distinguish betwixt the speeches of some particular Fathers and the general Doctrine of the Church betwixt what they express in Rhetorical strains to move affection and what they lay down in plain terms to inform the judgement betwixt what comes from them in the heat of their Discourses and popular Orations and what in cool and deliberate debates they set down for the truth of Christ it 's generally confest that the Fathers of times hyperbolize particularly S. Chrysostom and we must not take their flights of Fancy for the Doctrine of the Church We are to distinguish also betwixt what the Church did teach and allow and what she only tolerated and was forced to bear with the Bishops and Governours of the Church being many times engaged in weightier mattersin defending the Christian cause again Heathens and Hereticks were not alwayes at leisure to reform abuses and irregular practices but were forced too often to connive at those Faults which they had not time and opportunity to redress St. Austine complains much of this piece S. Aust de morib Eccles c. 31. tom 1 Epis 119. ad Janu. approbare non possum liberius improbare non andeo of superstition in his dayes that it had got such an head that the good Father wanted power to give a check to it I can no way allow them sayes he and yet I dare not freely reprove them lest I either offend some good Men or provocke some turbulenâ— spirits 5. They cite the practice of the Ancients Praying to God that for the Intercession of those Holy Men that had died in the Lord he would grant them their requests as a good proof for direct Praying to them The Ancients generally believing that the Saints and Martyrs in the future state did continually Pray to God in behalf of the Church Militant on Earth and some that their Souls were present at their Shrines and Tombs and did joyn their Intercessions with those Prayers of the Christians that were there offered up to God were wont in their addresses to mention the Martyrs and to beg the effects of their Intercessions that God would be moved by their supplications as well as their own to grant a supply of their wants and necessities but this is no more Praying to them then Moses may be said to Pray to Abraham Isaac and Jacob when he besought God to remember them in behalf of the People of Israel then we may be said to Pray for help to that part of the Church of Christ that is at a great distance from us when we desire God to hear the Prayers of his Church Catholick disperst throughout the whole World in the behalf of all Christian people that in all places call upon him Thus it 's said by the Historian that the Emperor Theodâ—sius Ruâ—â—in Hist l. 2. c. 33. when Eugeniâ— and his Complâ—ces raised that dangerous Rebellion against him repaired With his Clergy and Laity to the Oraâ—ories and Chapples and Sanctorum intercessione there lyâ—â—g Prostrate before the Tombs and Monuments of the Aposties and Marâ—yrs begged aâ—d and succour by intercession of the Saints He did not pray to any Saintâ—r Saints he did not beg help of them but supposing they Prayed with him and for him he prayed unto God that he would send him help for the sake of their Inâ—eâ—cession in his behalf This is also the meaning of those expressions in St. Austin that They ought to commend themselves to the Prayers of the Martyrs and frequent Aug. de Cur. promort c. 4. their tombs with a Religious Solemnity that they may become partakers of their Meâ—its and be helpt by their Prayers that is not by praying to them bâ—â— holding as was then commonly believed that when Christians came to
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
Disciples but also of their more Learned Writers who whatever strength they really fancy may be in the Argument it self think it a very proper Weapon to attempt the Vulgar and the Weak withall to amuse and dazle the less discerning eve at least when backâ— and set off with the stately Names of Infallibility Succession Anâ—iquity and the like and they tell us roundly our Faith was but yesterday our Religion is new and upstart as only Henry the Eights and â—romwels contrivance they may truly say as much as their Treason was Cecils Plot That our Faith began only in the year 1517 in Saxony by one Martin Luther an Apostate Fryar who for the sake of a fair Nun and other designs renounc'd the Ancient Faith and set up his new Device of Protestantism at Spires which did not quietly last much above seven years for in the year Bellar. Tom. lib. 4. p. 287 1. 25. starts up Zuinglius after two years more he Anabaptists who change and correct Luther's Religion and draw great numbers of his disciples from him and himself for his reward dyed a strange Death great Noises and Crackings were heard in his Tomb which being opened neither Body nor Bones were found and the smell of Brimstone was ready to stifle the standers by And therefore they say we ought to look from whence we are faln to repent of our Heresie and returne to our first Love and not stick so close to our Religion the new invention of so ill a Man That we may therefore keep those firme that are members of our Religion and bring those back that have revolted from us into the Romish Communion we have endeavour'd to give a satisfactory Answer to this their Question Where was your Religion before the times of Luther Not to trouble our selves with such Legends as these and Uncharitableness along with them the Answer is thus 1. Telling them plainly where our Religion was before Luthers time 2. By shewing what Errors and Mistakes are included in the Question 3. To turn the Question upon themselves and ask them some others of the like nature 1. The plain Answer to the Question is this That our Religion was long before the times of Luther and believed and setled in many Kingdoms and Nations of the World and hath neither Novelty nor Singularity in it 'T is an old Religion I am sure 't is of Age and can speak for it self It hath lasted now these 1600 years and more founded at first by Christ and his Apostles handed down to us through many Sufferings and Persecutions and here it is preserved It contracted indeed in the coming down a great deal of rust by the Falseness and Carelesness of its keepers particularly by the Church of Rome we scowr'd off the rust and kept the mettal that 's the Romish Religon this is the English They added False Doctrines to the Christian Faith we left the one and kept to the other this is Ancient those are New Our Religion is the same with that of the Early Christians Martyrs and Confessors believed in the first 300 years and defended by all Councils truely General Our Religion in those first Ages was in Palestine and Greece in Egypt in Antioch where the Discâ—â—les Acts 11. 26. were fiâ—st called Christians and in Rome it self and wherever the great labours of her first Apostles carry'd her to the different and reâ—ote Countries of the World Then and there our Religion lâ—v'd where Peter Linus and Cletus and all the first and Pious Bishops of Rome did It suffered indeed great variety of changes and conditions by the interest and wickedness of men sometimes more Adulterated and sometimes more Pure it flitted from Country to Country sometimes greater and sometimes smaller in its number sometimes in a dejected and sometimes in a more flourishing state but somewhere or other it was intire and without mixture as it was at first given unto the world and such an old Religion as this we are of holding fast neither more nor less neither adding to nor diminishing what Christ and his Apostles taught and iâ— Antiquity must evidence the Truth of our Religion we are safe and secure that we have right on our side And this will appear if we consider these following things 1. What Conformity our Religion carries to that of Christ and his Apostles Let any impartial eye compare them both together and he will find the features and complexion the whole body of Religion the same in both Whatever they delivered out at first as Fundamental to Salvation whatever they instituted as parts of Devotion Discipline and Order we still faithfully retain in our Church and if any Truth of moment hitherto by Fraud or Negligence be concealed from her she is ready to receive it when ever it is made plain not having stopt up the way of Truth by a pretence of Infallibility or want of Modesty to confess an error She hath the same sense of the Nature Offices the Design and whole Undertakings of Christ that the truly Ancient Church had She receives the Creed and Bible and any Traditions that can be made out to be truly Divine in the same meaning and understanding that Christ and his Apostles gave to the first Christians and they to us What their thoughts of Saints and holy Souls departed were ours are thoughts of respect remembrance and imitation not divine Worship Christ instituted proper Figures and Symbols of Bread Wine to represent and confirm to conveigh and commemorate his bloudy Passion and Benefits to Mankind in this sense She preserves the Institution sacred and doth not really Sacrifice or Crucifie the LORD of Life again Christ commanded good works under the penalty of eternal Damnation She doth the same and in our Masters language bids the doers of them call themselves unprofitable Servants beating down Pride and Merit Christ and his Apostles told the World what departing Souls must expect Her sense is the same that there are no second Ventures and Trials to be made neither can a kind Friend with a good Estate left for Masses or Monks compound for a Life ill spent Run through the whole constitution of our Church in Articles of Faith and Rules of Manners you may trace them to Christ and his Apostles time and all other parts of her Government and Order are truly Primitive And it must needs be so if She sincerely folloâ—s her rule of Faith the holy Scriptures so Ancient so Divine and whatever is declared there essential to Salvation She brings into her Creed and resolves to keep it like a mighty Treasure faithfully unto death And indeed the Church of Rome confesses that what we do retain is ancient and Apostolical but pretends that we are defective in many things and want some necessaries which they have to make an entire Faith But we challenge them to prove that those opinions wherein we differ from them were delivered by Christ or any men divinely inspired in those times
And they seem to acknowledge we do not and therefore to make up the matter pretend a Divine Authority in the Church to cast new Articles and Truths fere de fide almost fit for a Creed and some others of them confess that some of their Opinions as Image-Worship and others were not maintain'd in the first Ages of Christianity for fear of coming too near the Heathens Worship and out of other Prudential considerations so that whosoever doth compare the Doctrine of our Church with that of Christ and his Apostles must needs conclude that our Religion is Ancient Christianity and that the charge of Novelty is groundless 2. The Nature of Reformation which was not to found a New Church but correct an old one Christianity that Pearl of great price was hid with trash and Mat 13. 3. filth that the Romish Church had heap'd upon it our Reformers removed only what loaded and obscur'd it and restored it to its first Beauty and Lustre Such a Reformation indeed is later then their errors and it must needs be so it naturally supposing them before otherwise 't is not Reformation but a destructive change but Primitive Christianity which is our Religion was long before the Dâ—sease of Popery though the cure of this Disease was after or later then the disease it self but the sound Body of Christianity for which we are concern'd was before them both for 't is not Reformation barely that we are pleased withal no more then with a Pill or Potion but only as necessary to drive away an inveterate Disease and recover an old Religion to its â—ormer Health When Christ reformed the Jewish Religion from the false senses and glosses that the Scribes and Pharisees had put upon it and grafted Christianity upon the old stock will the Romanists call this a New Religion or rather an old one well amended and improved by Divine Authority Bellarmin doth allow this for Truth and saith that Christianity was rather a new State and Condition then a new church and he that can call our Religion New because 't is mended and made now what it was about 1600 years ago may affirm that Christ built a new Temple when he Whipt the buyers and sellers out of the old And that Hezekiah built a 2 Chron. 305 New Sanctuary and Instituted a New Passover because he cleans'd the one and restor'd the other to its first Institution our Reformation did no more it only scal'd off the Leprosie that stuck to the Body of the Romish church it only pair'd off those Additions that Interest or Superstition Niceness or Foppery had glew'd to it what after remain'd was our Religion the same that Christ and his Apostles taught the world at first And if they can shew that any thing hath been added since pernicious to the Nature of the True and Old Religion our church is ready to remove it or that any thing is wanting that is necessary to its complement and perfection she is ready to entertain it with the same spirit of meekness and Wisdom and Regard to the Gospel that she used in the Reformation but hitherto upon good grounds and strict inquiry She is fully satisfied that Her Religion is absolute and compleat Christianity 3. We have many and impartial Judges on our side that our Religion is Pure and Old Christianity The particular church of Rome indeed that supports her self by a pretended Infallibility to be true to her Principle refuses to be tryed by any other Church but will be only Judge of her self and others too yet we that are certain and sure of the Truth of our Religion though not Infallible dare appeal to the Judgment of other Christian churches The Greek church condemns their half Communion the Doctrines of Purgatory Merit and Supererogation The Adoration of Images their locking up the Scriptures in an unknown Tongue their extreme Unction and sale of Masses and laughs at their Infallibility the thing that makes their errours in Faith incorrigible the Arminian Christians reject the Supremacy Baron Tom. 10. P. 256. of the Pope Transubstantiation Purgary and excommunicat those that worship Images The Jacobites the Indians of St. Thomas the Egyptian and Abassine Christians dissent from most or all of the Romish errours which we condemn We have all the truly ancient Christian Churches on our side and most of the Modern whom the busie Emissaries of Rome have not terrified or seduc'd into their Party Our Writters have appealed with great success to the Ancient Councils the holy Fathers and to the Learned and Pious Bishops and Priests of old and from thence discovered the Novelty of the Romish Faith and the good old way of the English Church And they dare not stand the trial when we desire to be determined by the best and infallible Judge the holy Scriptures exept they must give the meaning of them otherwise they load them with Ignominious Names of â— Lesbian rule mere Ink and Paper and a Nose of Wax Who will they be try'd by by a Council truly General No except it be called manag'd and Confirm'd by the Pope Will they be Judg'd by any that differ from them yet are men of good honest and unprejudic'd Judgements No they are out of the pale of the Church and stubborn Hereticks And the best reason they have for their assurance that they are in the right is that they are sure they are so and keep themselves safe in their Enchanted Castle of Infallibility The Arabian Philosopher was offended at and abhorr'd their barbarous Doctrine of Transubstantiation and eating of their God and resolv'd to stick to his Philosophical rather then be of such a Christian Religion The Roman Images and the Worship of them have laid a Stumbling block before the Jews who therefore approved our Sentence and condemnation of them having therefore such a number of good Testimonies and Judgements on our side we rise up and reverence the gray Hairs of our Religion which Rome once cloath'd in a wanton and phantastick dress and made it ridiculous which because we have pull'd off and put on its ancient habit and made it look manly with the Image of GOD and Christ upon it they call us Innovators Many of their own Writers have spoke in favour of the English Church and many of their distinctions in a fair sense have concluded for her Doctrine and shewn their dislike of many opinions of their own Church 4. That our Religion was long before Luther will appear from the oppositions that were made to the Papal corruptions which did not enjoy so quiet a life but were frequently disturb'd and cry'd oâ—t against not only by other Churches but by many honest and considering men in their own Communion Men they were not of Interest and Discontent Peevishness and given to change of little Learning and less conscience and not in the World but men eminent in their Generation men of Probity and Studies of Temper and consideration men that stood not alone