from that which animated the Church in the former and best ages The Reverend Prelates say in their Letter That they hold the same Faith with their Predecessors If this were true in all points it were indeed very hard to write an Apology for those that have separated from them I shall not engage in a long discussion of the sentiments of the Ancient Bishops of the Gallican Church yet that the Reader may not be too much wrought on by the confidence and plausibleness of this expressionâ— I shall only give a taste of the Faith of the first of all the Gallican Clergy whose works are yet preserved and that is Irenaeus I shall instance it in two particulars the one is the hinge upon which all our other Controversies turn that is whether the Scriptures or Oral Tradition is to be appealed to for determining matters of Controversie The other is the most material point in difference among us concerning the presence of Christ in the Sacrament whether in it we really receive the substance of Bread and Wine or only the Accidents As to the first he directly appeals to the Scriptures which he says were the Pillar â—nd ground of Truth and adds that the Valentinians did appeal to Oral Tradition from which he â—urns to that Tradition that was come from the Apostles on which he insists very copiously and puts all the authority of Tradition in this That it was derived from the Apostles And therefore says that if the Apostles had delivered nothing in Writing we must then have followed the Order of Tradition And after he has shewed that the Tradition to which the Valentinians pretended was really against them and that the Orthodox had it derived down from the Apostles on their side he returns to that upon which he had set up the strength of his cause to prove the truth from the Scriptures Now the Scriptures being the foundation on which the Protestants build and Oral Tradition together with the authority of the Church being that on which the Church of Rome builds it will be easie to every one that considers those Chapters referred to in Irenaeus to gather upon which of those he grounded his belief As for the other particular he plainly calls the Sacrament that Bread over which thanks have been given and says our flesh is nourished by the body and blood of Christ and concludes that our flesh by the Sacrament has an assurance of its Resurrection and Incorruptibility More particularly he says Our blood is encreased by the blood of Christ and that he encreases our body by that bread which he has confirmed to be his body and that by these the substance of our body is encreased and from thence he argues that our bodies receive an encrease not by any internal or invisible way but in the natural way of nourishment and so concludes that our bodies being nourished by the Eucharist shall therefore rise again Every one that considers the force of these words must conclude that he believed our bodies received in the Sacrament a real substance which nourished them and not bare Accidents If then upon this essay it appears that the first Writer of all Gallican Bishops does agree with the Protestants both in that which is the foundation upon which they build their whole cause and also in that particular opinion which is believed to be of the greatest importance then the Reader has no reason to believe that the present Bishops of France hold the same Faith which their Predecessors taught who first preached the Christian Religion in that Kingdom But now I come to answer the main Question which is indeed the whole substance of the Letter Why have they made the Schism If such a Letter with such a demand in it had come from the Abassin or Armenian Churches or perhaps from the Greek Churches whose distance from us is such and the oppressions they groan under are so extreme that they have little heart and few opportunities to enquire into the affairs or opinions of others it could not have been thought strange but to hear it from these among whom those live who have so often both in Writings and Discourses answered this question so copiously is really somewhat unaccountable Yet this is not all but it is added That the Protestants upon trial finding they could not shake their Doctrine have charged them only for their ill lives as if that were the ground of the Separation This it must be confessed had better become the affected Eloquence of a Maimbourg than the sincerity of so many eminent men of whom the mildest censure that can be past in this particular is That some aspiring Priest being appointed to pen this Letter that was better accustomed to the figures of a clamorous Rhetorick than the strict measures of Truth gave it this turn hoping to recommend himself by it and that the Bishops signed it in haste without considering it well Who of all the Protestants have made that Experiment and found that the Faith of the Church of Rome was not to be attackt and that she can only be accused for the ill lives of some in her Communion If this were all we had to object we do not deny but that all that the Fathers retorted on the Schismaticks particularly the Donatists did very justly fall on us and that we could neither answer it to God to the World nor our own Consciences if we had separated from their Church on no other account And this is indeed so weak a Plea that the Penner of the Letter shewed his skill at least if he was wanting in his sincerity to set up a pretence which he knew he could easily overthrow though the reasons he brings to overthrow it are not all pertinent nor convincing But this in conclusion is so managed as to draw an occasion from it to complement the present Pope some way to make an amends for their taking part with their King against him All that is to be said on this Head is That Protestants are not so unjust as to deny the Pope that now reigns his due praises of whose vertue and strictness of life they hear such accounts that they heartily wish all the Assembly of the Clergy from the President down to the Secretaries would imitate that excellent Pattern that he sets them A Zeal for converting Hereticks does not very well become those whose course of life has not been so exemplary that this can be imputed to an inward sense of Religion and to the motives of Divine Charity But in this point of the corruption of mens lives we may add two things more material The one is if a Church teaches ill Morals or at least connives at such Casuistical Doctrines as must certainly root out all the principles of moral vertue and common goodness out of the minds of men then their ill Morals may be improved to be a good argument for a Separation from them How much the Casuistical Doctrine of those
guilty of which is to worship that as a God which we do believe is only a piece of Bread 2. In this very Article it is plain that our Opinion is the surer side For as to the Spiritual efficacy of the Sacrament and due preparation for it which is all that we hold concerning it by their own Confession there can be no sin in that whereas if their opinion is false they are guilty of a most horrid Idolatry So there is no danger in any thing we do whereas there may be great danger on their side all the danger that is possible to be on our side is that we do not adore Christ if he is present which may be thought to be want of Reverence But that cannot be reasonably urged since we at the same time adore him believing him to be in Heaven and if this objection against us had any force then the Primitive Church for twelve hundred years must have been in a state of damnation for none of them adored the Consecrated Elements nor has the Greek Church ever done it 3. It is clear this general Maxime of taking the surer sidâ— is against them There is no sin in not worshipping Images whereas there may be a sin in doing it They confess it is not necessary to invocate the Saints and we believe it is sinful They do not hold that it is necessary to say Masses for redeeming Souls out of Purgatory and we believe that it is an impious profanation of the Sacrament They do not hold it is necessary to take away the Cup in the Sacrament we think it Sacrilegious They do not think those Consecrations by which Divine Vertues are derived into such a variety of things to be necessary we look on them as gross Superstitions They do not think the Worship in an unknown tongue necessary whereas we think it a disgrace to Religion So in all these and many more particulars it is clear that we are of the surer side 4. We own that Maxime That nothing is necessary to Salvation but what is plainly set down in the Scriptures but this is not to be carried so far as that it should be impossible by sophistry or the equivocal use of words to fasten some other sense to such passages in Scripture for then nothing can be said to be plain in any Book whatsoever But we understand this of the genuine meaning of the Scriptures such as a plain well-disposed man will find out if his mind is not strongly prepossessed or biassed with false and wrong measures 5. The Confidence with which any party proposes their opinions cannot be a true Standart to judge of them otherwise the Receipts of Mountebanks will be always preferred to those prescribed by good Physicians and indeed the modesty of one side and the confidence of the other ought rather to give us a biass for the one against the other especially if it is visible that Interest is very prevalent in the confident party The Third Method IS to confer amicably with them and to shew them our Articles in the Scriptures and Tradition as the Fathers of tbe first Ages understood both the one and the other without engaging in reasonings or the drawing out of Consequences by Syllogisms as Cardinal Bellarmin and Perron and Gretser and the other Writers of Controversie have done which ordinarily beget endless disputes It was in this manner that the General Councils did proceed and thus did S. Austin prove Original sin against Julian To this end says he O Julian that I may overthrow thy Engines and Artifices by the opinions of those Bishops who have interpreted the Scripture with so much glory After which he cites the passages of the Scripture as they were understood by S. Ambrose S. Cyprian S. Gregory Nazianzene and others Remarks 1. WE do not deny but amicable Conferences in which matters are proposed without the wranglings of Dispute are the likeliest ways to convince people And whenever they shew us their doctrines directly in the Scripture and Tradition we will be very unreasonable if we do not yield upon that Evidence When they give us good authorities from Scripture and Tradition for the Worship of Images and Saints for adoring the Host for dividing the Sacrament for redeeming Souls out of Purgatory for denying the people the free use of the Scriptures for obliging them to worship God in a Tongue not understood by them we will confess our selves very obstinate men if we resist such Conviction 2. The shewing barely some passages without considering the whole scope of them with the sense in which such words were used in such ages and by such Fathers will certainly misguide us therefore all these must be also taken in for making this Enquiry exactly Allowances also must be made for the heats of Eloquence in Sermons or warm Discourses since one passage strictly and philosophically expressed is stronger than a hundred in which the heat of Zeal and the Figures of Rhetorick transport the Writer And thus if the Fathers disputing against those who said that the Humane Nature of Christ was swallowed up by his Divine Nature urge this to prove that the Humane Nature did still subsist that in the Sacrament after the Consecration in which there is an Union between the Elements and the Body and Blood of Christ they do still retain their proper nature and substance such expressions used on such a design leâ—d us more infallibly to know what they thought in this matter than any thing that they said with design only to beget Reverence and Devotion can do 3. The Ancient Councils were not so sollicitous as this Paper would insinuate to prove a Tradition from the Fathers of the first Ages They took great care to prove the truth which they decreed by many arguments from Scripture but for the Tradition they thought it enough to shew that they did innovate in nothing and that some Fathers before them had taught what they decreed We have not the acts of the two first General Councils but we may very probably gather upon what grounds those at Nice proceeded by what S. Athanasius wrote as an Apology for their Symbol in particular for the word Consubstantial which he proves by many consequences drawn from Scripture but for the Tradition of it he only cites four Fathers and none of those were very ancient They are Theognistus Denis of Alexandria Denis of Rome and Origen and yet both that Father Hilary and S. Basil acknowledge that Denis of Alexandria wavered much in that matter and it is well known what advantages were taken from many of Origen's expressions So here we have only two undisputed Fathers that conveyed this Tradition We have the Acts of the third General Council yet preserved and in them we find a Tradition indeed alledged but except S. Cyprian and S. Peter of Alexandria they cite none but those that had lived after the Council of Nice and Pope Leo's Letter to Flavian
Gâ—neral In which I intend to shew that they have departed from the Tradition of the Church much more evidently than they can pretend that we have done And this is concerning the Popes power oâ— Deposing Kings which they who live under so mighty a Monarch have very prudently renounced But whether they have not more plainly contradicted the Tradition of the Church than the Reformers did shall appear by the sequel of this Discourse In order to which I shall lay down two grounds that seem undeniable in their own principles The one is That the Tradition of any Age or Ages of the Church when it is universal and undisputed is of the same authority with the Tradition of any other Age whatsoever For the promises made to the Church last continually and have the same force at all times And therefore a Tradition for these last six hundred years is of as strong an authority as was that of the first six Ages The second is That a Tradition concerning the measures of mens Obedience and actions is of the same authority with a Tradition concerning the measures of their Belief The one sort are practical and the other are speculative points and as more are concerned in a practical truth than in a speculative point so it has greater effects and more influence on the World therefore it is as necessary that these be certainly handed down as the other And by consequence a Tradition concerning any Rule of Life is as much to be received as that concerning any point of Belief for the Creed and the Ten Commandments being the two Ingredients of the positive part of our Baptismal Vow it is as necessary that we be certainly directed in the one as in the other and if there were any preference to be admitted here certainly it must be for that which is more practical and of greater extent Upon these two grounds I subsume that all the Characters of Oral Tradition by which they can pretend to find it out in any one particular agree to this Doctrine of the Popes power of deposing Princes that are either Hereticks or favourers of them The way sof searching for Tradition are these four First what the Writers and Doctors of the Church have delivered down from one age to another The second is what the Popes have taught and pronounced ex Cathedrâ which to a great part of that Communion is Decisive their authority being held Infallible and to the rest it is at least a great Indication of the Tradition of such an Age. The third is what such Councils as are esteemed and received as Oecumenical Councils have decreed as General Rules The fourth is the late famous Method of Prescription when from the received Doctrine of any one Age we run a back-scent up to the Apostles upon this supposition that the Doctrine of the Church chiefly in a visible and sensible thing could not be changed These are all the ways imaginable to find out the Tradition of past Ages and they do all agree to this Doctrine All the Writers for five or six Ages both Commentators on Scripture the School-men the Casuists and Canonists agreed in it so that Cardinal Perron had reason to challenge those of the contrary persuasion to shew any one Writer before Calvin's time that had been of another mind We do not cite this as a proof because Cardinal Perron said so but because the thing in it self cannot be disproved and in the Contests that fell in between the Popes and those Princes against whom they thundred no Civilian nor Canonist ever denied the Popes power of deposing in the case of Heresie It is true when the Popes pretended to a Temporal Dominion and that all Princes were their Vassals some were found to write against that other Princes contended about the particulars laid to their charge and denied that they were either Hereticks or favourers of Hereticks But none ever disputed this position in general that in a manifest case of Heresie the Pope might not depose Princes and it is too well known what both the Sorbonne determined in the case of Henry the Third and likewise how the body of the Clergy adhered to Cardinal Perron in the opposition he made to the condemnation of that opinion The next mark of Tradition is the Popes pronouncing an opinion ex Cathedrâ that is in a solemn Judiciary way founding it on Scripture and Tradition If Popes had only brutally made War upon some Princes and violently thrust them out of their Dominions this indeed were no mark by which we could judge of a Tradition But when we find Gregory the Seventh and many Popes since his time found this authority on passages of Scripture as that of the Keys being given to S. Peter Jeremiah the Prophet's being set over Kingdomes to root out to pluck up and destroy and that all power in Heaven and Earth was given to Chrâ—st and his bidding his Disciples to buy a Sword we must look on this as the declaring the Tradition of the Church So that it must eitâ—er be confessed that they are not faithful conveyers of it or that this is truly the Tradition of the Church And this has been done so often these last six hundred years that it were a needless imposing on the Readers patience to go about the proving it The Third Indication of Tradition is the Declaration made by Synods but chiefly by General Councils I need not here mention the many Roman Synods that have concurred with the Popes in the Depositions which they thundered out against Kings or Emperours since we have greater authorities confirming it The Third Council of Lateran declared that all Princes that favoured Heresie fell from their Dominions and they granted a Plenary Indulgence to all that fought against them The Fourth Council of the Lateran vested the Pope with the power of giving away their Dominions if they continued for a year obstinate in that their merciful disposition of not extirpating Hereticks The first Council of Lions concurred with the Pope in the deposition of the Emperour Frederick the Second which is grounded in the preamble on the power of binding and loosing given to S. Peter After these came the Council of Constance and they reckoning themselves superiour to the Pope lookt on this as a power inherent in the Church and so assumed it to themselves and therefore put this Sanction in many of their Decrees particularly in that for maintaining the Rights of the Church and in the Passports they granted which had been often added in the Bulls that confirmed the foundations of Monasteries that if any whether he were Emperour King or of what Dignity soever he might be opposed their Order he should thereby forfeit his Dignity The Council of Sienna confirmed all Decrees against Hereticks and the favourers of them that had been made in any former Councils and by consequence those of the Third and Fourth Councils in the Lateran The Council of Basil put
what is the true sense of those passages that are in dispute but by that same Church which conveys it to you This is S. Austin's method in many places but above all in his Book De utilitate Credendi and in his Book Contra Epistolam fundamenti In which he says I would not believe the Gospel if the authority of the Church did not oblige me to it This Method is handsomely managed in the Treatise of the true Word of God joyned to the Peaceable Method Remarks 1. GReat difference is to be made between the conveyance of Books and an Oral Tradition of Doctrine It is very easie to carry down the one in a way that is Morally Infallible An exact copying being all that is necessary for that Whereas it is morally impossible to prevent frauds and impostures in the other in a course of some Ages especially in times of Ignorance and Corruption in which the Credulity of unthinking people has made an easie game to the Craft and Industry of covetous and aspiring Priests Few were then at the pains to examine any thing but took all upon Trust and became so ready of belief that the more incredible a thing seemed to be they swallowed it down the more willingly 2. If this way of reasoning will hold good it was as strong in the mouths of the Iews in our Saviours time for the High Priest and Sanhedrim might have as reasonably pretended that since they had conveyed down the Books in which the Prophecies of the Messiah were contained they hâ—d likewise the right to expound those Prophecies 3. A Witness that hands a thing down without Additions is very different from a Judge that delivers things on his own Authority We freely own the Church to be such a Witness that there is no colour of reason to disbelieve the Tradition of the Books but we see great cause to question the credit of her decisions 4. In this Tradition of Books we have not barely the Tradition of the Church for it We find in all ages since the Books of the New Testament were written several Authors have cited many and large passages out of them We find they were very quickly translated into many other Languages and diverse of those are conveyed down to us There were also so many Copies of these Books every where that though one had resolved on so Sacrilegious an attempt as the corrupting them had been he could not have succeeded in it to any great degree Some additions might have been made in some Copies and so from those they might have been derived to others but these could not have bâ—en considerable otherwise they had been discovered and complained of and when we find the Church engaged in contests with Hereticks and Schismaticks we see both sides appealed to the Scriptures and neither of them reproached the other for violating that Sacred Trust. And the noise we find of the small change of a Letter in the Aâ—ian Controversie shews us how exact they were in preserving these Records As for the Errours of Transcribers that is incident to the Nature of Man and though some Errours have crept into some Copies yet all these put together do not alter any one point of our Religion so that they are not of great consequence Thus it appears how much reason we have to receive the Scriptures upon the credit of such a Tradition But for Oral Tradition it is visible how it might have been so managed as quickly to change the whole Nature of Religion Natural Religion was soon corrupted when it passed down in this Conveyance even during the long lives of the Ancient Patriarchs who had thereby an advantage to keep this pure that after ages in which the life of Man is so shortned cannot pretend to We also see to what a degree the Iewish Tradition became corrupted in our Saviours time particularly in one point which may be called the most essential part of their Religion to wit concerning their Messias what the nature of his Person and Kingdome were to be So that they all expected a Great Conquerour a second Moses or a David so ineffectual a mean is Oral Tradition for conveying down any Doctrine pure or uncorrupted The Ninth Method IS to tell them the Church in which they were before they made the Separation was the true Church because it was the only Church so that they could not Reform the Doctrine without making another Church For then she must have fallen into Errour and by consequence the Gates of Hell must have prevailed against her which is directly contrary to the Promise of Iesus Christ that cannot fail The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against her Remarks 1. A Church may be a True Church and yet be corrupted by many Errours for a â—rue Church is a Society of men among whom are the certain means of Salvation and such was the Iewish Church in our Saviours time For their Sacrifices had still an Expiatory Vertue and the Covenant made with that people stood still and yet they were over-run with many Errours chiefly in their notions of the Messias And thus as long as the Church of Rome acknowledges the Expiation made by the Death of Christ and applied to all that truly believe and amend their lives so long she is a True Church So that those of that Communion who adhere truly to that which is the great fundamental of the Christian Religion may be saved But when so many things were added to this that it was very hard to preserve this fundamental truth pure and entire then it was necessary for those who were better enlightned to call on others to correct the abuses that had crept in 2. It is hard to build a great super-structure on a figurative expression of which it is not easie to find out the true and full sense And in this that is cited there are but three terms and about every one of them great and just grounds of doubting do appear 1. It is not certain what is meant by the Gates of Hell which is an odd figure for an assailant If by Gates we mean Councils because the Magistrates and Courts among the Iews sate in the Gates then the meaning will be that the Craft of Hell shall not prevail against the Church that is shall not root out Christianity or if by Gates of Hell or the Grave according to a common Greek Phrase Death be to be understood it being the Gate through which we pass to the Grave then the meaning is this that the Church shall never die or be extinguished Nor is there less difficulty to be made about the signification of the word Church Whether it is to be meant in general of the body of Christians or of the Pastors of the Church and of the majority of them The Context seems to carry it for the Body of Christians and then the meaning will be only this That there shall still be a Body of Christians in the World And
as that without which we can never be certain of the Faith But if this is true then into what desperate scruples must all men fall For the resolution of their Faith turns to that which can never be so much as made probable much less certain The efficacy of the Sacraments depending on the intention of the Priest none can know who are truly Baptized or Ordained and who are not And it is not to be much doubted but that many profane Priests may have in a sort of wanton Malice put their Intention on purpose cross to the Sacrament For the Impiety of an Atheistical Church-man is the most extravagant thing in the World Beside this what Evidence can they give of the Canonical Ordination of all the Bishops of Rome The first Links of that Chain are so entangled that it is no small difficulty to find out who first succeeded the Apostles And it is not certainly known who suceeeded them afterwards for some few Catalogues gathered up perhaps from report by Historians is not so much as of the nature of a Violent presumption If we consider Succession only as a matter of Order in which we go on without Scrupulosity I confess there is enough to satisfie a reasonable man But if we think it indispensable both for the conveyance of the Faith and the vertue of the Sacraments then it is impossible to have any certainty of Faith all must be sounded on conjecture or probability at most It is but of late that formal Instruments were made of Ordinations or that those were carefully preserved and transmitted In a word difficulties can be rationally enough proposed concerning Succession that must needs drive one that sets up his Faith on it to endless scruples of which it is impossible he should be ever satisfied There is one thing of great consequence in this matter that deserves to be well considered Under the Mosaical Law God limited the Succession to the High Priesthood so that the first-born was to succeed and the great Annual Expiation for the whole people was to be performed by him Yet when in our Saviours time this was so interrupted that the High Priesthood was become Annual and wassold for money God would not suffer the people to perish for want of such Expiation but the Sacrifice was still accepted though offered up by a Mercenary Intruder And Caiaphas in the year of his High Priesthood prophesied So that how great soever the sin of the High Priest was the people were still safe in him that was actually in that Office And if this was observed in a dispensation that was chiefly made up of positive Precepts and carnal Ordinances it is much more reasonable to expect it in a Religion that is more free from such observances and is more Spiritual and Internal 2. Another ground on which those of the Roman Church build is this That a True Church must hold the truth in all things Which is so Sophistical a thing that it might have been expected wise and ingenious men should have been long ago ashamed of it It is certain the Iewish Church was the true Church of God in our Saviours time for their Sacrifices had then an Expiatory Vertue in them So that they had the certain means of Salvation among them which is the formal notion of a True Church And yet in so great a point as what their Messias and his Kingdome were to be we find they were in a very fatal errour The opinion of his being to be a Temporal Prince had been handed down among them so by Oral Tradition that it had run through them all from the Priests down to the Fisher-men For we find the Apostles so possessed with it that at the very time of Christs Ascension they were still dreaming of it And yet this was a gross Errour and proved of most mischievous consequence to them Of this they were so persuaded that the Supream Judicature or Representative of their Church the Sanhedrim that had much more to shew for its authority than a General Council can shew in the New Testament erred in this fundamental point and condemned Christ as a Blasphemer and declared him guilty of Death So that while they continued to be the True Church of God yet they erred in the point which was of all others the most important upon which it is evident that it is no good Inference to conclude that because a Church is a True Church therefore it cannot be in an Errour 3. Another pretence in that Church on which they build much and which makes great Impression on many weak minds is the Churches Infallibility in deciding Controversies by which all disputes can be soon ended and they conclude that Christ had dealt ill with his Church if he had not provided such a Method for the end of all Disputes But it is certain they have lost this Infallibility if they ever had it unless it be acknowledged that it is lodged in the Pope against which the Gallican Clergy has so lately declared And yet it can be no where else if it is not in him for as they have had no General Council for about one hundred and twenty years so they cannot have one but by the Popes Summons and if the Pope is averse they cannot find this Infallibility so at best it is but a Dormant Priviledge which Popes can suspend at pleasure In the Intervals of Councils where is it Must one go over Europe and poll all the Bishops and Divines to find their Opinions So in a word after all the noise about Infallibility they can only pretend to have it at the Popes Mercy And indeed he that can believe a Pope chosen as he generally is by Intrigues and Court factions to be the Infallible Judge of Controversies or that a Council managed by all the Artifices of crafty men as that at Trent appears to have been even by Cardinal Pallavicini's History was Infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost is well prepared to believe the only thing in the World that is more Incredible which is Transubstantiation There was as good reason for lodging an Infallible Authority among the Iews as among Christians for their Religion consisting of so many External Precepts concerning which Disputes might rise it seemed more necessary that such an authority should have been established among them than under a Dispensation infinitely more plain and simple And the Supream Authority was lodged with the Sanhedrim in much higher expressions under the Old Testament than can be pretended under the New as will appear to any that will read the fore cited place in Deuteronomy There was also a Divine Inspiration lodged in the Pectoral by which the High Priest had immediate Answers from the Cloud of Glory and when that ceased under the Second Temple yet as their Writers tell us that was supplyed by a degree of Prophecy which is also confirmed by what S. Iohn says concerning Caiaphas's Prophecying and yet after all this thâ—t