true that they made the division from the Catholick Church but did it rightly and worthily for the intollerable errors and damnable doctrins which then infected the whole Church and therefore they followed the command of the voice of God Apoc. 18. Go out of her my people that ye be not made partakers of her sins The damnable doctrins are by themselves reduced cheifly to Idolatry the other differences they conceive may be more easily swallowed and indeed this were a capital one if true and it were no less strange that the Church of Rome which reduced this Island and most part of the two worlds from Idolatry should it self knowingly teach or practise it and no less strange that these few men after so many yeers should see these gross abominations which such an infinity of learned men in so long time nor yet can finde or judge to be so Idolatry according to Divines is taken for a religions worship due to God and given to any creature In this all Christians agree The Church of Rome in the holy Sacrament of Eucharist giveth indeed Divine worship out of infallible supposition that under those Elements is the body and blood of Christ accompanied with his Divinity they do not give it to the accidents no not to the body and blood of Christ properly and precisely but to the Divinity so precise they are in the Divine worship whence it is clear that they do not direct their worship to a creature but to God and though they cannot but involve in their adoration his presence under the Accidents of bread and wine yet do not formally terminate their act to this presentiallity of Christ in the Sacrament which is but a relative a very extrinsecal accident and consequently not capable to terminate a divine worship whence we see the proper object is Christ who certainly is existent and therefore in this they are not mistaken even in all sectaries opinions and therefore there can be no Idolatry even though Christ had not that new ubication under the Elements of bread and wine that being the accessory not the principal which they aim at for they adaequately direct their action to Christ present not to the presence it self abstracting from Christ so that their mistake would be in a circumstance not in a substance and therefore even admitting that impossible supposition yet there would be no Idolatry The other particle is their worship of Images which in no wayes can be called Idolatry First because they do not at all teach Divine worship to be due to them as is clear in the Councel of Trent and as all knowing Protestants will confess Secondly many great Schoolmen do not hold any worship at all to be precisely directed to them it is suffient reverently to retain them and by them to be raised up in devotion to the thing represented by them as by a picture of Christ to be called upon to remember Christ c. As they think it is deducible out of the Councel of Trent Out of which it is evident that the Church of Rome is injuriously defamed of Idoltary And here I wonder much at Mr. Hobbs in his book De Cive who otherwise singularly deserving in moral and socratical Philosophy would so easily preoipitate his judgement in points of this nature He saith in his Chapter 15. n. 18. That if the Common-wealth should command to worship God under a picture that the people were-bound to do it In his Annotations upon the same place he calls himself in question for antilogies in this particular for in n. 14. He had taught that to worship God by a picture or any Image were to limit God to a certain terme which were against the law of nature touching Gods worship which surely destroys the first position To the answer of this he saith the offence would be in the commanders not in the obeyers by reason they worship him thus upon compulsion He adds that if God should specially forbid to be worshiped by the use of an image that then such a command could not be obeyed as it is in the decalogue were expresly Idolatry is prohibited Afterwards in the 16. Chapter n. 10. treating of the ten Commandments he saith that to worship God by an Image is against the law of nature as he said in the 15. c. n. 14. These seem to be strangely inconsistent propositions First the power which he saith n. 17. in the 5. Chap. To be transferred to Magistracy from the people in determining Gods worship he confesseth that it ought to be according to reason He confesseth also in his Annotation cited that to worship God under an Image were against reason because Idolatry not onely because now God hath forbidden it as he saith but in it self namely because as he said before it were to prescribe a term to his infinity and consequently to make God to be finite Whence it followes first that though Idolatry is against the light of reason and therefore intrinsecally wicked yet knowingly I might do it if commanded by a Magistrate so that an inferior power namely a power derived from my self can command me that which is absolutely prohibited by the highest power as is that of nature and I am bound to obey it with neglect of the other though supreme yet the Magistrate cannot command it but against reason and therefore such a command cannot be obligatory because in his 5. Chapter and n. 17. reason is the limit of that power Are not these inconsistences Again he saith that moral compulsion for a command is no more would render an act of Idolatry lawful because it would exempt it from Idolatry This is destructive of all religion and truly of reason in all Schools of Philosophy where Aristotle in his Ethicks and all others teach that we must lose our lives for vertue it self Again he saith that if God make a positive law to the contrary as he supposeth he hath that then I may not obey the former command of a Magistrate how this is reconcilable to his former tenet that worshiping God by Images is against the law of nature and yet onely unlawful if commanded by Magistracy because in the Decalogue or positive law it is again forbidden I know not for surely this law is inferior to that of nature according to all men and reason it self being the law of nature is drawn from the very nature of the thing it self That God hath forbidden Idolatry I doubt not in his first Commandment but whether to worship God by the use of Images is there forbidden Or whether it be Idolatry would deserve Mr. Hobbs his greater diligence to prove it For surely to say that it were a confinement of his Infinity would be as far from a proof as it is from truth clear in the light of reason and evidently against Scripture where we are taught to glorifie God in and by his creatures according to the 18. Psalm Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei c. The heavens speak
beleeving and doing what she propounds and prescribes shall attain unto eternal salvation which sufficiently followeth out of what hath been said in the first Chapter if well attended much more also might be produced from Christian discoursing upon principles of holy Scripture and consent of old and modern Doctors But to bring our Doctors here is superfluous labour seeing Protestants with whom I have dealt sincerely acknowledge and ingeniously confess so much and many of them of no small account have delivered in books that the Church of Rome is the Church of God and that the errors in her are not so much as do overthrow the foundation of Salvation and therefore with them many have and may now be saved So Morton Regn. Jer. page 94. the Papists are to be thought of the Church of God because they hold the foundation of the Gospel which is faith in Christ Jesus the Son of God Hooker Eccles Polit. page 140. we willingly acknowledge Papists to be of the family of Christ Covel Apol. ad Archep Cant. we affirm those who are of the Churh of Rome to be part of the Church of Christ and those who live and die in the Church of Rome may notwithstanding be saved and he accuseth the Puritans of ignorance that think the contrary Soame Apol. p. 146. if you think that all Papists that die in the Papistical Church are damned you think absurdly and you dissent from the judgment of learned Protestants D. Burlo in his 3. Sermon ad Clerum saith I dare not deny c. D. Laud late Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in his great volume against the Jesuite doubteth not of ordinary Papists salvations and of late Doctor Taylour in his liberty of Prophecying out of his principles necessarily concludes so much in his twentieth Paragraph and number the 3 d. he speaks thus They keep the foundation c. and therefore all the wisest personages of the adverse party allowed to them possibility of Salvation whilest their errors are not faults of their will but weaknesses and deceptions of the understanding c. The foundation of faith stands secure enough for all these vain and unhandsome superstructures c. Chillingworth hath both the same tenents frequently and as you may gather by his maner of expression he grants them yet very plainly though unwillingly somtimes he saith that they are not damnable othertimes that they are damnable in themselves but not to Catholicks except they stick to them out of affection of error It was well he added this else he had in one stroke broken the whole phantastick fabrick of his verbal not rational volume flashy no way substantial as any sober man will judge The whole result of his work is that every man beleeving Scriptures and feriously labouring to deduce a probable sence out of them is sufficiently provided for in order to his salvation which is to exclude a necessity of communion with any in point of Religion as every man seeth against all Scripture and the Creed This is by the way There are indeed some amongst them as Field Usher and others who seem somtimes to speak more rigidly touching Catholiks Salvation But they observe not how repugnant this is to a generally admitted and cried up principle amongst them which is this namely that they differ not from us in fuundamentals or necessaries By this they labour hard to make their breach from from us not to be damnable being they differ not in points of necessary belief Which if it hath force doth it not inevitably and with more strength conclude a security for us We must therefore conclude that whether they will or no they do all conclude a possibility of salvation for us adhereing to our faith delivered from our forefathers and to omit innumerable others King James shall serve for all for he speaks in the name of all in his speech to the Parliament Novemb. 9. 1605. we rightly saith he confess that many Papists especially our progenitors putting their onely trust in Jesus Christ and his merits may and are frequently saved detesting according to that and judging the cruelty of the Puritans worthy of fire who will grant no salvation to any Papists Yea D. Potter in his book set forth by the command of King Charles pag. 76. 77. confesseth that those things which Protestants think erroneous in the Roman Church are not in themselves damnable to those who beleeve as they profess and that all may be saved with them who bona fide beleeve and profess the Roman Religion as long as they finde no motives sufficient whereby their judgment is convinced that they be in error To conclude all Protestants of any moderation who are not poysoned with the tincture of rigid Calvinisme freely confess that Catholicks in their religion may be faved and do accuse them of want of Charity that they do not think so of them So our adversaries are our judges as appears by their own confession that we may attain unto salvation in the Church of Rome I could give you a longer list but it were superfluous in a confessed doctrine CHAP. 3. Schism is an enormous Crime SChism if we look upon the force of the word it signifieth division if it be in the civil common wealth it is called Sedition if in the Church Schism or the same word may be used for both and be distinguished by Epithites in the one case it is civil Sedition in the other Ecclesiastical Division The Church may be divided two wayes first by revolting from faith which doth not only make Schism but heresie hence it is that they who fall from the faith and doctrin of the Church setting up their contrary opinions as Arrians Macedonians and the like are not onely termed Scismaticks but Hereticks Secondly the Church is divided by revolting from the chief Pastor or general Councels by disobedience or from communion with the other members although faith be conserved intire and this makes pure Schism as it is distinguished from heresie So the Donatists and Meletians at first keeping the faith of the Church but abstaining from communion with the other members in divine worship prayer and other holy rites or when they erected altar against altar then and not before they were properly accounted Schismaticks from whence it is gathered that although Schism continuing is wont to degenerate into heresie because as St. Hierom saith in Tit. 3. There is no Schim which doth not frame to it self some heresie that they may seem to have just cause to revolt from the Church Hence St. Augustine l. 2. contra Cresconium c. 7. Schism is a new revolt Heresie is an inveterate Schism yet speaking in rigour heresie violating the faith of the Church Schism breaking her charity they are both grevious sins seeing they seperate from the Church and consequently from the head which is Christ But now we will onely treat of the greviousness of Schism There are a sort of people who cannot conceive that a Christian Common-wealth
rather of Luther the whole Catholick Church consisting of divers Kingdoms in which England is comprised did obey divers Princes were governed by divers civil Lawes and Statutes yet they worshiped God but in one faith and in one sacrifice were sanctified with the same Sacraments did acknowledge the same spiritual Rector the Bishop of Rome Then arose Luther Henry the eighth Queen Elizabeth c. Who brake Communion with the whole world to take away the sacrifice of the whole Church and the greater part of the Sacraments and the holy rites to revolt from the Bishop of Rome all the Church besides persevering in the same unity worship and obedience which before it did profess Who therefore doth not see that they have revolted from the Church and erected altar against altar if they have any and have been the sole Authors of the divided unity of the Church I add that Schism is alwayes a dividing of an united body or a separation of a part from the whole preexistent or fore being now the Catholick Church was an united body existent before Luther from which the Protestants might go out and divide themselves but the Protesants seeing they were no where could make no body from whence the Catholicks could recede therefore the Protestants could onely first make the division and blow up the Rebellion The other often heard phantastick refuge wherewith when these are branded with novelty like men in a desperate naufrage they catch at any broken reed namely that they always were of us and amongst us and so continued till they were cast out of us To the first part I answer That till Henry the eighth they were indeed amongst us that is all their progenitors were Catholicks this every man in the testaments and records of each family can witness for the world till then knew no other all publick profession of Religion was that To fly to interiours that is to say that they were in their hearts Protestants were to recur to divination which were more then childish in things of this nature when all exteriour acts contradict any such dreams and yet to this clear non-sense they are put being compelled to assert their Church for above a Thousand yeers to have been invisible as it is understood under the notion of a body separated from the Roman you will see it in Whittaker in his 2. and 3. Controversie p. 479. Field seeing how destructive this Tenent would be in his 10. C. Accounts it foolish to say that a Church should not have always known professors and White in his defence of the way c. 4. p. 790. Saith positively that Religion is false if it cannot shew a continual descent yet p. 520. he is not ashamed to say that their Church hath had indeed always succession but not visible so that being pressed to shew the real svccession he is constrained to recur to this ridiculous divination of mens interiour Protestancie though they professed otherwise Which contradictory shist of their's were enough to destroy their pretended Church Prideaux in his ninth Lesson of the invisibility of the Church after many braggs comes to this poor refuge and beats about like a man desperate to save his case upon a broken reed or distracted sentence in any obsolute or forlorn Author But sa I noted They will say that they divided not the Church neither did they recede from it but were cast out of it by excommunication of the Pope and therefore not they but the Pope was the Author of this division but this helpeth them nothing For to omit that excommunication is a punishment which is inflicted upon such as go out of the Church not so much casting them out of the Church as depriving them of the participation of common benefits thereof to omit this it is notoriously known to all that Henry the eighth Luther and Queen Elizabeth went out of the Church before they were excommunicated as being condemned by their own proper judgments and so they separated themselves and before any excommunication made the Schism in punishment whereof they were excommunicated touching Henry the eighth it is manifest that he was excommunicated for his disobedience and contumacy in grievous crimes and Queen Elizabeth by and by when she had gotten the Crown upon her she seeing the Pope difficult in declaring her lawful title unto it not for her religion for then she had not changed it but for illegitemacy even according to Acts of our Parliaments under her Father broke off all Communion with the Church of God So Camden in Elizabeth The English also compiled a book of Canons wherein they also confess they went out of the Church of Rome therefore it is a frivolous thing that they pretend they went not out but were driven out of the Church They may perchance reply that they were as amongst us so of us before this division and so are yet because it is sufficient to incorporate any body into the true Church of Christ if he beleeveth the Creed of the Apostles as here Protestants do To this I answer First that in some cases this may be enough yes even to beleeve Jesus Christ to be the Son of God is sufficient as in the case of the Eunuch and such like that is an implicite faith may suffice till other necessary truths are sufficiently propounded For the Gospel had and hath a time of growth in every new Christian In these and such like cases it is sufficient not to mis beleeve formerly other truths to constitute a man a member of Chirst's Church I answer Secondly That the same God who trusted his Church with this hath as well entrusted her with all other necessary truths The Holy Ghost hath taught her omnem veritatem all and every necessary truth as our blessed Saviour promised which she pro re nata as heresies pullulate declares to her children that they may be able to avoid the danger of swallowing stones insteed of bread These truths thus by supreme power propounded to the faithful they are obliged to receive by obeying their Prelats who have a charge over their souls according to that of the Apostle obedite praepesitis vestris c. Hence the Nicene Fathers declared as a most fundamental truth Christ Jesus to be Deum de Deo et consubstantialem Patri c. to be God of God consubstantial to the Father c. which is not in the Apostles Creed neither is it there that the Holy Ghost is God nor the Fathers of Nice did declare that great truth because yet heresies touched not that point as St. Basile and St. Gregory Nariane teach yet I beleeve that every true Christian will esteem it necessary to beleeve these truths it is easie to descend to many more particulars which all Christians admit to be necessary though not expressed in the Apostles Creed as concerning the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist c. The Church hath therefore always from the beginning to this day beleeved and practised
is hurt in their fancies as I have observed some though otherwise able to make unbroken discourses in other matters of less concernment which is easily possible according to Philosophy or else God for other sins blindeth their understandings as he did Pharoah's which obstacle they must labour to remove that they may learn to obey God in his Church else their condition will be every way most miserable if they obey not for want of Christian humility they are in evident danger of hell if they do obey they are in danger because they do against Conscience but the remedy of this is at hand if they relinquish their own judgments not by satisfying which they pretend they cannot do but by captivating to a sure Authority Certainly wicked fury hath made and increased this Schism for granting which is my second answer to the former objection that when unity cannot be kept without detriment of eternal Salvation it may and ought to be broken without sin but when by the conservation of unity no detriment of salvation is incurred and that if this also may be obtained by persevering in unity then at least there shall be no lawful cause to break unity and those who break it do incur certain damnation for sacrilegious Schism But now Protestants remaining in union with the Church of Rome should have suffered no detriment of their eternal Salvation but had been in a certain way to arrive unto it As we have shewed before by their own confession that Catholicks persevering in the same unity may attain unto salvation wherefore it manifestly followeth that they without any cause went out of the Church wherein they might have been saved and cast themselves and their followers into the state of damnation according to that of St. Augustine De unit Eccl. c. 19. None come unto Salvation and life everlasting except he hath Christ for his head and none can have Christ for his head except he he in his body which is the Church Again which is chiefly to be pondered and always to be repeated those damnable doctrins as they call them taught in the Church of Rome ought to have been declared by a general Councel and not by themselves who are the least if any part of the Church Otherwise if it should be lawful for every one to accuse the Church his mother of Heresie and to leave her without any other discussing of the cause a gate should be open to all Heresies the Church of God would be trodden under foot yea all Christianity fall to ruine this hath been the plea of all separatists which they thought sufficiently proved if onely accusing of error be proving as in the cause of England D. Bilson and Covell teach the necessities of Synods in these things the first part p. 374. the other p. 110. And that which another replied first that England might sufficiently judge of heresies newly brought in seeing it is matter of fact to wit whether this or the other doctrin came down from our Fathers Grandfathers c. or whether it were heard of but yesterday or the day before for this even children may perceive The second point also which he not onely by mouth but by pen now frequent in other hands so much urged saying that it is not needful to call a general Councel since by your confessions as Cressy fol. 443. seemeth to insinuate that there is no infallable power in them A doctrin which I was glad to finde amongst you yet I wondred at it being already repugnant to what I had read in your former authors as D. Stapleton and D. Stratford of the Church and of late in a book made by a Country-man of ours in Latine called Systema Fidei Cressie's words are these No man will endeavour to oblige them further then c. to beleeve an obliging authority in the Catholick Church let is be limitted and confined as straitly and with as many provises as any Catholick or indeed any resonable man shall think good I say according to this power of defining and establishing faith it is to no purpose to call a general Councel to declare heresies when every ignorant fellow can do as much in order to the verity of declaring though perhaps not in order to the coercive manner of declaring yea in the very power it self for asmuch as according to this position of Cressy the power of the Church in this particular may be restrained by any silly fellow c. Thus far this Author To these I answer For asmuch as concerneth matter of fact every nation may witness what they have recived but they cannot make infallable discernment of matters of Faith without the supreme judgment of the whole Church in whose onely mouth there can be no errors which is our principal question Many things are conveyed to posterity which are not matters of Faith sometimes not of truth this the Church onely suerly determines To the second objection out of Gressy I answer that his words though very harsh yet in my judgment they may receive a more favourable gloss upon connexion with the other parts of his discourse He doth indeed to much even suspiciously savour of his old friendship with that vertiginous and flashy Apostata Chillingworth a man whom few examples have paralel'd in often turning religion But Cressy wrote this book in Neophitism not being yet fully instructed in the mysteries of our holy faith as St. Hierome noteth of Arnobius which therefore is more excusable in him though he should express his not throughly digested conceits hardly endugh consistent with the verities of the Catholick faith I do not beleeve that his intention was so soon to play the master in teaching what he had not perfectly learned which had been too preposterous 〈◊〉 this whole books 〈◊〉 to give the History or gradation of his conversion how he did reach from one degree to another and how he gathereth the sence of our doctrin and Doctors in his passage wherein as I said it is no wonder if being a Neophite he should boggle in his manner of explication as his expression seemeth to do in this but where he now is he will better and more fully inform himself and I doubt not but wil rectifie those passages which savour of mistakes Neither doth it avail much though many here stumble at these and other of his passages for St. Hier saith ep 76. I think Origen to be read So sometimes for application as Tertullian Novatus Apollinaris Cressy and many more Ecclesiastical writers both Greek and Latin that we may choose what is good in them and avoid the contrary There are some very good things in that book though intermixt with other passages more harsh as he seems to express them which a prudent reader may pick out and discern to his profit It remaineth therefore firm and certain that our Country men are bound under the pain of Schism and rebellion to reunite themselves unto the Church of Rome their mother as