doubt a mighty Advantage to have such infallible Interpreters as the Apostles and Prophets and all Christians are bound to follow their Sense where they have delivered it But suppose the Question be about the Sense of these Interpreters must their Books not be looked into because of the danger of Error This Reason will still hold against those who go about to deliver their Sense and so on till by this Method of Reasoning all sort of Books and Interpretations be rejected unless any such can be found out which is not liable to be abused or misunderstood And if there be any such to be had they are much to blame who do not discover it But as yet we see no Remedy for two things in Mankind a proneness to Sin and to Mistake But of all things we ought not to take away from them one of the best Means to prevent both viz. a diligent and careful and humble reading the Holy Scriptures But 3. He denies that all persons are forbid to read the Scriptures but only such as have License and good Testimony from their Curats and therefore their design is not to preserve Ignorance in the people but to prevent a blind ignorant presumption These are plausible pretences to such as search no farther but the Mystery of this matter lies much deeper It was no doubt the Design of the Church of Rome to keep the Bible wholly out of the hands of the people But upon the Reformation they found it impossible so many Translations being made into vulgar Languages and therefore care was taken to have Translations made by some of their own Body and since the people of better inclinations to Piety were not to be satisfied without the Bible therefore they thought it the better way to permit certain persons whom they could trust to have a License to read it And this was the true Reason of the fourth Rule of the Index Liber prohibit made in pursuance of the Order of the Council of Trent and published by Pius IV. by which any one may see it was not an Original Permission out of any good Will to the Thing but an Aftergame to get the Bible out of the hands of the People again And therefore Absolution was to be denied to those who would not deliver them to their Ordinaries when they were called for And the Regulars themselves were not to be permitted to have Bibles without a License And as far as I can understand the Addition of Clement VIII to that fourth Rule he withdraws any new Power of granting such Licenses and saith they are contrary to the Command and Vsage of that Church which he saith is to be inviolably observed Wherein I think he declares himself fully against such Licenses And that inferior Guides should grant them against the Command of the Head of the Church is a thing not very agreeable to the Unity and Subordination they boast of XI Of Apocryphal Books HE believes it lawful to make what Additions to Scripture his Party thinks good and therefore takes no notice of the ancient Canon approved by the Apostles and primitive Christians but allows equal Authority to the Books of Toby Judith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and the Macchabees as to the other part of the Scripture altho' these were always rejected by the Jews never exant in the Hebrew Copy and expresly condemn'd by St. Jerome as not Canonical and never admitted by the Church but only of late years in some of their Synods which made these Innovations contrary to the Sense of their Ancestors HE believes it damnable to add any thing to the Scripture And yet allows the Books of Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom Macchabees to be Canonical because the Church of Christ has declar'd them such not only in these later ages but even in the primitive times S. Gregory Nazianzen Orat. de S S. Macc. who lived in the year 354. Also S. Ambrose lib. de Iacob vit beat An. 370. Innocent I. Ep. ad Exup They were also received by the third Council of Carthage An. 419. which approv'd all these Books as Canonical Can. 47. and was subscrib'd by S. Augustine and confirm'd in the 6 th General Synod August lib. 2. Doct. Christ. cap. 8. So that to him 't is of little concern whether they were ever in the Hebrew Copy the Canon of the Church of Christ being of much more Authority with him than the Canon of the Iews He having no other assurance that the Books of Moses and the four Gospels are the true Word of God but by the Authority and Canon of the Church And this he has learn'd from that great Doctor S. Augustine who declares his mind plainly in this case saying That he would not believe the Gospel except the Authority of the Catholick Church mov'd him threunto Contra Ep. Fundam c. 4. Now he is well satisfied that many doubted whether these Books were Canonical or no and amongst others S. Ierom because the Church had not declar'd them so But since the Church's Declaration no Catholick ever doubted no more than of other Books viz. of the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of St. James the second of St. Peter the second and third of St. John St. Jude 's Epistle and the Apocalyps All which were for many years after the Apostles time doubted of but afterwards declar'd and receiv'd as Canonical This he finds S. Ierome expresly confessing of himself viz. That for some time the Book of Judith seemed to him Apocryphal to wit till the Council of Nice declar'd it otherwise Praef. in Iudith The like he affirms of S. Iames's Epistle that it was doubted of by many for several years Paulatim tempore procedente meruit authoritatem By little and little in process of time it gain'd Authority De viris illus verb. Iacob For this reason he matters not what Books have been reputed Apocryphal by some and for some years But only what Books are receiv'd and declar'd by the Church Canonical in what year and at what time soever For believing the same spirit of Truth assists her in all Ages he looks upon himself equally oblig'd to receive her Definitions of the Year 419. as of any of the precedent years It not being possible for Christ to fail of his Promise or the Holy Ghost to err or misguide the Church in that year more than in any other XI Of Apocryphal Books 1. WE do not charge the Church of Rome with making what Additions to Scripture they think good as the Misrepresenter saith but we charge them with taking into the Canon of Scripture such Books as were not received for Canonical by the Christian Church as those Books himself mentions viz. Toby Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdom and Maccabees 2. We do not only charge them with this but with Anathematizing all those who do not upon this Declaration believe them to be Canonical since they cannot but know that these Books never were in the Iewish Canon and were left
out by many Christian Writers And if the Church cannot add to the Scripture and our Author thinks it damnable to do it how can it make any Books Canonical which were not so received by the Church For the Scripture in this sense is the Canon and therefore if it add to the Canon it adds to the Scripture i. e. it makes it necessary to believe some Books to be of infallible Authority which were not believed to be so either by the Iewish or Christian Church as appears by abundant Testimonies to that purpose produced by a learned Bishop of this Church which ought to have been considered by the Representer that he might not have talked so crudely about this matter But however I must consider what he saith 1. He produces the Testimony of Greg. Nazianzen who is expresly against him and declares but Twenty two Books in the Canon of the Old Testament but how doth he prove that he thought these Books Canonical He quotes his Oration on the Maccabees Where I can find nothing like it and instead of it he expresly follows as he declares the Book of Iosephus of the Authority of Reason concerning them So that if this proves any thing it proves Iosephus his Book Canonical and not the Maccabees 2. He adds the Testimony of S. Ambrose who in the place he refers to enlarges on the Story of the Maccabees but saith nothing of the Authority of the Book And even Coccius himself grants that of old Melito Sardensis Amphilochius Greg. Nazianzen the Council of Laodicea S. Hierom Russinus and Gregory the Great did not own the Book of Maccabees for Canonical 3. Innocentius ad Exuperium speaks more to this purpose And if the Decretal Epistle be allowed against which Bishop Cosins hath made considerable Objections then it must be granted that these Books were then in the Roman Canon but that they were not received by the Universal Church appears evidently by the Canon of the Council of Laodicea c. 60. wherein these Books are left out and this was received in the Code of the Universal Church which was as clear a Proof of the Canon then generally received as can be expected It is true the Council of Carthage took them in and S. Augustine seems to be of the same Opinion But on the other side they are left out by Melâ—to Bishop of Sardis who lived near the Apostles times Origen Athanasius S. Hilary S. Cyril of Ierusalem Epiphanius S. Basil Amphilochius S. Chrysostom and especially S. Ierom who hath laboured in this point so much that no fewer than thirteen places are produced out of him to this purpose by the forementioned learned Bishop of our Church who clearly proves there was no Tradition for the Canon of the Council of Trent in any one Age of the Christian Church But our Author goes on 4. It is of little concern to him whether these Books were ever in the Hebrew Copy I would only ask whether it be of any concern to him whether they were divinely inspired or not He saith It is damnable to add to the Scripture by the Scripture we mean Books written by Divine Inspiration Can the Church make Books to be so written which were not so written If not then all it hath to do is to deliver by Tradition what was so and what not Whence should they have this Tradition but from the Iews and they owned no Divine Inspiration after the time of Malachy How then should there be any Books so written after that time And he that saith in this matter as he doth It is of little concern to him whether they were in the Hebrew Canon doth little concern himself what he ought to believe and what not in this matter 5. Since the Churches Declaration he saith no Catholicks ever doubted What doth he mean by the Churches Declaration that of Innocent and the Council of Carthage Then the same Bishop hath shewed him that since that time there have been very many both in the Greek and Latin Church of another Opinion And a little before the Council of Trent Catharinus saith That a Friend of his and a Brother in Christ derided him as one that wanted Learning for daring to assert these Books were within the Canon of Scripture and it is plain Card. Cajetan could never be perswaded of it But if he means since the Council of Trent then we are returned to our Difficulty how such a Council can make any Books Canonical which were not received for such by the Catholick Church before For then they do not declare the Canon but create it XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible HE makes no Conscience of abusing the Scripture and perverting for the maintenance of his Errors and Superstitions And therefore though he dares not altogether lay it by lest he should by so doing lose all claim to Christianity Yet he utterly disapproves it as it is in its genuine Truth and Purity and as allow'd in the Church of England and crying this down he believes it unlawful to be read by any of his Communion And then puts into their hands another Volume which in its Frontis-piece bears the Title indeed of the Word of God with the names of the Books and Chapters but in the context of it is so every where full of Corruptions Falsifications and intolerable Abuses that it almost every where belies its Title and is unfit for any one who professes himself a Christian. HE believes it a damnable sin to abuse the Scripture or any ways to pervert it for the maintenance of Errors or Superstitions and thinks himself oblig'd rather to lay down his life than concur to or approve of any such Falsifications or Corruptions prejudicial to Faith or Good Manners For this reason being conscious that in all Ages there has been several Copies of this Sacred Volume quite different from the Originals in many places either through the mistake of the Transcribers or malice of others endeavouring by this means to gain credit to their new Doctrines He is commanded not to receive all Books indifferently for the Word of God that wear that Title but only such as are approv'd by the Church and recommended by her Legitimate And such is that he daily uses commonly known by the name of the Vulgar Translation which has been the principal of all other Latin Copies in all Ages since the Primitive times much commended by St. Augustine and never altered in any thing but once heretofore by the Holy Studies of St. Hierome And twice or thrice since being review'd by Authority and purg'd of such mistakes as in length of time had crept in by Transcribers or Printers faults And that this Translation is most pure and incorrupt as to any thing concerning matter of Belief or differences in Religion is not only the Doctrine of his Church but also the Sentiment of many Learned Men of the Reformation who approve this Version and prefer it before any
after it And it is no great advantage to Purgatory for him that commends Self-murder to have introduced it The most probable account I can give of it is That the Alexandrian Iews of whose number Iason of Cyrene seems to have been had taken in several of the Philosophical Opinions especially the Platonists into their Religion as appears by Philo and Bellarmine himself confesses that Plato held a Purgatory and they were ready to apply what related to the Law to their Platonick Notions So here the Law appointed a Sin-offering with respect to the Living but Iason would needs have this refer to the dead and then sets down his own remark upon it That it was a holy Cogitation to pray for the dead as our Author renders it If it were holy with respect to the Law there must be some ground for it in the Law And that we appeal to and do not think any particular Fancies sufficient to introduce such a Novelty as this was which had no Foundation either in the Law or the Prophets And it would be strange for a new Doctrine to be set up when the Spirit of Prophecy was ceased among them But S. August held these Books for Canonical and saith they are so received by the Church l. 18. de Civit. Dei To answer thâ—s it is sufficient to observe not only the diffâ—rent Opinions of others before mentioned as to these Books but that as Canus notes it was then lawful to doubt of their Authority and he goes as low as Gregory I. whom he denies not to have rejected them And I hope we may set the Authority of one â—gainst the other especially when S. Augustine himself being pressed hard with the fact of Razias confâ—sses 1. That the Iews have not the Book of Maccabees in their Canon as they have the Law the Prophets and the Psalms to whom our Lord gave Testimony as to his Witnesses Which is an evident Proof he thought not these Books sufficient to ground a Doctrine upon whâ—câ— was not found in the other 2. That however this Book was not unprofitably received by the Church if it be soberly read and heard Which implies a greater Caution than S. Augustine would ever have given concerning a Book he believed truly Canonical But saith Bellarmine his meaning is only to keep men from imitating the Example of Razias whereas that which they pressed St. Augustine with was not meerly the Fact but the Character that is given of it Sanctaâ—um Scâ—ipâ—urarum Auctoritate laudasus est Razias are their very Words in S. Augustine And therefore the Caution relates to the Books and not meerly to his Example And he lessens the Character given by the Author when he saith He chose to dye nobly It had been better saith he to have died humbly But the other is the Elogium given in the Heathen Histories and better becomes brave Heathens than true Martyrs Can any one now think S. Augustine believed this Writer Divinely inspired or his Doctrine sufficient to ground a Point of Faith upon And I wonder they should not every jot as well commend Self-murder as an Heroical Act. as prove the Doctrine of Purgatory from these words of Iason or his Epitemizer For the Argument from the Authority of the Book will hold as strongly for one as the other And yet this is the Achilles for Purgatory which Natalis Alexander whom our Author follows in this matter saith is a demonstrative place against those that deny it But I must proceed 2. Purgatory is plainly intimated by our Saviour Matt. 12.32 Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this World neither in the World to come By which words Christ evidently supposes that some Sins are forgiven in the World to come I am so far from discerning this plain Intimation that I wonder how any came to think of it out of this place Well! But doth it not hence follow that Sins may be forgiven in the World to come Not near so plainly as that Sins will not be forgiven in the World to come Not that particular Sin but others may How doth that appear What intimation is there that any Sins not forgiven here shall be forgiven there Or that any Sins here remitted as to the Eternal Punishment shall be there remitted as to the Temporal And without such a kind of Remission nothing can be inferred from hence But if there be a Remission in another World it can be neither in Heaven nor Hell therefore it must be in Purgatory But those who own a Remission of Sins in another World say it will be on the day of Judgment For the actual Deliverance of the Just from Punishment may be not improperly called the full Remission of their Sins So S. Augustine whom he quotes plainly saith Si nulla remitterentur in judicio illo novissimo c. Iulian l. 6. c. 5. where it is evident S. Augustine takes this place to relate to the Day of Judgment and so in the other De Civit. Dei l. 21. c. 24. But as he supposed a Remission so he did a Purgation as by Fire in that day In illo judicio poenas quasdam purgatorias futuras De Civit. Dei l 20. c. 25. And so he is to be understood on Psal. 37. to which he applies 1 Cor. 3.15 But our Author was very much out when he saith S. Augustine applied 1 Pet. 3.15 to some place of temporal Chastisement in another World when Bellarmine sets himself to confute S. Augustine about it as understanding it of this World And therefore he hath little cause to boast of St. Augustine's Authority about Purgatory unless he had brought something more to the Purpose out of him Hâ—s other Testimonies of Antiquity are not worth considering which he borrows from Natalis Alexander that of Dionysius Areopag Eccl. Hierarch c. 7. is a known Counterfeit and impertinent relating to a Region of Rest and Happiness And so do Tertullian's Oblations for the Dead De Cor. Milit c. 3. For they were Eucharistical as appears by the ancient Liturgies being made for the greatest Saints St. Cyprian Ep. 66. speaks of an Oblation for the Dead and he there mentions the Natalitia of the Martyrs but by comparing that with his Epist. 33. it will be found that he speaks of the Anniversary Commemoration of the Dead which signifies nothing to Purgatory for the best men were put into it and St. Cyprian threatens it as a Punishment to be left out of the Diptychs but surely it is none to escape Purgatory Arnobius l. 4. only speaks of praying for the Dead which we deny not to have been then used in the Church not with respect to any temporary pains in purgatory but to the Day of Judgment And therein lies the true state of the Controversie with respect to Antiquity which is not Whether any solemn Prayers were not then made for the dead but whether those Prayers did
which of all those Senses is that intended by the Holy Ghost and leading to Truth and which are Erroneous and Antichristian He is taught to believe that the Scripture alone can be no Rule of Faith to any private or particular person not that there is any thing wanting on the Scripture-side but because no private person can be certain whether amongst all the several meanings every Text is obnoxious to that which he understands it in is the Right or no. And without this certainty of Truth and security from Error he knows there 's nothing capable of being a Rule XIII Of the Scriptures as a Rule of Faith THE only thing insisted on here is That it is not the Words but the Sense of Scripture is the Rule and that this Sense is not to be taken from Mens private Fancies which are various and uncertain and therefore where there is no security from Errors there is nothing capable of being a Rule To clear this we must consider 1. That it is not necessary to the making of a Rule to prevent any possibility of mistake but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault For Certainty in it self and Sufficiency for the use of others are all the necessary Properties of a Rule but after all it 's possible for Men not to apply the Rule aright and then they are to be blamed and not the Rule 2. If no Men can be certain of the right Sense of Scripture then it is not plain in necessary things which is contrary to the design of it and to the clearest Testimonies of Antiquity and to the common Sense of all Christians who never doubted or disputed the Sense of some things revealed therein as the Unity of the Godhead the making of the World by him the Deluge the History of the Patriarchs the Captivity of the Jews the coming of the Messias his sending his Apostles his coming again to Judgment c. No Man who reads such things in Scripture can have any doubt about the Sense and Meaning of the Words 3. Where the Sense is dubious we do not allow any Man to put what Sense he pleases upon them but we say there are certain means whereby he may either attain to the true Sense or not be damned if he do not And the first thing every man is to regard is not his security from being deceived but from being damned For Truth is made known in order to Salvation If therefore I am sure to attain the chief end I am not so much concerned as to the possibility of Errors as that I be not deceived by my own fault We do not therefore leave Men either to follow their own fancy or to interpret Scripture by it but we say They are bound upon pain of Damnation to seek the Truth sincerely and to use the best means in order to it and if they do this they either will not err or their Errors will not be their Crime XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture HE believes that his Church which he calls Catholick is above the Scripture and profanely allows to her an uncontrollable Authority of being Judge of the Word of God And being fondly abus'd into a distrust of the Scriptures and that he can be certain of nothing even of the Fundamentals of Christianity from what is deliver'd in them though they speak never so plainly he is taught to rely wholly upon this Church and not to believe one word the Scripture says unless his Church says it too HE believes that the Church is not above the Scripture but only allows that Order between them as is between the Iudge and the Law And is no other than what generally every private Member of the Reformation challenges to himself as often as he pretends to decide any doubt of his own or his Neighbours in Religion by interpreting the Scripture Neither is he taught at all to distrust the Scripture or not to rely on it but only to distrust his own private Interpretation of it and not to rely on his own Iudgment in the Resâ—lution of any doubt concerning Faith or Religion though he can produce several Texts in favour of his Opinion But all such cases he is commanded to re-cur to the Church and having learnt from her the sense of all such Texts how they have been understood by the whole Community of Christians in all Ages since the Apostles and what has been their Receiv'd Doctrine in such doubtful and difficult Points he is oblig'd to submit to this and never presume on his own private Sentiments however seemingly grounded on Reason and Scripture to believe or preach any New Doctrine opposite to the Belief of the Church But as he receives from her the Book so also to receive from her the Sense of the Book With a Holy Confidence that she that did not cheat him in delivering a False Book for the True one will not cheat him in delivering a False and Erroneus Sense for the True one her Authority which is sufficient in the one being not less in the other And his own private Iudgment which was insufficient in the one that is in finding out the True Scripture and discerning it from all other Books being as incapable and insucffiient in the other that is in certainly discovering the meaning of the Holy Ghost and avoiding all other Heterodox and mistaken Interpretations XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture 1. THE Question is not Whether Men are not bound to make use of the best means for the right Interpretation of Scripture by Reading Meditation Prayer Advice a humble and teachable Temper c. i. e. all the proper means fit for such an end but whether after all these there be a necessity of submitting to some infallible Judge in order to the attaining the certain Sense of Scripture 2. The Question is not Whether we ought not to have a mighty regard to the Sense of the whole Christian Church in all Ages since the Apostles which we profess to have but Whether the present Roman Church as it stands divided from other Communions hath such a Right and Authority to interpret Scripture that we are bound to believe that to be the infallible Sense of Scripture which she delivers And here I cannot but take notice how strangely this matter is here misrepresented for the Case is put 1. As if every one who rejects their pretence of Infallibility had nothing to guide him but his own private Fancy in the Interpretation of Scripture 2. As if we rejected the Sense put upon Scripture by the whole Community of Christians in all ages since the Apostles times Whereas we appeal in the matters in difference between us to this universal Sense of the Christian Church and are verily perswaded they cannot make it out in any one Point wherein we differ from them And themselves cannot deny that in several we have plainly the Consent of the first Ages as far as appears by the Books remaining
on our side as in the Worship of Images Invocation of Saints Papal Supremacy Communion in both kinds Prayer and Scripture in known Tongues and I may safely add the Sufficiency of the Scripture Transubstantiation Auricular Confession Publick Communions Solitary Masses to name no more But here lies the Artifice We must not pretend to be capable of judging either of Scripture or Tradition but we must trust their Judgment what is the Sense of Scripture and what hath been the Practice of the Church in all Ages although their own Writers confess the contrary which is very hard But he seems to argue for such a Submission to the Church 1. Because we receive the Book of Scripture from her therefore from her we are to receive the Sense of the Book An admirable Argument We receive the Old Testament from the Iews therefore from them we are to receive the Sense of the Old Testament and so we are to reject the true Messias But this is not all If by the Church they mean the Church of Rome in distinction from others we deny it if they mean the whole Christian Church we grant it but then the force of it is quite lost But why is it not possible for the Church of Rome to keep these Writings and deliver them to others which make against her self Do not Persons in Law-Suits often produce Deeds which make against them But there is yet a further Reason it was not possible for the Church of Rome to make away these Writings being so universally spread 2. Because the Church puts the difference between true and false Books therefore that must be trusted for the true Sense of them Which is just as one should argue The Clerks of the Rolls are to give an account to the Court of true Records therefore they are to sit on the Bench and to give Judgment in all Causes The Church is only to declare what it finds as to Canonical Books but hath no Power to make any Book Canonical which was not before received for such But I confess Stapleton saith the Church if it please may make Hermes his Pastor and Clemens his Constitutions Canonical but I do not think our Author will therein follow him XV. of Tradition HE believes the Scripture to be imperfect And for the supplying of what he thinks Defective in it he admits Humane Ordinations and Traditions of Men allowing equal Authority to these as to the Scriptures themselves thinking himself as much oblig'd to submit to these and believe them with Divine Faith as he does whatsoever is written in the Bible and confessedly spoken by the Author of all Truth God himself Neither will he admit of any one to be a Member of his Communion although he undoubtedly believes every Word that 's written in the Scripture unless he also assents to these Traditions and gives as great credit to them as to the Word of God although in that there is not the least footstep of them to be found HE believes the Scripture not to be imperfect nor to want Humane Ordinations or Traditions of Men for the supplying any defects in it Neither does he allow the same Authority to these as to the Word of God or give them equal credit or exact it of others that desire to be admitted into the communion of his Church He believes no Divine Faith ought to be given to any thing but what is of Divine Revelation and that nothing is to have place in his Creed but what was taught by Christ and his Apostles and has been believ'd and taught in all Ages by the Church of God the Congregation of all True Believers and has been so deliver'd down to him through all Ages But now whether that which has been so deliver'd down to him as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles has been by Word of Mouth or Writing is altogether indifferent to him he being ready to follow in this point as in all others the command of St. Paul that is To stand fast and hold the Traditions he has learn'd whether by Word or by Epistle 2 Thess. 2.15 And to look upon any one as Anathema That shall preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd Gal. 1.9 So that as he undoubtedly holds the Scripture to be the Word of God penn'd by Prophets and Apostles and inspir'd by the Holy Ghost because in all Ages from Moses to Christ and from Christ to this time it has been so Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd successively by the Faithful and never scruples the least of the truth of it nor sticks to assent to it with a stedfast and Divine Faith altho' they are not nor have not at any time been able to prove what they have thus taught and deliver'd with one Text of Scripture In the like manner he is ready to receive and believe all that this same Congregation has together with the Bible in all Ages successively without interruption Taught Preach'd Believ'd and Deliver'd as the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles and assent to it with Divine Faith just as he does to the Bible and esteems any one Anathema that shall Preach otherwise than he has thus receiv'd And although some may seriously endeavour to convince him that several Points of Faith and other Religious Practices which he has thus receiv'd and believes are not the Doctrine of Christ nor Apostolical Institutions but rather Inventions of Men and Lessons of Antichrist and should produce several Texts of Scripture for the proving it He is not any thing surpriz'd at it As well knowing that he that follows not this Rule of Believing all to be of Christ that has been universally taught and believ'd as such by the Church of Christ and of understanding the Scripture in the same sense in which it has in all Ages been understood by the same Church may very easily frame as many Creeds as he pleases and make Christ and his Apostles speak what shall be most agreeable to his Humour and suit best with his Interest and find plain proofs for all And make no more difficulty in producing Scripture against Christ's Doctrine than the Iews and the Devil did against Christ's Person who never wanted their Scriptum est It is written when 't was necessary to carry on their designs And if there were any thing in these sort of Arguments to make him doubt of the truth of any Point of Doctrine thus receiv'd he thinks it might make him call in question the Truth of the Scripture and the Bible it self as soon as any thing else They all standing upon the same foundation of the Church's Tradition which if it fail in one leaves no security in any XV. Of Tradition 1. THE Question is not about Human Traditions supplying the Defects of Scripture as he misrepresents it but whether there be an Unwritten word which we are equally bound to receive with the Written word Altho these things which pass under that Name are really but Humaâ—e Traditions yet we do not
Sacrifice of the Mass which has been observ'd perform'd frequented by the Faithful in all Agâ—s attested by the General Consent of ancient Canons universal Tradition Councils and the practâ—ce of the whole Church mention'd and allow'd of by all the Fathers Greek and Latin and never call'd into question but of lâ—te Years being that pure Offering which Malachy Prophecying of Christ foretold should be offer'd among the Gentiles in every place Mal. 1.11 as it is understood by several Fathers and particularly S. Cypr. l. 1. c. 18. advers Iud. S. Ierom S. Theodoret S. Cyril in their Commentaries upon this Text S. Augustine l. 18. c. 15. de Civit. S. Chrysost. in Psal. 95. and others Of the MASS UNder this Head which is thought of so great consâ—quence in the Roman Church I expected a fuller Representation than I here find as about the Opus Operatum i. e. how far the meer Act is effectual About their Solitary Masses when no Person receives but the Priest about the People having so little to do or understand in all the other parts of the Mass About the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mass how useful and important they are About reconciling the present Canon of the Mass with the present Practises About offering up Masses for the honour of Saints All which we find in the Council of Trent but are omitted by our Representer Who speaks of the Mass as tho there were no Controversie about it but only concerning the Sacrifice there supposed to be offered up and which he is far from true Representing For the Council of Trent not only affirms a true proper propitiatory Sacrifice to be there offered up for the quick and dead but denounces Anathema's against those that deny it So that the Question is not Whether the Eucharist may not in the sense of Antiquity be allowed to be a Commemorative Sacrifice as it takes in the whole Action but whether in the Mass there be such a Representation made to God of Christ's Sacrifice as to be it self a true and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the Qâ—ick and the Dead Now all that our Representer saith to the purpose is 1. That Christ bequeathed his Body and Blood at his last Supper under the species of Bread and Wine not only a Sacrament but also a Sacrifice I had thought it had been more proper to have offered a Sacrifice than to have bequeathed it And this ought to have been proved as the Foundation of this Sacrifice viz. That Christ did at his last Supper offer up his Body and Blood as a Propitiatory Sacrifice to God And then what need his suffering on the Cross 2. He gave this in charge to his Apostles as the first and chief Priests of the New-Testament and to their Successors to offer But Where When and How For we read nothing at all of it in Scripture Christ indeed did bid them do the same thing he had there done in his last Supper But did he the offer up himself or not If not How can the Sacrifice be drawn from his Action If he did it is impossible to prove the necessiâ—y of his dying afterwards 3. This Sacrifice was never questioned till of late years We say it was never determined to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice till of late We do not deny the Fathers interpreting Mal. 1.11 of an Offering under the Gospel but they generally understand it of Spiritual and Eucharistical Sacrâ—fices and although some of them by way of Accommodation do apply it to the Eucharist yet not one of them doth make it a Propitiatory Sacrifice which was the thing to be proved For we have no mind to dispute about Metaphorical Sacrifices when the Council of Trent so positively decrees it to be a True Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice XXIII Of Purgatory HE believes contrary to all Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity that besides Heaven and Hell there is a third place which his Church is pleas'd to call Purgatory a place intended purely for those of his Communion whâ—re they may easily have admittance after this Life without danger of falling into Hell for that though Hell was designed first for the punishment of Sinners yet that now since the blessed discovery of Purgatory Hell may easily be skip'd over and an eternal Damnation avoided for an exchange of some short Penalty undergone in this Pope's Prison where he never need fear to be detained long for that if he has but a friend left behind him that will but say a few Hail-Maries for his Soul or in his Testament did but remember to order a small sum to be presented to some Mâ—ss Priest he never need doubt of being soon releas'd for that a Golden Kâ—y will as infallibly open the Gates of Purgatory as of any other Prison whaâ—soever HE believes it damnable to admit of any thing for Faith that is contrary to Reason the Word of God and all Antiquity and that the Being of a Third Place call'd Purgatory is so far from being contrary to all or any of these that it is attested confirm'd and establish'd by them all 'T is expresly in the 2 d. of the Maccabees c 12. where Money was sent to Hierusalem that Sacrifices might be offered for the slain And ' â—is recommended as a Holy Cogitation to Pray for the Dead Now though these Books are not thought Canonical by some yet St. Augustine held them as such and says they are so received by the Church l. 18. de Civit. But whether so or no one thing is allow'd by all viz. That they contain nothing contrary to Faith and that they were cited by the Antient Fathers for the Confutation of Errors forming of good Manners and the explication of the Christian Doctrine Thus were they us'd by Origen for Condemnation of the Valentinian Hereticks Orig. in cap 5. Ep. ad Rom. thus by St. Cyprian Lib. de Exhor Mart. c. 11. thus by Euseb. Caesariensis Lib. Praepar Evang. 11. c. 15. thus by St. Greg. Naz. Ambros. c. And he is in a manner certain that the Books would never have been put to this Use by these Holy and Learned Fâ—thers they would never with such confidence have produc'd their Authority nor would they have been read by the Church in those Golden times had this Doctrine of a Third Place and of Prayers for the Dead which they maintain been any idle Superstition a meer Dream contrary to Reason the Word of God and Antiquity or had it been any Error at all The being also of a Third Place is plainly intimated by our Saviour Matth. 12.32 where he says Whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this World neither in the World to come By which words Christ evidently supposes that though these shall not yet some sins are forgiven in the World to come which since it cannot be in Heaven where no sin enters nor in Hell whence there is no Redemption it must necessâ—rily be
call him to any account for any thing he has done although he should chance to die without the least remorse of Conscience or Repentance for his sins HE believes it damnable to hold that the Pope or any other Power in Heaven or Earth can give him leave to commit any sins whatsoever Or that for any Sum of Mony he can obtain an Indulgence or Pardon for sins that are to be committed by him or his Heirs hereafter He firmly believes that no sins can be forgiven but by a true and hearty Repentance But that still there is a Power in the Church of granting Indulgences which concern not at all the Remission of sins either Mortal or Venial but only of some Temporal Punishments remaining due after the Guilt is remitted So that they are nothing else but a Mitigation or Relaxation upon just causes of Canonical Penances which are or may be injoyn'd by the Pastors of the Church on penitent sinners according to their several degrees of demerit And this he is taught to be grounded on the Judiciary Power left by Christ in his Church of binding and loosing whereby Authority was given to erect a Court of Conscience to assign Penalties or release them as circumstances should reguire And this Authority he knows S. Paul plainly own'd 2 Cor. 2.6 where he decreed a Penance Sufficient says he to such a man is this punishment And 2 Cor. 2.10 where he released one For your sake speaking of the Penance injoyn'd the incestuous Corinthian I forgive it in the Person of Christ. And what Mony there is given at any time on this account concerns not at all the Pope's Coffers but is by every one given as they please either to the Poor to the Sick to Prisoners c. wherefore they judge it most Charity And tho' he acknowledges many abuses have been committed in granting and gaining Indulgences through the default of some particular Persons yet he cannot imagine how these can in Justice be charg'd upon the Church to the prejudice of her Faith and Doctrine â—specially since she has been so careful in the retâ—enching them As may be seen by what what was done in the Council of Trent Dec. de Indulg cum potestas VIII Of Indulgences 1. THey must be extreamly ignorant who take the Power of Indulgences to be a Leave from the Pope to commit what Sins they please and that by virtue thereof they shall escape Punishment for their Sins without Repentance in another World Yet this is the sense of the Misrepresentation which he saith is made of it And if he saith true in his Preface That he hath described the Belief of a Papist exactly according to the apprehension he had when he was a Protestant He shews how well he understood the Matters in difference when I think no other Person besides himself ever had such an apprehension of it who pretended to be any thing like a Scholar 2. But now he believes it damnable to hold that the Pope or any other Power in Heaven or Earth can give him leave to commit any Sins whatsoever or that for any Sum of Mony he can obtain any Indulgence or Pardon for Sins that are to be committed by him or his Heirs hereafter Very well But what thinks he of obtaining an Indulgence or Pardon after they are committed Is no such thing to be obtained in the Court of Rome for a Sum of Mony He cannot but have heard of the Tax of the Apostolick Chamber for several Sins and what Sums are there set upon them Why did he not as freely speak against this This is published in the vast Collection of Tracts of Canon Law set forth by the Popes Authority where there are certain Rates for Perjury Murder Apostacy c. Now what do these Sums of Mony mean If they be small it is so much the better Bargain for the Sins are very great And Espencaeus complains that this Book was so far from being called in that he saith the Popes Legats renerred those Faculties and confirmed them It seems then a Sum of Mony may be of some consequence towards the obtaining Pardon for a Sin past tho' not for a Licence to commit it But what mighty difference is there whether a Man procures with Mony a Dispensation or a Pardon For the Sin can hurt him no more than if he had Licence to commit it 3. He doth believe there is a Power in the Church to grant Indulgences which he saith concern not at all the Remission of Sins either mortal or venial but only of some temporal Punishments remaining due after the Guilt is remitted Here now arises a material Question viz. Whether the Popes or the Representer be rather to be believed If the Popes who grant the Indulgences are to be believed then not only the bare Remission of Sins is concerned in them but the plenary and most plenary Remission of Sins is to be had by them So Boniface the 8 th in his Bull of Iubilee granted Non solum plenam largiorem imo plenissimam veniam peccatorum If these words had no relation to Remission of Sins the People were horribly cheated by the sound of them In the Bull of Clement the 6 th not extant in the Bullarium but published out of the Vtrecht Manuscript not only a plenary Absolution from all Sins is declared to all persons who died in the Way to Rome but he commands the Angels of Paradise to carry the Soul immediately to Heaven And I suppose whatever implies such an Absolution as carries a Soul to Heaven doth concern Remission of Sins Boniface IX granted Indulgences à Poenâ à Culpâ and those certainly concerned Remission of Sins being not barely from the temporal Punishment but from the Guilt it self Clement VIII whom Bellarmine magnifies for his care in reforming Indulgences in his Bull of Iubilee grants a most plenary Remission of Sins and Vrban the 8 th since him not only a Relaxation of Penances but Remission of Sins and so lately as A. D. 1671. Clement the 10 th published an Indulgence upon the Canonization of five new Saints wherein he not only grants a plenary Indulgence of Sins but upon invocation of one of these Saints in the point of Death a plenary Indulgence of all his Sins And what doth this signifie in the point of Death if it do not concern the Remission of Sins 4. Indulgences he saith are nothing else but a Mitigation or Relaxation upon just Causes of Canonical Penances which are or may be enjoyned by the Pastors of the Church on penitent Senners according to their several degrees of Demerits If by Canonical Penances they mean those enjoined by the Penitential Canons Greg. de Valentia saith This Opinion differs not from that of the Hereticks and makes Indulgences to be useless and dangerous things Bellarmin brings several Arguments against this Doctrine 1. There would be no need of the Treasure of the Church which he had proved
deny that they pretend them to be of Divine Original 2. We do not deny but the Apostles might deliver such things by Word as well as by Epistle which their Disciples were bound to believe and keep but we think there is some difference to be made between what we certainly know they delivered in Writing and what it is now impossible for us to know viz. what they delivered by word without writing 3. We see no ground why any one should believe any Doctrine with a stedfast and divine Faith which is not bottom'd on the Written word for then his Faith must be built on the Testimony of the Church as Divine and Infallible or else his Faith cannot be Divine But it is impossible to prove it to be Divine and Infallible but by the Written word and therefore as it is not reasonable that he should believe the Written word by such a Divine Testimony of the Church so if any particular Doctrine may be received on the Authority of the Church without the Written word then all Articles of Faith may and so there would be no need of the Written word 4. The Faith of Christians doth no otherwise stand upon the Foundation of the Churches Tradition than as it delivers down to us the Books of Scripture but we acknowledg the general Sense of the Christian Church to be a very great help for understanding the true sense of Scripture and we do not reject any thing so delivered but what is all this to the Church of Rome But this is still the way of true Representing XVI Of Councils HE believes that the Faith of his Church may receive new Additions every day And that he is not only oblig'd to believe what Christ taught and his Apostles but also every Definition or Decree of any General Council assembled by the Command of the Pope So that as often as any thing is issued out by the Authority of any of these Church-Parliaments and order'd to be believ'd he thinks himself under pain of Damnation immediately bound to receive it and having added it to his Creed to assent to it with as Firm Stedfast and Divine a Faith as if it had been Commanded by Christ himself and Decreed in the Consistory of Heaven And by this means he never comes to understand his Religion or know what he is to Believe but by the continual Alterations Additions Diminutions Interpretations of these Councils he is preserv'd in a necessary Confusion and tho he changes often yet he fondly thinks himself always the same HE believes that the Faith of his Church can receive no Additions and that he is oblig'd to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defin'd and commanded to be believ'd even by Ten thousand Councils he believes it damnable in any one to receive it and by such Decrees to make Additions to his Creed However he maintains the Necessity and Right of General Councils lawfully Assembled whose business it is not to coin new Articles of Faith or devise Fresh Tenets but only as often as any Point of Receiv'd Doctrine is impugned or call'd in question to debate the matter and examine what has been the Belief of all Nations who are there present in their Prelates in that Point And this being agreed on to publish and make known to the World which is the Catholick Doctrine left by Christ and his Apostles and which the new-breach'd Error And by this means to prevent the loss of infinite number of Souls which might otherwise be deluded and carried away after new inventions not being capable by their own knowledge and abilities to distinguish betwixt Truth and Falshood and discover the subtilties of every crafty Deceiver And in this case he believes that he is oblig'd to submit and receive the Decrees of such a Council the Pastors and Prelates there present being by Christ and his Apostles appointed for the decision of such Controversies They having the care of that stock committed to them over which the Holy Ghost has made them Overseers to feed the Church of God Acts 20.28 and to watch against those men who should arise from among themselves speaking perverse things tâ— draw Disciples after them Ib. vers 30. And he having receiv'd Command as likewise the whâ—le Flock of Christ to obey their Prelates and to be subject to them who watch and are to render an account for their Souls Heb. 13.17 with an assurance That He that heareth them hearch Christ and he that despiseth them despiseth Christ Luke 10.16 And withal being taught that as this way of the Ancients of the Church and Prelates meeting in case of any danger threatning their Flock or any new Doctrine arising was the means instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles in the first planting of the Church for the preventing Schisms and preserving Vnity among the Faithful and that they should speak and think the same thing and be perfectly joyn'd together in the same mind and same judgment 1 Cor. 1.10 So it ought to be the means in all succeeding Ages for the preventing Divisions and conserving Vnity among the Faithful And that therefore as that Controversy concerning the necessity of Circumcision Act. c. 15. arising in the Apostles times was not decided by any private Person nor even by Paul and Barnabas who nevertheless had received the Holy Ghost and one would have thought might have pretended to the Spirit and a Heavenly Light but by a General Meeting of the Apostles and Elders of the Church at Ierusalem who were consulted by Paul and Barnabas about this Question So all other Disputes and Difficulties of Religion arising in succeeding Ages ought to be referr'd to the Successors of the Apostles whose Charge Dignity and Office is to continue to the end of the World tho' they are dead in Person who are to consider of the matter Acts 15.6 as the Apostles did while all the Multitude keeps silence ver 12. without any one presuming on any Learning Gift Virtue Prayers or Inspiration to intermeddle in the Dispute or put an end to the Question This being none of their business or obligation but only with all Patience and Humility to expect the Determination of their Prelates and Elders and receive it with the same expressions as those good Christians did heretofore who rejoyced for the Consolation Acts 15.31 And unless this that the Apostles did and their Obsequious Flock be taken as a Pattern in all Ages for the ending such-like difficulties he believes 't is impossible that Believers should stand fast in one Spirit with one Mind Philip. 1.27 and be not carried away with divers and strange Doctrines Hebr. 13.9 XVI Of Councils 1. WE are glad to find so good a Resolution as seems to be expressed in these words viz. That he is obliged to believe nothing besides that which Christ taught and his Apostles and if any thing contrary to this should be defined
purpose And he adds that the difference between the Divines and Canonists was but in Terms for the Canonists were in the right as to the Power and the Divines in the manner of explaining it 3. Others have thought this too loose a way of explaining the Popes Power and therefore they say That the Pope hath not a bare declaratory Power but a real Power of dispensing in a proper sense in particular Cases For say they the other is no act of Jurisdiction but of Discretion and may belong to other men as well as to the Pope but this they look on as more agreeable to the Popes Authority and Commission and a bare declaratory Power would not be sufficient for the Churches Necessity as Sanchez shews at large and quotes many Authors for this Opinion and Sayr more and he saith the Practice of the Church cannot be justified without it Which Suarez much insists upon and without it he saith the Church hath fallen into intolerable Errors and it is evident he saith the Church hath granted real Dispensations and not meer Declarations And he founds it upon Christ's Promise to Peter To thee will I give the Keys and the Charge to him Feed my Sheep But then he explains this Opinion by saying that it is no formal Dispensation with the Law of God but the matter of the Law is changed or taken away Thus I have briefly laid together the different Opinions in the Church of Rome about this power of dispensing with the Law of God from which it appears that they do all consent in the thing but differ only in the manner of explaining it And I am therefore afraid our Representer is a very unstudied Divine and doth not well understand their own Doctrine or he would never have talked so boldly and unskilfully in this matter As to what he pretends that their Church teaches that every Lye is a Sin c. it doth not teach the Case for the Question it not whether their Church teach men to lye but whether there be not such a power in the Church as by altering the nature of things may not make that not to be a Lye which otherwise would be one As their Church teaches that men ought not to break their Vâ—ws yet no one among them questions but the Pope may dissolve the Obligation of a Vow although it be made to God himself Let him shew then how the Pope comes to have a Power to release a Vow made to God and not to have a Power to release the Obligation to veracity among men Again We do not charge them with delivering any such Doctrine That men may have Dispensations to lye and forswear themselves at pleasure for we know this Dispensing Power is to be kept up as a great Mystery and not to be made use of but upon weighty and urgent causes of great consequence and beneâ—it to the Church as their Doctors declare But as to all matters of fact which he alludes to I have nothing to say to them for our Debate is only whether there be such a Power of Dispensation allowed in the Church of Rome or not XX. Of the Deposing Power HE believes that the Pope has Authority to dispence with his Allegiance to his Prince and that he needs no longer be a Loyal Subject and maintain the Rights Priviledges and Authority of his King than the Pope will give him leave And that if this Mighty Father think sit to thunder out an Excommunication against him then he shall be deem'd the best Subject and Most Christian that can first shed his Prince's Blood and make him a Sacrifice to Rome and he 's but ill rewarded for his pains who after so Glorious an Atchievement has not his Name plac'd in the Kalendar and he Canoniz'd for a Saint So that there can be no greater Danger to a King than to have Popish Subjects he holding his Life amongst them only at the Pope 's pleasure 'T IS no part of his Faith to believe that the Pope has Authority to dispence with his Allegiance to his Sovereign or that he can Depose Princes upon any account whatsoever giving leave to their Subjects to take up Arms against them and endeavour their ruin He knows that Deposing King-killing Power has been maintain'd by some Canonists and Divines of his Church and that it is in their Opinion lawful and annex'd to the Papal Chair He knows likewise that some Popes have endeavor'd to act according to this Power But that this Doctrine appertains to the Faith of his Church and is to be believ'd by all of that Communion is a malicious Calumny a down-right Falsity And for the truth of this it seems to him a sufficient Argument that for the fâ—w Authors that are Abettors of this Doctrine there are of his Communion three times the number that publickly disown all such Authority besides several Universities and whole Bodies that have solemnly condemn'd it without being in the least suspected of their Religion or of denying any Article of their Faith Those other Authors therefore Publish their own Opinions in their Books and those Popes acted according to what they judg'd lawful and all this amounts to no more than that this Doctrine has been or is an Opinion amongst some of his Church but to raise it to an Article of Faith upon these grounds is impossible Let his Church therefore answer for no more than what she delivers for Faith let Prelates answer for tâ—eir Actions and Authors for their own Opinions otherwise more Churches must be charg'd with Deposing and King-killing Doctrine besides that of Rome The University of Oxford having found other Authors of Pernicious Books and Damnable Doctrines destructive to the Sacred Persons of Princes their State and Government besides Iesuits as may be seen in their Decree published in the London Gazette Iuly 26. 1683. In which they condemn'd twenty seven false iâ—pious seditious Propositions fitted to stir up Tumults overthrow States and Kingdoms to lead to Rebellion Murder of Princes and Atheism it self Of which number only three or four were ascrib'd to the Iesuits the rest having men of another Communion for their Fathers And this Doctrine was not first condemn'd by Oxford What they did here in the Year 1683. having been solemnly done in Paris in 1626. Where the whole Colledge of Sorbon gave Sentence against this Proposition of Sanctarellus viz That the Pope for Heresie and Schism might depose Princes and exempt the Subjects from their Obedience the like was done by the Universities of Caen Rhemes Poictoirs Valence Bourdeaux Bourges and the Condemnation subscrib'd by the Iesuits And Mariana's Book was committed publickly to the flames by a Provincial Council of his own Order for the discoursing the Point of King-killing Doctrine problematically Why therefore should this disloyal Doctrine be laid to his Church whenas it has been writ against by several hundred single Authors in her Communion and disown'd and solemnly condemn'd by so many famous
published Anathema's with Authority he ought to have printed those of the Council of Trent viz. such as these Cursed is he that doth not allow the Worship of Images Cursed is he that saith Saints are not to be Invocated Cursed is he that doth not believe Transubstantiation Purgatory c. 2. Because he leaves out an Anathema in a very material point viz. As to the Deposing Doctrine We do freely and from our Hearts Anathematize all such Doctrines as tend to dissolve the Bonds of Allegiance to our Sovereign on any pretence whatsoever Why was this past over by him without any kind of Anathema Since he seems to approve the Oxford Censures Why did he not here shew his zeal against all such dangerous Doctrines If the Deposing Doctrine be falsly charged upon their Church let us but once see it Anathematized by publick Authority of their Church and we have done But instead thereof we find in a Book very lately published with great Approbations by a present Professor at Lovain Fr. D'Enghien all the Censures on the other side censured and despised and the holding the Negative as to the Deposing Doctrine is declared by him to be Heresie or next to Heresie The Censure of the Sorban against Sanctarellus he saith was only done by a Faction and that of Sixty Eight Doctors there were but Eighteen present and the late Censure of the Sorban he saith was condemned by the Inquisition at Toledo Jâ—n 10. 1683. as erroneous and schismatical and so by the Clergy of Hungary Oct. 24. 1682. We do not question but there are Divines that oppose it but we fear there are too many who do not and we find they boast of their own numbers and despise the rest as an inconsiderable Party This we do not Misrepresent them in for their most approved Books do shew it However we do not question but there are several Worthy and Loyal Gentlemen of that Religion of different Principles and Practices and it is pity such be not distinguished from those who will not renounce a Doctrine so dangerous in the Consequences of it 3. Because the Anathema's he hath set down are not Penned so plainly and clearly as to give any real Satisfaction but with so much Art and Sophistry as if they were intended to beguile weak and unwary Readers who see not into the depth of these things and therefore may think he hath done great matters in his Anathema's when if they be strictly examined they come to little or nothing as 1. Cursed is he that commits Idolatry An unwary Reader would think herein he disowned all that he accuses of Idolatry but he doth not curse any thing as Idolatry but what himself thinks to be so So again Cursed is he not that gives Divine Worship to Images but that prays to Images or Relicks as Gods or Worships them for Gods So that if he doth not take the Images themselves for Gods he is safe enough from his own Anathema 2. Cursed is every Goddess worshiper i. e. That believes the Blessed Virgin not to be a Creature And so they escape all the force of this Anathema Cursed is he that Honours her or puts his Trust in her more than in God So that if they Hâ—nour her and trust in her but just as much as in God they are safe enough Or that believes her to be above her Son But no Anathema to such as suppose her to be equal to him 3. Cursed is he that believes the Saints in Heaven to be his Redeemers that prays to them as such What if men pray to them as their Spiritual Guardians and Protectors Is not this giving God's Honour to them Doth this deserve no Anathema 4. Cursed is he that worships any Breaden God or makes Gods of the empty Elements of Bread and Wine viz. That supposes them to be nothing but Bread and Wine and yet supposes them to be Gods too Doth not this look like non-sense And yet I am afraid our Author would think it a severe Anathema in this matter to say Cursed is he who believes Nonsense and Contradictions It will be needless to set down more since I have endeavoured by clear stating the several Controversies to prevent the Readers being imposed upon by deceitful Anathema's And yet after all he saith Cursed are we if in answering and saying Amen to any of these Curses we use any Equivocations or Mental Reservations or do not assent to them in the common and obvious use of the Words But there may be no Equivocation in the very Words and yet there may be a great one in the intention and design of them There may be none in saying Amen to the Curses so worded but if he would have prevented all suspicion of Equivocation he ought to have put it thus Cursed are we if we have not fairly and ingenuously expressed the whole meaning of our Church as to the Points condemned in these Anathema's or if we have by them designed to deceive the People And then I doubt he would not so readily have said Amen The CONTENTS  Papist Protestant  Page Page THE Introduction and Answer 1 10 Of Praying to Images 19 20 Of Worshipping Saints 28 29 Of Addressing more Supplications to the Virgin Mary than to Christ. 36 37 Of Paying Divine Worship to Relicks 42 43 Of the Eucharist 46 47 Of Merits and Good Works 57 57 Of Confession 61 62 Of Indulgences 65 66 Of Satisfaction 68 69 Of Reading the Holy Scriptures 70 71 Of Apochryphal Books 74 75 Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible 77 79 Of the Scripture as a Rule of Faith 80 81 Of the Interpretation of Scripture 82 83 Of Tradition 85 86 Of Councils 87 89 Of Infallibility in the Church 90 93 Of the Pope 95 97 Of Dispensations 100 102 Of the Deposing Power 105 107 Of Communion in one Kind 111 113 Of the Mass. 116 118 Of Purgatory 119 122 Of Praying in an unknown Tongue 127 129 Of the Second Commandment 132 133 Of Mental Reservations 134 136 Of a Death-Bed Repentance 137 138 Of Fasting 139 140 Of Divisions and Schisms in the Church 142 143 Of Fryars and Nuns 145 147 Of Wicked Principles and Practices 148 151 Of Miracles 153 154 Of Holy-Water 156 158 Of Breeding up People in Ignorance 159 161 Of the Vncharitableness of the Papists 162 166 Of Ceremonies and Ordinances 168 173 Of Innovations in Matters of Faith 173 180 The Conclusion and Answer to it 182 188 FINIS Apog c. 2. Sp. Anno 286. Par. 5. (a) Spond An. 362. (b) Id. Anno 66. (c) Apo. c. 40. (d) Apo. c. 3. (e) P. 1. pag. 936. Bulla Pii 4 â—i super Confirmat Concil Tridentini The venoâ— Voyâ—ge 〈◊〉 Inâ—es p. 188. Bernier Memoirs Tom. 3. p. 172. Suarez iâ— 3. perâ— Qu. 2â— Disp. 53. §. 3.2 â—◠〈◊〉 â—5 § 5. Bellarmine de Imag. l. 2. c. 2. â— Conâ—il Trident Sess. 25. Moyâ—nâ— Surs 〈…〉 Coâ—version de toâ—s les Hereâ—iquâ—s To. 2. p.