not annexed to the sensible species but to the proper substance of his flesh which is living and life-giving because of the Divinity which is united to it Upon which account all those who believe the real presence ought not to have any difficulty to communicate under one sole species because they there receive all that is essential to this Sacrament together with a plenitude so secure because there being now no real seperation betwixt the Body and the Blood as hath been said we receive entirely and without division him who is solely capable to satiate us This is the solid foundation upon which the Church interpreting the precept of Communion as declared we may receive the Sanctification which this Sacrament carries with it under one sole species and if she have reduced her Children to this sole species it was not out of disesteem of the other seeing on the contrary she did it to hinder those Irreverences which the confusion and negligence of people had occasioned in these later ages reserving to her self the re-establishment of communion under both kinds according as it should become more advantagious to Peace and Unity Catholic Divines have made it appear to those of the pretended Reformation that they have themselves made use of several such like Interpretations in what belongs to the use of the Sacrament but above all they had reason to remark this which is taken out of the 12 chap. of their discipline Title of the Lords Supper art 7. where we find these words The Bread of the Lords Supper ought to be administred to those who cannot drink wine upon their making protestation that it is not out of contempt and endeavouring what they can possibly to obviate all Scandal even by approaching the cup as neer their mouths as they are able They have judged by this regulation that both species were not by the institution of JESVS CHRIST essential to the Communion otherwise they ought to have absolutely refused the Sacrament to those who could not receive it whole and entire and not to give it them after a manner contrary to that which JESVS CHRIST had commanded in which case their disability would have been their excuse But our adversaries conceived it would be an excessive rigour not to allow at least one of the species to those who could not receive the other and as this condescendence has no ground in Scripture they must acknowledge with us the words by which JESVS CHRIST proposes to us the two species are liable to some interpretation and that this interpretation ought to be declared by the authority of the Church But it might seem as if this article of their discipline which was made in the Synod of Poitiers held in the year 1560 had been reformed by the Synod of Vertueil held in the year 1567. where it is said the company is not of opinion the bread should be administred to those who would not receive the Cup. These two Synods nevertheless are no ways opposite That of Vertueil speaks only of those who will not receive the Cup And that of Poitiers of these only who cannot In effect notwithstanding the Synod of Vertueil this article remains in their discipline and has been also approved by a latter Synod then that of Vertueil by the Synod of la Rochell in 1571 where this article was review'd and put into that stare in which it now is But supposing the Synods of the pretended reform'd Religion had differed in their sentiments it would only follow that the matter in question regards not Faith and that it is of the number of those which are at the Churches disposal according to their own Principles SECT XVIII The written and unwritten Word THERE remains nothing more now but to explicate what Catholics believe touching the Word of God and the Authority of the Church JESVS CHRIST having laid the Foundation of his Church by Preaching the unwritten Word was the first Rule of Christianity and when the Writings of the New Testament were added this unwritten Word did not upon that account lose its Authority which makes us reiceive with equal veneration all that was ever taught by the Apostles whether by Writing or byword of Mouth as St. Paul himself has expresly declared And it is a most certain sign 2 Thes 2.14 a Doctrine comes from the Apostles when it is universally embraced by all Christian Churches without any possibility of shewing its beginning We cannot chuse but receive all that is established after this manner with the submission due to Divine Authority and we are persuaded those of the Pretended Reformation who are not obstinate are in the bottom of their Hearts of the same Opinion it being impossible to believe a Doctrine received from the beginning of the Church can flow from any other source than that of the Apostles Wherefore our Adversaries ought not to wonder if we who are careful to gather together all our Fathers have left us should conserve the Depositum of Tradition as well as that of the Scriptures SECT XIX The Authority of the Church THE Church being established by God to be the Guardian of Scripture and Tradition we receive the Canonical Scriptures from her and let our Adversaries say what they will we doubt not but it is her Authority which principally determines them to reverence as Divine Books the Canticle of Canticles which has so few visible marks of a Prophetical Inspiration the Epistle of St. James which Luther rejected and that of St. Jude which might appear suspected because of some Apocriphal Books cited in it In fine it can only be from this Authority they receive the whole Body of Scripture which all Christians accept as Divine before their reading of it has made them sensible of the Spirit of God in it Being then inseparably bound as we are to the Holy Authority of the Church by means of the Scriptures which we receive from her Hands we learn Tradition also from her and by the means of Tradition we learn the true sence of Scripture Upon which account the Church professes she tells us nothing from her self and that she invents nothing new in her Doctrine she does nothing but declare the Divine Revelation by the interiour direction of the Holy Ghost who is given to her as her teacher That Dispute which was raised in the very time of the Apostles upon account of the Ceremonies of the Law shews clearly that the Holy Ghost explicates himself by the Church and their Acts have by the method by which that first Contest was decided taught all succeeding Ages by what Authority all other differences are to be ended So that as often as there shall happen any Disputes to cause a Division amongst the Faithful the Church will interpose her Authority and her Pastors assembled will say after the Apostles Act. 15.28 It his seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us And when she has spoken her Children will be taught they ought not to begin
Prelate is come to a fair composition about Transubstantiation He is willing to content himself with such a reality of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament as the Pretended Reform'd themselves believe An. Avert p. 27. When he treats of the Invocation of Saints He endeavours to mitigate and extenuate this worship of the Roman Church An. p. 24. both as to her Tenets and Practice Together with the Veneration of Saints he softens that of Images An. p. 24. An. p. 65. as also the Articles of Satisfaction Sacrifice of the Mass and the Popes Authority As for Images he is ashamed of the Excess to which the Doctrine as well as Practice has been carried The Anonymus who represents him as if he had changed the Council of Trents expression in the Article of Satisfaction p. 110. will needs have it that this change in the Expression proceeds from an alteration which he introduces in the Doctrine In fine he represents him as one who is going over to the Sentiments of the new Reformation or to use his own Expression like the Dove which returns to the Ark not finding where to rest his foot An. p. 104 368. He not only lays to his charge particular Opinions about the Merits of Good Works and the Authority of the Pope but seems ready if we would conform our selves to the Doctrine of the Exposition to admit of those two Articles which so much perplex those of his Communion There is nothing generally more frequently repeated in his Book An. Avert p. 23 26. Rep. p 3. c. than the reproaches he casts upon the Author of the Exposition for deserting the Communion of the Church of Rome He wishes all those of M. de Condoms Communion would reduce themselves to the moderations in this Book An. Avert p. 30. and write conformably to its sense This would says he a little after be a happy beginning of a Reformation which might have much more happy consequences Nay more he takes an advantage from these pretended allievations These Softnings of M. de Condom says he are so far from giving us an ill opinion of our Reformation An. p. 85. they confirm us that good and moderate Person themselves condemn at least a great deal that we do and by consequence in some measure acknowledge a Reformation to be useful and necessary He should have concluded quite otherwise For a Reformation such as theirs is which tends to a change in Doctrine ought not to regard those things which are condemned already by a common consent But the pretended Reform'd are willing to perswade themselves that the Honest and moderate Persons in Communion with Rome amongst which number they allow M. de Condom a place in many things abandon the Sentiments of their Church and come over as much as they can to the new Reformation Thus you see what they are made to believe by this strange manner of mis-representing the Catholick Doctrine Being accustomed to that hideous and terrible form in which their Ministers represent it in their Pulpits they imagine those Catholicks who lay it open in its natural Purity disguise and alter it The more justly we represent it as it is the less are they acquainted with it and they imagine we are going over to them when we only disabuse them of their false preocupations 'T is true they say not always the same thing The Anonymus who accuses M. de Condom of making such considerable alterations in the Doctrine of the Church p 61 6 tells us this Exposition has nothing new in it but a dextrous and delicate turn and in fine nothing but apparent qualifying which consisting only in some expressions or in things of small consequence gives no body any Satisfaction and only raises new difficulties instead of resolving old So that he seems to be sorry for having represented the Exposition as a Book which made an alteration in the Faith of the Church in all its principal points not only in the Expressions but in the Doctrine Let him take it which way he pleases If he continue to think a Book so truly Catholick as the Exposition contrary to so many important points of the Roman Faith he shews himself never to have had any thing but false Ideas of its Doctrine And if it be true that by sweetning only the expressions or retrenching as he says matters of small consequence the Catholick Doctrine seems to him so much more tractable he will in the end find the grounds of it were better then he imagined But the truth of the matter is M. de Condom has not betrayed his trust nor dissembled the Faith of the Church in which the Holy Ghost has placed him a Bishop And the pretended Reform'd could not perswade themselves that a Doctrine which already appears less strange by the sole exposition of it and that an Exposition so plain so easie and so 〈◊〉 should be that Doctrine which their Ministers represented to them full of Blasphemy and Idolatrous We ought no doubt to give God thanks for such a disposition because although it shew in them a strange prejudice against us yet it gives us hopes they will look upon our Tenets with a more equal temper when once they are satisfied that the Doctrine of this Treatise which seems to them already more pleasing is the pure Doctrine of the Church So that we are so far from being angry at them for making so great a difficulty to to believe us when we propose our Faith to them that we are obliged in Charity to give them Lights so clear and evident that they may not hereafter doubt but it was faithfully expounded to them The thing shews it self and we need but tell them that this Treatise of the Exposition which they believe is contrary not only to the Common Tenets of the Doctors of the Roman Church but also to the words and Doctrine of the Council is approved by the whole Church and that after having received divers Testimonies of Approbation from Rome as well as from other places it has at last been approved by the Pope himself in the most express and most Authentick manner that could be expected This Book had no sooner appeared in publick but the good repute it had throughout France was testified to the Author by Letters from all sorts of People from Lay Persons Ecclesiasticks Religious and Doctors but especially from the most Learned Prelates of the Church whose Testimonies he could even then have produced had the Subject been ever so little dubious or new But because the Pretended Reform'd are apt to believe us in France to have particular thoughts and Tenets which approach nearer unto theirs in matters of Faith than the rest of the Church and particularly than Rome it is convenient we should let them see how matters there were carried on As soon as this Treatise was come forth Cardinal Bouillon sent it to Cardinal Bona desiring him to examine it with
the utmost Rigour Letters could no sooner return from Rome to Paris but there came also from this Learned and Holy Cardinal whose memory will be perpetuated in the Church with eternal Benediction that honourable approbation of his which you will find in the sequel among the rest that we shall speak of The Book was Printed the first time about the end of the year 1671. And this Cardinals answer is dated the 26. January 1672. Cardinal Sigismond whose death the whole Church doth still regret writ no less favourably concerning it to M. l' Abbe de Dungeau He tells us expresly that M. de Condom has spoken very well of the Popes Authority and whereas this Abbot had written him word that some scrupulous persons here apprehended lest this Exposition should be looked upon at Rome as one of those Explications of the Council prohibited by Pope Pius IV he shews how ill grounded this scruple is He adds that he found the Master of the Sacred Palace the Secretary and the Consulters of the Congregation dell ' Indice all the Cardinals that compose it and in particular the Learned Cardinal Braneas President of it of the same opinion and that they did all of them highly applaud this Treatise of the Exposition This Letter bears date the 5th of April 1672. The Master of the Sacred Palace was at time the Reverend Father Hyacinth Libelli a famous Divine whose merits and great Learning raised him shortly after to the Dignity of Archbishop of Avignon His Letter of the 26th of April 1672 written to his E. the Cardinal Sigismond shews what esteem he had of this Book for he tells him there is not so much as the shadow of a fault in it and that if the Author desire it should be Printed at Rome he will give all the necessary permissions without altering the least tittle in it In effect M. l' Abbe Nazari famous for the Journal des Scavans which he writes with so much elegance and exactness was at that time about an Italian Version of it which his E. the Cardinal d' Estrees caused to be reviewed and did himself peruse some of the principal parts that it might be entirely conformable to the Original The Book had been already done into English by the late Abbot Montaigue whose zeal and vertue is known to the whole World and there wanted not many Testimonies to shew that his Version was well received by all the Catholicks of England This Translation was Printed in the Year 1672 And in the Year 1675 it was put into Irish and Printed at Rome by the Printers of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide The Author of this Version the Reverend Father Porter of the Holy order of St. Francis and Superiour of the Convent of St. Isidorus had some time before ordered a book called Securis Evangelica to be Printed at Rome it self in which a great part of this Treatise of the Exposition was inserted to prove the tenets of the Church when faithfully expounded to be so far from ruining the Foundations of Faith that they do establish them In the mean time the Italian Version went on with an exactness which became a Subject of that importance where one word ill rendred would spoil the whole work and the Reverend Father Capisucchi Master of the Sacred Pallace Licensed it to be Printed in the Year 1675 as appears by his answer of the 27th of June following to M. de Condoms Letter of thanks for it This Prelate after having heard from several parts of Germany that this Treatise had been well approved of there received a more ample Testimony of it in a Letter of the 27th of April 1673 from the Bishop and Prince of Paderhoâ—n then Coadjutor and at present Bishop of Munster in which that Prelate whose name bears with it his Elogium says that he took care that this work should be turned into Latin that it might be made Common every where and especially in Germany but the succeeding Wars or some other occupations having hindred the performance of it the Bishop of Castory Apostolical Vicar in the United Provinces was desirous that a Latin Version which the Author himself had examined might be made publick and accordingly it was Printed at Antwerp in the Year 1678. Not long after in the same year by the same Bishops order this Treatise was again Printed at Antwerp in Dutch with the Approbation of the Ordinary and the Doctors in those parts so much did this Prelate who composes such excellent things himself judge this to be profitable for the instruction of his People The Bishop of Strasbourgh who notwithstanding the miscries of War was no less careful of his Flock resolved about the same time to procure that this Book might be turned into High Dutch and published with a Pastoral Letter to all those of his Diocess and having advertised the Pope of his design his Holiness caused him to be informed that he knew the Book long before and that as he had heard from all parts it was the occasion of many Conversions so the translation of it could not but be advantagious to his People About this time the Italian Version was finished with all the exactness and elegancy possible Monsieur l' Abbe Nazari dedicated it to the Cardinals of the Congregation de propaganda side by whose order it was printed the same Year 1678. by the Printers belonging to that Congregation In the front of this Version was placed the Cardinal Bona's Letter the Coppy of which was fouâ—â— at Rome in the Hands of his Secretary as also the Approbations of M. l' Abbe Ricci Consultor of the Holy Office of the Reverend Father M. Laurence Brancati de Laurea Religious of the Order of St. Francis Consultor and Qualificator of the Holy Office and Bibliothecarian of the Vatican and of M. L' Abbe Gradi Consultor of the Congregation Dell ' Indice and Bibliothecarian of the Vatican that is by the chief men in Rome for Piety and Learning This Book was presented to the Pope as the Latin Translation had been before And he had the goodness to order M. l' Abbe de St. Luke to write to the Author and to let him know that he was satisfied with it which he also repeated several times to the French Embassadour The Author who thought he had nothing more to wish for after such an Approbation gave with a profound respect his most humble thanks to the Pope in a Letter dated Nov. 22. 1678. In answer to which he received a Breve from his Holiness of the Fourth of Jan. 1679 which contains such an express approbation of this Book that it cannot be hereafter doubted but it maintains the pure Doctrine of the Church and of the Apostolick See After this approbation I needed not to have mentioned any others but I was willing to shew how this Book which was threatned by the Ministers with such opposition in the Church and which they imagined was so contrary to her common
Doctrine has naturally as I may say passed through all the degrees of Approbation till it came to that of the Pope himself which confirms all the rest Those of the Pretended Reformed Religion may at present see how they were imposed upon An. Avert p. 23. when they were told The Person was known and that a Catholick too who writ against this Exposition of M. de Condom It would certainly be a strange thing this good Catholick unknown to all others of that Religion should make the Enemies of the Church his only Confidents in a Work which he designed against a Bishop of his own Communion But this Imaginary Writer makes the World stay too long and the Pretended Reform'd are too credulous if they suffer themselves hereafter to be amused by such like Promises Thus one of the necessary Questions to be answered in vindication of the Exposition is entirely dispatch'd We need not now go about to refute those Ministers who held the Doctrine of the Exposition not to be that of the Church Time and Truth have so refuted their allegations that no room is left for a reply M. Nogâ—ier would first hear the Oracle of Rome speak before he would admit M. de Condom to have rightly explicated the Catholock Faith p. 41. I give no credit says he to those Approbations which these Bishops give in Writing Other Doctors want not the like Approbations and after all the Oracle of Rome must speak in matters of Faith The Anonymus was of the same mind and both of them supposed nothing more could be said in this matter against M. de Condom if once this Oracle had but spoken This Oracle has now spoken this Oracle I say which the whole Catholick Church hearkned to with so much respect in the very origine of Christianity and the answer it has given has shewn what this Prelate had said hath nothing new or to be suspected in it nothing in a word which is not receiv'd throughout the whole Church Nay this Question being answered all the others are in a manner insensibly dispatcht Mr. de Condom held the Catholick Doctrine was never rightly understood by the pretended Reform'd and that the Authors of their Separation had magnified the Objects to render them odious What he said appears now most certain seeing it is manifest on the one side the Exposition proposes to them the Catholick Faith in its Purity and on the other that it appeared less strange to them than they thought it was But if they find their Pretended Reformers to the end they might animate them against that Church in which their Ancestors served God and in which they themselves received Baptism were forced to fly to those Calumnies which we see now are not maintainable how can they dispence with themselves if they search not a new And why are they not afraid to persist in a Schism which is manifestly founded upon false Principles in even the most principal points They believ'd for example they had good grounds to separate from the Church under pretence that whilst she taught the merit of good Works she destroyed Free Justification Gratuite and that Confidence which a Christian ought to have in JESVS CHRIST only Their breach was principally founded upon this Article An. p. 86. The Anonymus thinks it enough to say The Article concerning Justification is one of the chief that gave occasion to the Reformation But M. Noguiers speaks more plainly Nog p. 83. Those says he who were the Authors of our Reformation had reason to propose the Article of Justification as the most principal of the rest and the most Essential Foundation of their separating At present then seeing M. de Condom tells them together with the whole Church Expos p. 14 15. That she believes we cannot have Life but in Jesus Christ in whom alone she puts all her Hope That she asks all things hopes all things and gives thanks for all things through our Lord JESVS CHRIST and in fine that she places all the hopes of Salvation on him What would they have more The Church tells us Expos p. 15. That all our Sins ars pardon'd by pure Mercy through JESVS CHRIST That we owe that Justice which is in us by the Holy Ghost to his free undeserved liberality and that all our good Works which we do are so many gifts of his Grace The Author of this Exposition who teaches this Doctrine does not teach it as his own God forbid Ibid. p. 15. He teaches it as the clear and manifest Doctrine of the Council of Trent and the Pope approves his Book After this shall it be again said That the Council of Trent and the Roman Church overthrow Free Justification and that trust which the Faithful ought to repose in Jesus Christ alone Is not this unsufferable And if we should hold our Tongues would not the Stones cry aloud and proclaim us injur'd It must be also granted as it was taken notice of in the Exposition Ex. p 15. that those Disputes which the Pretended Reform'd have raised upon so capital a Point are almost brought to nothing not to say wholly refuted No body will doubt of it if they consider what the Anonymus has writ concerning the merit of Good Works with the approbation of four Ministers of Charenton We acknowledge says he as in Justice we must M. de Condom and those of the Roman Church An. p. 104. who hold the most Orthodox Opinions concerning Grace express themselves almost in all things as we do We agree with them in the main But since he promised us so much Justice he ought to have acknowledged that M. de Condom whom he makes here to be of a particular Sect has not said one word concerning the merit of Good Works which is not taken from the Council Expos p. 13 14 15. He said Eternal Life ought to be proposed to the Children of God both as a Grace which is mercifully promised to them by the means of our Saviour Jesus Christ and as a Recompence which is faithfully rendred to their good Works and to their merits in virtue of that Promise He said That Merits are the gifts of God He said We can do nothing of our selves but that we can do all things with him who strengthens us and that our whole confidence is in JESVS CHRIST And the rest which you may see in their proper place By this means it is he has satisfied the Pretended Reform'd and made them say they agree with him in the main Seeing therefore these Propositions are taken word by word from the Council they cannot hereafter but acknowledge the Principal Subject of their complaints to be taken away by the sole proposing the Decrees and proper Terms of a Council so much hated and blamed amongst them What is it offends them most in the Satisfactions which the Church exacts from the Faithful but only that they think Catholicks looks upon those of
FOR VS No matter for that the Ministers will never believe it They must then raise out of their Catechism and their Confession of Faith these accusations of Idolatry with which they are filled they must retrench in their Sermons so many bloody Invectives which have no other Grounds and this they cannot resolve of and let us make what Declarations we can of our Minds they will neither believe the Council not its Catechism nor our Confession of Faith nor the Bishops nor the Pope himself It is not necessary to repeat here what is said in the Exposition as to other objections Exp. p. 8. and principally as to that where they accuse the Church of attributing to Saints a divine Knowledge and Power whilst she teaches they can neither know nor do any thing of themselves But the accusation of Idolatry has another Foundation which they accuse M. de Condom to have palliated as well as the others And it is the Article concerning Images An. Av. p. 24. where nevertheless he has searched no other Palliations but to expose faithfully the meaning of the Church Rep. p. 65. There needs no more than this to make the very Suspition of Idolatry to vanish according to the Principles of the Pretended Reform'd and they need only in this compare the Doctrine of their own Catechism with that of the Council of Trent represented in the Exposition Their Catechism upon this Commandment Dim 23. Thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image Asks whether God forbids the making of any Image And the answer is No but that God forbids only the making of any Image whereby to represent God or to adore it Behold the two things which they think forbidden in this Precept of the Decalogue It may be they will do us the Justice to believe we do not pretend to represent God and that if they see in some Pictures God the Father Painted in that form which he was pleased so often to appear in to his Prophets we pretend no more to derogate from his Invisibile and Spiritual Nature than he himself when he exhibited himself under that form The Council explicates sufficiently to them upon this account Sess 25. that we pretend not thereby to represent or express the Divinity or to give it any Colours and I think I should do them an injury in proceeding to a clearer Proof Let us pass to the second part of their Doctrine and let us learn from their Catechisms what form of Adoration is condemned To Prostrate ones self says the Answer before an Image to pray to it to how the Knee before it or shew some other sign of reverence as if God exhibited himself there to us This is in effect the Errour of the Gentiles and the proper Character of Idolatry But they who believe Expos p. 9 10 11. with the Council That Images have neither Divinity nor Vertue in them for which they ought to be reverenced and who place all the benefit in their recalling the Originals to our remembrance do not believe that God in them exhibits himself to them It is not therefore Idolatry by the consent of the Pretended Reform'd and according to the proper Definition of their Catechism The Anonymus seems to have been sensible of this Truth in that place where objecting this Commandment of the Decalogue he says P. 67. that God forbids to make Images and to worship them He is in the right The words of the Precept are express and the Images there spoken of are those which are forbidden to to be made as well as to be worshiped That is to say according to the explication of his Catechism those which are made to represent God and those which are made to show him present and which are worshipped with the same intention as full of his Divinity We neither make nor suffer any of this nature We do not worship Images God forbid but we make use of Images to put us in mind of the Originals Our Council so odious to the pretended Reform'd Church teaches us no other use of them Is this then enough to make them say as that Church doth in her own Confession of Faith that all sorts of Idolatry are in vogue in the Roman Church Art 28. Is it for this that her Discipline calls us Idolaters and our Religion Idolatry Disc art 11.13 Art 5.2 Without doubt they represent to themselves other things than our Doctrine when they give us the name of Gentiles They believe we follow their abominable Errors and that we believe as they did that God shews himself to us in those Images Had it not been for these mortal Prejudices had it not been for Ideas which they frame to themselves of the sentiments of the Church Christians could never have imagined it so detestable a crime to kiss the Cross in remembrance of him who bore our Iniquities upon the wood nor that so simple and natural a demonstration of those sentiments of tenderness which that Pious Object excites in our hearts ought to make us regarded as if we Adored Baal or the Golden Galves of Samaria During this strange preocupation of the Pretended Reform'd this Treatise of the Exposition might well appear to them which really in effect it did a Book full of Artifice which did nothing but extenuate the Sentiments of Catholicks But now when they see clearly all the Artifice of this Book is to separate the Doctrines which they have imputed to the Church from those which she professes that all the mitigations he makes in Doctrine is that he has taken off that hidious Masque which the Ministers had put upon it let them confess this Church was not worthy of so much horror as they had for her and that at least she deserves to be heard Neither the Pope nor the Sea Apostolick ought to be hereafter accused of diminshing that adoration which is due to God nor that confidence which a Christian ought to establish in his sole goodness through our Lord Jesus Christ since they see without further search this Treatise of the Exposition which is made only to explicate these two Truths has received at Rome and from the Pope himself so Authentick an Approbation After this they will certainly be ashamed of that Title which they give the Pope No one can think on it without horrour nor hear without astonishment that the Pretended Reform'd who boast to follow Scripture word for word when the Apostle St. John who has alone named Antichrist tells us three or four times that Antichrist is he who denies that JESVS CHRIST is come in flesh 2. Joh. 1.7 1 Joh. 2.22.4.3 dare so much as think that he who teaches so fully the Mystery of JESVS CHRIST that is to say his Divinity his Incarnation the superbundance of his Merits the necessity of his Grace and that absolute confidence we must have in it should nevertheless be that Antichrist described by the Apostle But it is
objected against the Popes 2. Thes 2.3.4 that they are that wicked Person that man of Iniquity who has seated himself in the Temple of God and makes himself adored as God They who confess themselves not only mortal men but sinners who pray every day with the rest of the Faithful forgive us our offences and who never approach the Altar without Confessing of their sins and without saying in the most essential part of the Holy Sacrifice they hope for eternal life not by their own Merits but through the Bounty of God in the name of our Lord JESVS CHRIST T is true they maintain that Primacy which JESVS CHRIST has given them in the Person of St. Peter but it is by That they advance the Work of JESVS CHRIST himself the Work of Charity and Concord which would never have been perfectly accomplished if the Universal Church and all the Episcopal Order had not one head of Ecclesiastical Gover ment upon Earth to make the Members act in concurrence and accomplish in the whole Body the Mystery of Unity so much recommended by the Son of God It is just as much as nothing to answer that the Church has her true Head in Heaven who Unites her by animating her with his Holy Spirit who doubts of it But who does not know this Holy Spirit who disposes all things with as much sweetness as efficacy knows also how to prepare exteriour means proportionable to his designs The Holy Ghost both teaches and governs us interiourly therefore he establishes Pastors and Teachers to Act exterourly The Holy Ghost Unites the Body of the Church and the Ecclesiastical Government therefore it is he places at the head a common Father and a principal disposer who may Govern the whole Family of JESVS CHRIST We will call to witness the Consciences of those of the Pretended Reform'd Religion In this unfortunate age when so many wicked Sects endeavour by little and little to undermine the Foundations of Christianity and believe it enough only to name JESVS CHRIST to introduce indifferency in Religion and manifest impiety into the bosom of the Church Who sees not the necessity of a Pastor who may watch over his flock and authorized from above encite all others whose vigilance might slacken Let them in reality tell us if it be not the Seconians the Anabaptists the Independants those who under the name of Christian Liberty would establish indifferency in Religions and so many other pernicious Sects which they condemn as well as we who fly with the greatest impetuosity against St. Peters Chair and cry loudest that his Authority is Tyrannical I do not wonder at it those who would divide the Church or surprise her fear nothing more than to see her march against them like a well ranged Army under one head Let us not raise a quarrel with any let us only reflect whence come those Books wherein these dangerous Licenses and Antichristian Doctrines are taught at least none can deny but the See of Rome by the very Constitution of it is incompatible with these Novelties and if we could not know by the Gospel that the Primacy of this See is necessary for us Experience it self would convince us of it Moreover We must not be astonished if this Author of the Exposition who places the essential Authority of this See in those things wherein all Catholic Schools agree hath been approved without difficulty The Chair of St. Peter stands in need of no disputing what all Catholics acknowledge without contestation suffices to maintain that Power which was given to it for edification and not for destruction The Pretended Reform'd should hereafter give way no more to those vain Phantoms with which they are frighted What does it profit them to search in Histories for the Vices of Popes when if what they meet with there should be true does the Vices of men destroy the institution of JESVS CHRIST and the Priviledge of St. Peter shall the Church rise in Rebellion against a Power which maintains her Unity under pretence that some have abus'd it Christians are accustomed to reason upon higher and more true Principles and know that God is able to maintain his works in the midst of all the evils which accompany humane frailty We do then Conjure these of the Pretended Reform'd Religion by that Charity which is God himself by the name of Christian which is common to us both not to judge of the Doctrine of our Church by what they hear in their Sermons or read in their Books where many times the heat of dispute and Prevention not to mention any other make things frequently otherwise represented then they are but to hearken to this Exposition of the Catholic Doctrine It is a work in reality which consists not so much in disputing as in explicating clearly our belief In which to see how plainly the Author has proceeded we need only consider his design He promised in the very beginning 1. To propose the true Tenets of the Catholic Church Exp. p. 2. and to distinguish them from those which are falsely imputed to her 2. To the end no one should doubt but that he faithfully proposed the true Sentiments of the Church Exp. p. 2. he promised to take them from the Council of Trent where the Church has spoken decisively upon the things in question 3. He promised to propose to the Pretended Reform'd not all points in general Exp. p. 2. but those which caused the greatest separation betwixt them and us and to speak properly those which they made the occasions of their breach 4. He promised that what he said to make the decisions of the Council more intelligible Exp. p. 2. should be approved of in the Church and manifestly conformable to the Doctrine of the same Council All this is plain and just And in the first place no body can think it strange we should distinguish the Churches Tenets from those which are falsely imputed to her When Persons are animated beyond measure for want of a right understanding and when strange prejudices move great disputes there is nothing more natural nothing more charitable then to explicate matters clearly The Holy Fathers practised a way fraudless and calm like this to set men right again Whilst the Arians and Semi-Arians decryed the Symbol of Nice and the Consubstantiality of the Son by the false Ideas they fixed upon them St. Athanasius and St. Hilarius the two most illustrious defenders of the Nicene Faith represented to them the true sense of the Councils and St. Hilarius said to them S. Hil. lib. de syn Let us both together condemn false Interpretations but not destroy the certainty of Faith The Word Consubstantial may be mis-understood let us resolve how we may rightly understand it We may lay down the true state of Faith betwixt us if we do not overthrow what has been rightly established but remover mis-understanding It is Charity it self which dictates such words and suggests such
difficulty from such Consequences by this short answer of M. Daille and tell them that the Catholic Church disavowing them they cannot be imputed to her without Calumny But I will go yet further and show these Gentlemen of the Pretended Reform'd Religion by the sole Exposition of our Doctrine that the Catholic Church is so far from ruining the Fundamental Articles of Faith either directly or indirectly that on the contrary she establishes them after so solid and evident a manner that no one can question her right understanding of them without great injustice SECT III. Religious Worship is terminated in God alone TO begin with that Adoration which is due to God alone the Catholic Church teaches us that it consists principally in believing he is the Creator and Lord of all things and in adhering to him with all the Powers of our Soul by Faith Hope and Charity as to him alone who can render us happy by the Communication of an infinite Good which is himself This interiour Adoration which we render to God in Spirit and in Truth has its exteriour marks of which the principal is Sacrifice which cannot be offered to any but to God because a Sacrifice is established to make a publick acknowledgment and a solemn protestation of Gods Soveraignity and our absolute dependance The same Church teaches us that all Religious worship ought to terminate in God as its necessary end and that if the honour which she renders to the Blessed Virgin and to the Saints may in some sence be called Religious it is for its necessary Relation to God But before we explicate any further in what this honour consists it will not be unuseful to take notice how those of the Pretended Reformation obliged by the strength of truth begin to acknowledge that the custom of praying to Saints and honouring their Reliques was established even in the fourth age of the Church Monsieur Daille grants thus much in that book he published against the Tradition of the Latin Church about the object of Religious worship and accuses St. Basil St. Ambrose St. Hierome St. John Chrysostom St. Augustin and many more of those famous Lights of Antiquity who lived in that Age and above all St. Gregory Nazianzen who is called the Divine by excellence of having altered in this point the Doctrine of the three foregoing ages But it will not appear very likely that M. Daille should understand the Sentiments of the Fathers of the first three Ages better then those who gathered as I may say the succession of their Doctrine after their deaths and this will be so much the less credible because the Fathers of the fourth Age were so far from perceiving that they introduced any novelty in that worship that this Minister on the contrary has quoted several express Texts by which he shows clearly that they pretended in Praying to Saints to follow the example of their Predecessors But without any further examination what might be the Sentiments of the Fathers of the three first ages I will content my self with what M. Daille is pleased to grant who allows us so many great men who taught the Church in the fourth age For tho' he has taken upon him twelve hundred years after their deaths to give them in derision the name of a kind of Sect calling them Reliquarists that is to say Relique honourers yet I hope those of his Communion will have more respect for these great men They dare not at least accuse them of falling into Idolatry by praying to Saints or of destroying that trust which Christians ought to put in JESVS CHRIST and it is to behoped henceforwards they will not reproach these things to us when they consider they cannot do it without accusing at the same time these excellent men whose sanctity and learning they profess a reverence for as well as we But seeing our design is here to expound our belief rather then to show who were the defenders of it we must continue our explication SECT IV. Invocation of Saints THe Church in teaching us that it is profitable to pray to Saints teaches us to pray to them in the same Spirit of Charity and according to the same order of fraternal society which moves us to demand assistance of our brethren living upon Earth and the Catechism of the Council of Trent concludes from this Doctrine that if the quality of Mediator Cat. Rom. part 3. tit De Cultu Invoc Sanct. which the Scripture gives to JESVS CHRIST received any prejudice from the Intercession made to the Saints who Reign with God it would receive no less from the Intercession made to the faithful who live with us This Catechism shows us clearly the extream difference betwixt our manner of imploring God's assistance and that of imploring the aid of Saints For saith it we pray to God either to give us good things Part 4. tit Quis orandus sit or to deliver us from evil but because the Saints are more acceptable to him than we are we beg of them to undertake our cause and to obtain for us those things we stand in need of From whence it comes to pass that we use two very different forms of Prayer for to God the proper manner of speaking is to say HAVE PITY ON VS HEAR OVR PRAYER whereas we only desire the Saints TO PRAY FOR VS From whence we ought to understand that in what Terms soever those prayers which we address to Saints are couched the intention of the Church and of her faithful reduces them always to this form as the Catechism presently after confirms Ibid. But it is good to consider the words of the Council it self which prescribing to Bishops how they ought to speak of the Invocation of Saints Sess 25. Dec. de Invoc c. obliges them to teach that the Saints who reign with JESUS CHRIST offer up to God their prayers for men that it is good and profitable to invocate them after an humble manner and to have recourse to their prayers aid and assistance to obtain of God his Benefits through our Lord JESUS CHRIST his Son who is our sole Saviour and Redeemer After which the Council condemns those who teach a contrary Doctrine We see then to invocate the Saints according to the sense of this Council is to have recourse to their prayers for obtaining benefits from God through JESVS CHRIST So that in reality we do not obtain those benefits which we receive by the intercession of the Saints otherwise then through JESVS CHRIST and in his name seeing these Saints themselves pray in no other manner than through JESVS CHRIST and are not heard but in his name This is the Faith of the Church which the Council of Trent has clearly explicated in few words After which we cannot imagine that any one should accuse us of forsaking JESVS CHRIST when we beseech his members who are also ours his Children who are our Brethren and his Saints who are
contrary full of Esteem for this Work I discoursed of it likewise to the Cardinals of the Congregation and amongst all the rest I found Cardinal Brancas much enclined to praise the Author and esteem the Book So that I doubt not but M. de Condom will receive here the same approbation which has been given him every where else and which is so legitimately due both to his Learning and his Labour I am very much obliged to you for having given me the means of admiring him and have perceived in this your old and ordinary goodness The Author is close in his Proofs and explicates very clearly the Subject he treats on in shewing the true difference betwixt the belief of Catholics and that of the Enemies of the Church I do not think the method he takes to explicate the Doctrine taught in the Council of Trent can in the least be disapprov'd This Method having been practised by many other Writers and being handled throughout his whole Book with great Exactness Certainly it was never his Intention to give the Interpretation of the Tenets of the Council but only to deliver them in his Book rightly explicated in such sort that Heretics may be convinc'd and especially in those things which the Holy Church obliges them to believe He speakes perfectly well of the Popes Authority and whereever he treats of the visible Head of the Church he appears full of respect for the Holy See In fine I must tell you once again M. de Condom cannot be too much commended c. Rome April the 5th 1672. A Letter from the Reverend Father HIACINTHUS LIBELLI at that time Master of the Sacred Palace and now Arch-Bishop of Avignon to the Cardinal SIGISMOND CHIGI I Have read M. de Condom's Book which contains an Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church I am extreamly indebted to your Eminence for giving me the opportunity of employing four hours so profitably and with so much Pleasure It is impossible for me to express how much this work has pleased me both for the peculiar Excellence of the design and for the Proofs which correspond to it The Doctrine is sound in all its parts and without the smallest shadow of a fault As for my self I cannot see what can be objected against it and if the Author would have the Book Printed at Rome I will give all the necessary Approbations without changing a single Word This Author who has a great deal of Wit has shown a great deal of Judgment too in this Treatise where laying aside disputes which ordinarily speaking do but encrease Dissentions it being rare to find any who will grant the Preheminence of Wit to their Companions he has found out another and more easie Method of treating with the Calvinists from which much better Fruit may be expected In effect as soon as they can be brought to lay aside that horrour which they have sucked in with their Milk against our Tenets they come more willingly towards us and discovering the insincerity of that Doctrine which they learn'd from their Masters the principal Maxim of which is That our Doctrines are horrid and incredible they apply themselves with more tranquillity of Mind to search into Catholic Verities This is what they must be carefully exhorted to sinee there is no better Method to make them renounce their Errors and your Eminence had great reason when you lately said That Catholic Truth will always be victorious in the Mind of every man of Sense who will only without prejudice consider it in comparison with Heresy I take the Liberty to write this long Discourse to your Eminence not being able to contain within my self the Pleasure which the reading of this Book you have been pleased to let me have has afforded me I beg your Eminence will continue the like Favours to me c. Rome 26 April 1672. A Letter from the Bishop and Prince of PADERBORNE at that time Coadjutor and now Bishop of Munster to the Author THE most Christian King when he entrusted to you the Instruction and Education of his Son born to so much Greatness did by his Judgment alone sufficiently recommend your Knowledg and your Merit to all the World and all Posterity yet you have given a new Lustre to your Reputation and to the Christian Doctrine by an immortal Monument of your Worth I would say by that most excellent Book whose Title is An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which has not only gained the vast applause of Catholics but forced the Heretics themselves to give deserved Praises to your Judgment and Erudition In this most admirable Treatise there appears a most incredible facility to unfold the most difficult the most sublime and most divine things and at the same time a most winning candor and a truly Christian Charity and Bounty capable to draw with sweetness all those who are set in Darkness and in the shadow of Death and to enlighten and conduct them into the way of Peace Insomuch that you seem to be chosen amongst the Bishops to reduce the Enemies of Catholic Faith under the easie Yoak of Truth To the end therefore the effects of this great work might be the more extended and might spread it self throughout all Germany and amongst other Nations I had formed to my self a design of having it put into Latin but after having read your Letter of the 24th of April I had a doubt whether I ought to proceed any further in it or quit my design because I perceived you were as perfect a Master of the Latin Tongue as of the French and that you writ it with so much Purity that if any other should undertake to translate your Works instead of adorning those curious Products of your Wit he might on the contrary discredit them You ought the rather therefore to be desired to put your self in Latin what you have published But seeing that perhaps you have not leisure and if you had it would be much better you should be employed in the Composition of more new Works than in the translation of those you have already Composed because you admit of it I will hasten him to whom I have committed it to finish what he has begun and will send you the Version of your own Book that you may review and correct it your self What remains for me is always infinitely to honour your Vertue and Learning and to make it my endeavour to cultivate that Friendship which my care of the Version and your Bounty have given so favourable a beginning to Continue still to love me most worthy Prelate who serve the Church so well and while you give the Dauphin so many excellent instructions contrive for me a place in the remembrance and affection of so great a Prince Give if you please my most humble Service to the Duke de Montausier In my Castle at the confluence of the Lippe the Padere and the Alise the 29th of May 1673 A Letter from the Reverend Father