have not strained this Canon in my interpretations I assure you they are not mine but your own Authors The first is Gratians Par. 1. Dist. 28. c. 15. Si quis discernit Presbyterum conjugatum tanquam occasione â—…ptiarum quod offerre non debeat ab ejus oblatione ideo se abstinet Anathema sit The latter is the new Glossators upon Gratian in the edition authorized by Greg. 13. Si quis secernat se à Presbytero qui uxorem duxit tanquam non oporteat illo liturgiam peragente de oblatione percipere Anathema sit And he tells us That Dionysius exiguus had in effect so interpreted it before him 7. And this one single Canon might I alledge not only as the Jugement and Decree of the Catholick Church from the Code of her Canons but also as the Judgement of your own particular Roman Church from Dionysius and as the Decree of the same Church from Gratian But that both the antient Judgement and Decree of your Church are more clearly proved by the practice of it For in your very Church of Rome have heretofore been no less then nine Popes which were the sons of married Priests and Deacons whereas if Priests and Deacons marriage had been forbid by the Apostles or by the Catholick Church I might say They were the sins of Priests not sons and you might say They were very unfit Popes because very unfit successors for Saint Peter but more unfit Vicars for his master But so saith Gratian Par. 1. Dist. 56. cap. 2. Osius Papa fuit filius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa fuit filius Jucundi Presbyteri Felix Papa filius Felicis Presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapetus Papa filius Gordiani Presbyteri Theodorus Papa filius Theodori Episcopi de civitate Hierosolymâ Silverius Papa filius Silverii Episcopi Romae Deus dedit Papa filius Stephani subdiaconi Felix etiam tertius natione Romanus ex Patre Felice Presbytero fuit Item Gelasius natione Afer ex Episcopo Valerio natus est Item Agapetus natione Romanus ex Patre Gordiano Presbytero originem duxit complures etiam alii inveniuntur qui de sacerdotibus nati Apostolicae sedi praefuerunt See here are nine Popes named which were all the sons of married Clergy-men and yet Gratian concludes this Chapter saying These were not All divers more might be found if he had a mind to look after them yet these are enough to prove the practice of the Church of Rome for having married Priests till the year of our Lord 158 when Anastasius flourished who writ the lives of the Popes saith Bellarm. de script Eccles. with this emphatical asseveration Ut notum est denying Damasus cited by Gratian to have been the author of of that Book as well he might For Damasus lived in the year 367. So that very few of these men not above three at most had been Popes before his time for it is evident That Agapetus who is reckoned fourth in this Catalogue lived in the time of Justinian that is above 500. years after Christ For by his couragious answer he kept Justinian from embracing Eutychianism saying He thought he 〈◊〉 come to a Christian Emperour but he had found a Pagan persecutor the reason was The Emperour had laboured to perswade him to be an Eutychian And that Silverius who was this Agapetus his next successor may by the way be added to Gratians list for he was the son of Hormisdae not of Silverius Bishop of Rome I have no mind nor leisure to make any special enquiry after the rest and I need not For if you will consider this testimony seriously you will find in this one Catalogue not only Priests and Bishops of Rome to have been Fathers of Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests allowed in that particular Church but also Theodorus Bishop of Hierusalem in Asia and Valerius Bishop of Hippo in Africa to have been Fathers of two of your antient Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests then allowed in the Catholick Church that is to say not only in Europe but also in Asia and in Africa But I do intreate you to take special notice of Valerius Bishop of Hippo for he alone may very well make you misdoubt if not the truth yet the authority of your own alledged Canon since it is incredible that such a married Bishop should live at Hippo at the very same time in which such a Canon was made at Carthage against Priests marriages and neither confute the Canon having such a Learned Priest under him as Saint Augustine nor be confuted by it having so many enemies about him as the Donatists but however in that so many Fathers of your own Church have been the sons of married Priests it will be discretion in some of your Zealots hereafter to bestow better language upon the children of married Priests for fear they be constrained to reproach not only many of their own Popes but even the whole Church of Christ For so far doth your own Gratian justifie this Truth as to assure us That the marriage of Priests was lawful at that time in every Countrey over all the Christian world Dist. 56. c. 13. Quum ergo ex sacerdotibus natiin summos Pontifices supra leguntur esse promoti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis conjugiis nati quae sacerdotibus ante Prohibitionem Ubique licita erant in orientali Ecclesia usque hodie eis licere probatur When as therefore the sons of Priests as we we read before viz. cap. 2. which I alledged have been promoted to be Popes we may not think they were born to those Priests in fornication but in lawfull marriage for it was lawfull everywhere that is in all the Christian world for Priests to marry before the Prohibition and in the Eastern Church it is at this day proved to be lawfull So we see that the Clergy both of Eastern and Western Church did plainly shew by their Practice That the marriage of Priests was not prohibited by the Apostles or the Catholick Church and therefore generally used their liberty till some after-prohibition denyed the same to the Clergy of the Western Church And the new Glossator himself who confidently saith that Gratian was mistaken as to the Latine Church sheweth little reason for his own confidence because no pretence or proof for the others mistake till this Decree of Siricius which was not made till almost 400. and not generally ratified or received in his own Diocess till above a 1000. years after Christ For so Baronius himself hath recorded that in the year 1074. this Decree of prohibiting Priests marriage was forced upon the Bishops of Italy Germany and France by Pope Gregory the seventh after they had unanimously gainsayed and most earnestly deprecated and opposed it v. Bar. An. 1074. nu 37 38 39. Now if this Decree were not generally received in the Latine Church till then though it were made
A Christian Vindication OF TRUTH Against ERROUR Concerning these Seven Controversies 1. Of Sinners Prayers 2. Of Priests Marriage 3. Of Purgatory 4. Of the second Commandment and Images 5. Of praying to Saints and Angels 6. Of Justification by Faith 7. Of Christs New Testament or Covenant By Edw. Hide D. D. sometimes Fellow of T. C. in Cambridge and late Rector Resident of Brightwell in Berks. Holding forth the faithful word as he hath been taught that he may be able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers Tit. 1. 9. Idcirco doctrinam Catholicam contradicentium obsidet impugnatio ut fides nostra non torpescat otio sed multis exercitationibus elimetur Aug. Serm. 98. de Tempore London Printed by R. White for Richard Davis Bookseller in Oxford 1659. The General Contents of each Chapter CAp. 1. Of Sinners prayers p. 1. 2. Of Priests Marriage p. 13. 3. Of Purgatory p. 69. 4. Of the Second Commandement and against Images p. 129. 5. Of Praying to Saints and Angels p. 245. 6. Of Justification p. 359. 7. Of Christs New Testament or Covenant p. 471. Courteous Reader The pages above-mentioned will shew theâ—… the full Contents of all particulars handled in each Chapter TO THE Christian Reader HE that writes Devotion is like to please all good Christians and is sure to please himself because he walks with God in whose presence is joy and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore But he that writes Controversie is sure to displease many even all that are either Unchristian as coming short of Religion or Antichristian as going beyond or against it and cannot easily please himself because he walks among briers and thorns which may entangle but must annoy and offend his footing I did little think when I took some few steps in Golgotha to teach my self and prepare others how to dye That I should have met with thorns instead of dead mens skuls though I made a publick impression of those steps in my Christian Legacie for others the more plainly to see and the more easily to follow them But such is the contentiousness of this carping and quarreling age That it turneth even Devotion it self into controversie and no wonder then if it turn controversie into contention and contention into bloodshed Let the Apostle cry never so lowd Foolish and unlearned questions avoid knowing that they do gender strifes And the servant of Christ must not strive 2 Tim. 2. yet this captious world will afford more questions concerning strife then Godliness not considering that the Spirit of God calleth them foolish and unlearned questions though they be invented with never so much wit and maintained with never so great learning And such I think are most of these ensuing questions raised by so many exceptions lately brought against the doctrine and practice of the Church of England by one G. B. neerly devoted to the Church of Rome 1. Of Gods hearing the Prayers of Heathens for what is that to Christians 2. Of Purgatory for what is that to the Christian Faith 3. Of Priests marriage for what is that to the Christian Religion 4. Of worshiping Images for they are both directly against Religion. 5. Of Praying to Saints 6. Of Justification by works for that 's against Faith in Christ. 7. Of Quarrelling about the words of Testament and Covenant for that 's at least vain if not profane or sinful babling As t is meerly upon words so t is vain as t is quarrelling upon those words so it may easily be sinful For he that saith Hold fast the form of sound words 2 Tim. 1. 13. bids us stand upon Propositions which signifie true or false not upon single Terms which are unsignificant as to the Truth whether speculative or practick for there can be neither Faith nor Love in them yet I have endeavoured to make the Answers to these Questions though grounded on such unnecessary exceptions to contain some very necessary and sound Divinity for which purpose I have put them into large Chapters and have assigned to each Chapter large Contents being resolved to answer the Cause for the satisfaction of others rather then the Objection for the vindication ofmy self And I think I had a good occasion and a better reason so to do for though our Brethren most oppress us yet our Adversaries most revile us and therefore every true Son much more Servant of this distressed Church ought to believe and observe his Church now speaking to him in the language of St. Paul Be not thou therefore ashamed of the Testimony of the Lord nor of me his Prisoner but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the Gospel according to the Power of God 2 Tim. 1. 8. He that is ashamed of his Religion is ashamed of the Testimony of the Lord He that forsakes his Church when she is the Lords Prisoner did hypocritically follow her when she was the Lords free Servant and refusing to partake in the afflictions of the Gospel shews he embraced the Gospel according to the custom of men not according to the Power of God But the Word of God is not bound 2 Tim. 2. 9. These Truths which we profess according to Gods word will alwaies be professed to the worlds end though with less visibility yet not with less constancy and if Protestants shall go from them Papists shall return to them For God that can raise Children out of Stones will never be without witness among his own children and I look upon all Christians at large as his children though only upon good Christians as his dutiful children And if they should hold their peace the very stones would speak crying Hosanna to the Son of David our blessed Saviour ascribing unto him the Truth of our Religion and the honour of our Salvation And we desire no more may obtain no less Let our adversaries shew any one Tenent or Practice wherein we of this Church leave them to be more for the honour of Christ then that which we embrace and we will acknowledge our selves the worser Christians nor be any longer in that particular Protestant against them but detestant of our selves But till they can shew that we beseech them to shew themselves good Christians in not railing and raging against us for being so because we cannot think God hath given any Church Dominion over Religion or his Servant power above his Son yet men of their perswasion then most call to be answered when they least resolve to be satisfied disiring only to hinder Orthodox Ministers from confirming Protestants because they have power by prohibiting their own Proselites the use of their Books to hinder them from converting Papists yet for my part I should not have laid open the corrupt doctrines and practices of Popery had I not been constrained to vindicate Protestancy for I had rather spend my time and zeal about doctrines of Conscience the of Contestation or of Corruption and these for the most part are both
before yet was it not ratified and confirmed till then for that is an undenyable rule of her own Canonist Leges instituuntur quùm promulgantur firmantur quùm moribus utentium approbantur Grat. Par. 1. Dist. 4. cap. 3. Whence it follows That neither this Decree of Siricius nor any other of the like nature could properly be called a Prohibition till that time when it was first generally received imto Practice and that was not til the year 1074. a longtime sure after the Apostles And this same Truth is attested by Gratian in the first words of his 31. distinction Tempus quoque Quia nondum erat institutum ut sacerdotes continentiam servarent where your new Glossator is very much troubled to prove that Sacerdotâ—…s is put for Subdiaconi Priests for Subdeacons that so he may rather elude then expound the Text It doth therefore neerly concern you as a Trustee of Gods Truth not of any mans mistakes or insolencies and as a member and Minister of Christs Catholick Church to mitigate if not recall those words That the Apostles themselves were the first that taught and decreed that Priests ought to abstain from wives And those other For Priests to marry contrary to the Churches precept Siricius might well say is to be in the flâ—…sh because it is to be in a continuall state of sin and damnation unless you will say That the Apostles taught and decreed that in word which they have contradicted in writing that the whole Church wittingly and willingly sinned against their Decree for above a thousand years together by which means you may chance teach others to say and we now find many Schollars most ready to learn such a wicked lesson That for so long together Christ was without a Catholick and Apostolick Church For my part I dare not be so far an Accuser of my Brethren but sure I will never be brought to be so far an Accuser of my Mother 8. But least it may be thought that Sampsen-like you have smitten us poor Philistines hip and thigh and have carried away our Gates by the vertue and strength of the Council of Carthage I will now look after a Razor that shall very much endanger that lock wherein your great strength lyeth for I have yet only clipped it a little by Valerius his hand and must now labour to cut it off which I shall endeavour to do by cutting the Africane Church from the Catholick and that Council you have alledged from the Africane Church and that Canon you have alledged from the Africane Council I say therefore 1. That the Africane Church was but a particular Church and could not pass the sentence may not have either the repute or the authority of the Catholick Church And for this answer I have your own Cardinals precedent Bellar. lib. 2. de concil cap. 8. 9. Where that objection against the Popes being called Summus Pontifex which is brought from the 26. Canon of the Council of Carthage Ut primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos aut aliquid hujusmodi sed tantum primae sedis Episcopus is by him thus answered Quùm hoc Concilium nationale fuerit non universae sed tantùm Africanae Ecclesiae leges tulisse potuit Itaque hoc Canone non prohibuit neque potuit prohibere ne Rom. Pontifex diceretur sacerdotum princeps vel summus sacerdos sed tantuÌ„ ne ita appellaretur ullus Metropolitanus Africae This Council being but nationall could not make Canons for the Catholick Church and therefore by this Canon could not prohibit the Bishop of Rome to be called an high Priest but only the Bishops of Africa to be so called Pray shew me a reason why this answer is not as good for the Priests of Europe as for the Bishop of Rome for all the world cannot make one National Church the whole Catholick Church no more then it can make a particular an universal or one corner of the South or West all the world 2. That second Council of Carthage scarce deserves to have the credit and cannot have the authority of the particular Africane Church First because for ought that can be collected out of the acts thereof there were not above seven Bishops present at it no more then were at a Collation with the Donatists v. Bin. Conc. Tom. 1. Col. p. 624. whereas Africa afforded above two hundred Bishops and they were all by their Canons strictly bound to be present at National Synods Secondly because there is a plain and a gross untruth set down in the first words of that Council as it is in the Latine Copy which only befriends your assertion for there it is said Gloriosissimo Imperatore Valentiniano Augusto 4. Theodosio viris clarissimis consulibus i. Whiles Valentinian the Emperour was Consul the fourth time and Theodosius with him these Bishops met at Carthage whereas it is evident by the Archives of Chronologie That Valentinian the Emperour never at all was Consul with Theodosius and it is as clear by the same Archives that when Valentinian the Emperour was Consul the fourth time Neotorius not Theodosius was his partner See Helvicus An. Christ. vul 390. So I shew you plainly we have a false Consul put upon the Council and I have some reason to suspect we have also a false Council put upon the Church For it is clear that this Council was not held in the year 390. when Valentinian was Consul the fourth time because Genedius who speaks first in it and was President of it was not taken by Aurelius to be his Coadjutor at Carthage till after Saint Augustine had been taken by Valerius to be his Coadjutor at Hippo as saith Binius Aurelius factum Valerii Hipponensis imitatus onus Episcopale in Genedium stranstulit And it is asserted by Helvicus That Saint Augustine was made Priest of the Church of Hippo but in the year 391. that is the year after this Consulage And sure he lived some years a Priest of that Church before he was made Bishop thereof perchance so many as to satisfie the custom of the Church but sure so many as to write full thirteen Books as appears by his Retractations lib. 1. cap. 14. notwithstanding his continual Preaching all that time For he was required and authorized by his Bishop to be a Preacher whiles he was yet a Priest which till his daies had not been known in the Africane Church and he preached both privately and publickly against the Donatists Manichaeans and Pelagians saith Possidius and sure the more time he spent in Preaching the less time he had for writing But to let pass collections and conjectures we see Genedius the President of this Council was not a Bishop till after Saint Augustine And Saint Augustine was not so much as a Priest till one year after the date of this Council so it is certain the Council hath a false date and it is possible we may have a false Council
the whole But take heed whiles you say so that they who are against you and deny Purgatory tax you not of blasphemy for saying that which is not in being is a part of Christs Kingdom for to make Christ a King in Utopia in a place which is not is to make him no King And that they who are with you and affect purgatory tax you not of infidelity for believing that Christ hath taken possession of his whole Kingdom upon no better grounds then upon a meer uncertainty 6. For even your own Bellarmine though in his first Book de Purgatorio he writ so confidently as if all men were bound to believe Purgatory that will be saved yet in his second Book de circumstantiis Purgatorii He writes so ambiguously as to enfeeble any unprejudicate mans belief I will give you some few instances and then leave you to judge what small reason he had for his so great confidence Cap. 6. de loco Purgatorii He saith The Church hath not defined in what place Purgatory is for that the purgation of souls may be in many places and some are purged where they sinned but after several other opinions he seems to like that best which placeth Purgatory in the bowels of the earth because of several eruptions of fire out of the earth in several parts of the world Be it so if we must needs have a Purgatory that they may have the greatest share in it and terrour from it who were once the first inventers and now are the chiefest maintainers of it even the Italian Monks and Fryers for the most notorious eruptions of fire in these parts of the world are either in Italy as at Mount Vesuvius or not far from it as at Mount Aetna in Sicily Cap. 9. De tempore quo durat Purgatorium Of the time that Purgatory lasteth which is as uncertain as the place Quando ab hoc loco in coelum avolant res est incertissima How long the souls must stay in Purgatory before they can get to heaven is a matter of the greatest uncertainty Cap. 10. 11. Qualis sit purgatorii poena The quality of the Torment in Purgatory is as uncertain as either the time or place De poenâ Purgatorii quaedam sunt certa quaedam dubia As concerning the punishment of Purgatory some things are certain some are doubtfull Certa sunt Carentia visionis poena sensus poena ignis T is certain saith he the souls in Purgatory are under the punishment of loss for want of the beatifical vision and are under the punishment of sense by torment of fire Do they want the beatificall vision say then God hath thus sentenced them at their particular Judgement Depart from me ye cursed and let them hereafter be accounted not blessed but cursed souls not in a Communion with God but in a separation from him yet in saying so remember you bid your best Champion recall even the very subject of this whole Controversie which indeed is the best if not the only way to end it De Ecclesiâ quae est in Purgatorio of the Church which is in Purgatory for that cannot be a part of Gods Church which is in a separation from God And sure I am your Cardinal is beholding to the latter part of this same sentence to prove that souls in Purgatory are under the punishment of sense by fire for he proveth it by these words Ite in ignem aeternum Go into everlasting fire Mat. 25. And why not also prove their punishment of loss in the want of the beatifical vision from the first part of the same sentence Depart from me ye cursed For the same sentence denounceth the judgement of loss and of sense of loss in Depart from me ye cursed and of sense in Go into everlasting fire And we may fancy the one to be Temporarie as well as the other and to belong to righteous souls as much as the other but surely the Text saith both are eternal and belong only to the cursed And indeed t is a strange proof which brings Hell to prove Purgatory yet this is the best he can find in all the Scripture For here he proves that material fire can punish immaterial souls because it was provided to punish the Devil and his Angels which are immaterial spirits But still the proof concerneth only Hell fire so that in plain truth He alledgeth hell to prove Purgatory All the doubt is how he can make it so This proof is yet further enlarged in the next Chapter where he answers some chief doubts concerning Purgatory as whether it be a true real fire and how it can act upon separated souls and both are answered from these words Go ye cursed into everlasting fire Ignem Purgatorii esse corporeum quia in Scripturis passim poena impiorum vocatur Ignis Et regula Theologorum est ut verba Scripturarum accipiantur propriè quando nihil absurdi sequitur The fire of Purgatory is corporeal for commonly in the Scripture the punishment of the wicked is called fire what is the punishment of the wicked to the righteous or must men turn wicked that they may go to Purgatory and it is a rule of Divines That the words of Scripture are to be taken properly if there follow no absurdity and a little after Corpora damnatorum puniuntur igne Mat. 25. Ite in ignem aeternum est autem idem ignis corporum damnatorum spirituum corpore vacantium nam ibidem dicitur qui paratus est diabolo Angelis ejus The bodies of the damned are punished with fire Go into everlasting fire Mat. 25. but it is the same fire which punisheth their bodies and other souls or spirits without bodies as it is said Which is prepared for the Devil and his Angels Pray Sir why should any Christian be taught to desire to go to that fire which was prepared for the Devil and his Angels and if he do once go thither how shall he ever return from thence And yet your Cardinal would have us believe Purgatory that we may have the happiness to go thither and saith if we do not we shall burn for ever in Hell-fire A new Apostle sure he speaks not only so resolutely but likewise so authentically yet not dropt down as the rest from Mount Sion bùt from Mount Sina as we may guess by his Thunder and Lightning Seriously it is a sad thought for all good Christians that any Divine should after Nadab and Abihu dare offer strange fire for God is not well pleased with such an offering But it is a joyful thought for us poor Protestants that this fire of Purgatory is not only a strange but also a false fire for so we are sure it cannot burn us Else it seems after it hath been your Purgatory it should be our Hell However it is palpable That your Cardinals talk only is of Purgatory but his proof is of Hell Thus himself hath brought his certainties concerning
in doing or in suffering because there is no proportion betwixt an infinite Justice and a finite satisfaction This considered may I not be as gross an Ebionite or Cherinthian by saying there is a necessity of penal satisfaction as if I say there is a necessity of legal observations for the expiation of sin do not both alike diminish and disparage the efficacy of Christs death Or may I think that the Church of Christ by using the power of the Keyes in retaining sins intends to retain where Christ remits to wiâ—… in the true Penitent to the undervaluing of Christs merit in purchasing remission of sins and Gods free grace and mercy in granting it and Gods holy Spirit in testifying it Therefore I must let the satisfaction enjoyned by the Church die with the Penitent and not be required of him after death unless I will suppose the Church both able and willing to bind where Christ hath loosed For if Christ loose not the sinner here I do not find upon what grounds to believe That he will loose him hereafter So that we see if satisfaction is to be made by the sinner All must go to Purgatory and for ought we can prove tarry there eternally And so Purgatory will in truth be Hell If satisfaction hath been made by Christ then none at all can justly go thither And so Purgatory will in truth be Nothing certain it is no other satisfaction was given for all the offences of the good Thief though he were not a Penitent till the hour of his death and with what colour of Truth can any Divine teach that God will not take this satisfaction and this alone for all other Penitents And yet this in Bellarmines acount is one of the two supporters of Purgatory the other is Venial sins which may also be shaken in good time In a word The Place the Time the Quality of Torment the manner of tormenting the Tormentor and the cause or end for which souls are said to be tormented in Purgatory are all uncertain and how can the torment it self be taken for a certainty For it is not any mans confidence can make that certain which is invested with so many intrinsecal doubts and ambiguities nor any mans arguments can make that credible which is not certain But besides the uncertainty wâ—… meet with in this temporary Tormentâ—… which will not suffer us to believe it wâ—… find it casts an uncertainty upon that eternal Torment which we confess our selveâ—… bound to believe For as you rightly sayâ—… Nothing is more certain amongst Christiaâ—… then what is de fide of Divine Faith So crave leave to inferr from that sayinâ—… Nothing is to be affirmed de fide of diviâ—… faith among Christians which is not ceâ—…tain unless we will labour to overthroâ—… the Certainty of the Christian faith Fâ—… to require men to believe an uncertaiâ—… equally with a certainty is to invite theâ—… to disbelieve a certainty since it is not possible they should have one and the same Divine Faith for uncertainties and for certainties And therefore to teach men to believe Purgatory which is uncertain is the ready way to make them not believe Hell which is most certain Nor is it to be wondered That Bellarmines certainties concerning this doctrine should be so much enfeebled by his own uncertainties concerning the same no more then it is to be wondered that the certainty of our Christian saith should depend not upon the wit of man but upon the word of God 7. For this doctrine of Purgatory is so far from being taught in the Word of God that if you should ask those Disciples who have been most and best instructed in the Word Have ye received the doctrine of Purgatory since ye believed They must answer you We have not so much as heard whether there be any Purgatory and yet the same men will plainly tell you They have heard there is an holy Ghost and have received him though your over-bold Peltanus would perswade the world That Purgatory is as expresly taught in the holy Scriptures as the Unity of God and yet that is a little more expresly taught then the Deity of the Holy Ghost though blessed be God the Scripture is very express in both these Doctrines But in the whole Book of God there is neither in words nor in sense neither explicitly nor implicitly any such thing as your Purgatory which we cannot say concerning any Article of the Christian Faith That the thing we are bound to believe is not so much as really or virtually named in all the Holy Bible For an sit is as truly a precognition in the object of faith as in the subject of any question by that Rule of the Apostle if reason will not serve How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard and how shall they hear without a Preacher Rom. 10. 14. We cannot believe what we have heard we cannot hear any supernatural truth unless God preach it and if he hath been the Preacher we may find the doctrine in his written Word which the most zealous defenders of this your doctrine durst not assert in former times For a very eminent Schoolman of our own Couâ—…rey Iohannis Bachâ—…nus lib. 4. dist 45. quâ—…unica answers all the Texts that were in his daies commonly alledged out of the Bible to prove Purgatory which were then but three though since they have swelled into a far greater number The first Text was that of 2 Mac. 12. To which his answer is Libri Macchabaeorum non sunt de Canone Bibliae ut dicit Hieronymus The Books of the Macchabees are not of the Canon of the Bible as saith Saint Hierom Nor doth your Cardinals new subtilty invalidate this answer Dico librum Maccha non esse Canonicum apud Judaeos sed apud Christianos esse I say the Books of the Macchabees were not Canonical among the Jews but they are among the Christians For the Christian Church had the Canon of the Old Testament from the Church of the Jews who not daring to make themselves a Canon took that which God gave them and therefore left out the Macchabees because they were not in the Ark that is to say not in that Canon which God had given them Nor hath God given the Christian Church power and authority to make that or any other Book Canonical which himself hath not made so for the Text is plain which saith To them were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3. 2. Which words only shew a Trust of keeping not a power of making the Oracles of God either in Jew or Christian. The second Text then alledged to prove Purgatory was that of 1 Cor. 3. To which his answer is That the Apostle there speaketh of that fire which shall burn the world at the day of Judgement therefore that place will not prove such a a purging by fire as the Doctors suppose before the day of Judgement Benè probatur Purgatio ista conflagrationis in
of the Decalogue 2. Athanasius in bis Synopsis cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Book of Exodus containeth the Sâ—…atutes or Judgements and before them all the Ten Commandements in two Tables whereof this was the first I am the Lord thy God c. This the second Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image 3. Greg. Naz. in his verses which have this title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Ten Commandements of Moses sets this for the first Commandement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not know any other God and this for the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not make any vain or breathless image I could moreover add Saint Chrysostom and Epiphanius and others but this was never at all a doubt much less a Controversie in the Greek Church Therefore I make haste to the Latines where I will not insist upon Saint Hierom because we had his testimony already in Sedulius but only Saint Ambrose who in his Comment upon the sixth of the Ephesians saith expresty This is the first Commandemâ—…nt Thou shalt have no other Gods but me and this the second Thou shalt not make to thy self any image or likeness This is enough to shew the doctrine of the Latine Church whereof Saint Hierom and Saint Ambrose were accounted the two first and chiefest Doctors yet to these I will add Severus Sulpitius who in the first Book of his holy History hath these words Nos eam sc. legem Dei breviter perstringemus Non erunt inquit tibi alii Dii praeter me Non facies tibi Idolum Non sumes nomen Dei tui in vanum Sabbathis nullum opus facies c. I will briefly set down the Law of God Thou shalt have no other Gods but me Thou shalt not make to thy self an image or idol Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain Thou shalt do no work on the Sabbath daies c. This man undertaking to set down the Decalogue sets down those four Commandements distinctly as belonging to the first Table And though the Schoolmen in process of time had generally followed Saint Augustine joyning the first and second Commandements in one yet the other Divines had not generally followed the Schoolmen till of very late years if we may believe Polydore Virgil an Author that writ in the daies of our King Henery the eight For in his fifth Book de Invent. rerum and ninth Chapter he hath these remarkable words Si vis ad vitam ingredi serva mandata quorum capita haec sunt Unum Deum colito Nullius animalis effigiem colito Per Dei nomen haud frustra dejerabis Festos dies piè riâ—…è celebrato Parentes venerare Hominem ne occideris Adulterium fuge Furtum non feceris Nihil alienum concupiveris nec falsum dix eris testimonium If thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandements the Heads whereof are these Worship one God Worship not the image of any creature mark he puts these for two several heads of the Decalogue and not the one as it were the tail of the other Swear not vainly by the name of God Observe the Festivals piously and righteously Honour your parents Kill no man Fly adultery Steal not Covet nothing that belongs to another Bear no false witness He is so far from dividing the Tenth Commandement that he puts the ninth after it whereby to keep others from dividing it for it is palpble himself took Nihil alienum concupiveris but for one Commandement And he saith so plainly That these were the heads of the Commandements that nothing could be said more plainly to shew That though the School did use a liberty in Disputing yet the Church did not use a liberty in Dogmatizing against the Ten Commandements as they had been taught and delivered by God himself 9. But that generally all good Church-men did even at that time in their method of Preaching of which he there speaketh part the first and second Commandements and did not part the tenth for he that saith Covet nothing that belongs to another sets down but one universal negative concerning all coveting And an universal negative may no more be divided into particulars then it may be limited for its division will at last prove its limitation and so an universal will be turned into a particular and Gods Negative will be made mans Affirmative as for example Thou shalt covet nothing of thy neighbours may be made Thou shalt covet something of thy neighbours for the enumeration of all the prohibited particulars in an universal negative being impossible to particularize in some few only as prohibited is in effect to leave those which are not particularized or enumerated out of the Prohibition and therefore we may not think those particulars which are set down in the Tenth Commandement to be set there by way of enumeration as if they were All but only by way of instance or exposition as being the most notorious And consequently one and the same Prohibition Thou shalt not covet must be extended to them All alike and then pass from those particulars till it come to this universal Nor any thing that is his So that this is in truth the Tenth Commandement Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbours for we cannot make it an universal Negative unless we suppose it but one universal Prohibition concerning all manner of concupiscence forbidding internally the first motions and affections thereof and the consent to either externally the leud significations or expressions and much more the completion and custom of concupiscence All these are alike forbidden in the Tenth Commandement by one the same universal Prohibition And if it be but one Prohibition it cannot be two Precepts and if it be two Precepts it cannot be one Prohibition so it must come from an universal negative forbidding all concupiscence to be a particular negative forbidding some concupiscence and consequently licencing that which it hath not forbidden 10. I have hitherto examined your assertion That all Catholick Divines after Saint Augustine did reckon the first and second Commandement but as one I now come to examine your Divinity built upon it and first that Position It is impossible for Christians whatever the Jews did well instructed in the First to offend through ignorance against the second Commandement You might as well have said It is impossible for Christians well instructed to sin through ignorance for you allow the instruction of the first to reach to the second or you allow no second Commandement so the instruction and the ignorance both concern the same thing I answer 1. God thought it not impossible for he hath given the second Commandement no less to Christians then to Jews since we find it not only re-inforced but also even repeated in the New Testament 1 John 5. 21. Little children keep your selves from Idols 9. d. If you will keep your selves Gods children and in his Communion you must
but me doth likewise say Thou shall invocate no other but me because invocation is the most proper and the most publick acknowledgement and worship of God For Invocation is required by the first though it is regulated by the third commandement That enjoyns the object and internal affection this only enjoyns the manner and the external expression Therefore Call upon me in the day of trouble Psal. 50. 15. belonging to the affirmative Call not upon any besides me doth belong to the negative precept in the first Commandement since these two are contraries and contraria sunt sub eodem genere posita contraries must be ranked or reckoned under one and the same Head For in vain doth your Cardinal seek to excuse bad words in prayers from the good sense or meaning of him that prays non agitur de verbis sed de sensu verborum Bell. l. 1. de sanct Beat. c. 17. because as a right intention in our prayers is required by the first so also a right expression in our prayers is required by the third Commandement God requirlng us no less to honour his Name by right words and professions in the One then to honour his Nature by right intentions and affections in the other For as we may not honour God with our lips whiles our hearts are far from him So neither may we dishonour him with our lips whiles our hearts are near him For as the one makes us Hypocritical so the other makes us blasphemous worshippers As the one is directly against the internal so the other is directly against the external Act of Religion as the one is against the morality of the first so the other is against the morality of the third Commandement But of this I have spoken elsewhere of purpose to justifie the Religion established and professed amongst us for which so many Orthodox Divines have lately lost their livelyhoods by Protestants and pray they may not come to lose their lives by Papists because I was there bound to shew the irreligion that I found not only in Faction which hath no Liturgie but also in superstition which hath corrupt Liturgie Justif. of the Church of England cap. 3. sec. 3. there you might have seen more work made for you upon the grounds of conscience then you have here made for me only upon the grounds of contention Thither if you please you may go for more of this argument but before you go take this Question along with you not Where was this your Religion of praying to Saints before Luther but where is it now For it is not in any of Gods Commandements concerning Religion nay 't is plainly against them all 'T is against the first in having a false Object and false internal acts of Religion against the second in having a false external act or manner of Religion by way of adoration against the third in having a false external act or manner of Religion by way of invocation or of Praise and Profession As it is not according to Gods Commandements so it cannot be Piety or Religion as 't is against Gods Commandements so 't is moreover impiety and irreligion Therefore boast not any longer of the general profession and practice of this or any other corrupt part of your Religion which you cannot justifie in its substance For 't is a miserable Religion which is to be found only in its exercise according to the purport of the fourth and not also in its substance according to the purport of the three first Commandements A Religion in its Name not in its Nature in its solemnity not in its purity in its followers not in it self That is in one word A Religion not of Gods but of mans making 12. To such a Religion belongs â—…hat Prayer Maria mater gratiae mater misericordiae Tu nos ab hoste protege horâ mortis suscipe which yet your Cardinal boldly imputeth to the universal Church sic loquitur ecclesia universa lib. 1. de Sanct. Beat. cap. 19. though its language speak only the Church of Rome and its rythme speaks only the late and corrupt ages of that Church and its irreligion doth in truth speak no Church For that is no Church whereof Christ is not the Head And he is not the Head of that Church which prayeth to such as he did not pray And he did never pray to his Mother but only to his Father teaching us o say Our Father not Our Mother whâ—…ch art in Heaven We cannot say the words of this Prayer in his Communion we cannot obtain the blessing oâ—… it by his intercession therefore if we wâ—…l â—…e his Church we must put this prayer oâ—… of our meutâ—…es because we dare not put it into His We have no pattern 〈◊〉 sâ—…ch prayers in all the Book of God and 〈◊〉 we can find better Patterns then God hath given we are bound to â—…ollow those of his giving or we shall leave his 〈◊〉 â—…oly Communion and lose his Soâ—…s blessed â—…ntercession in our prayers â—…or as we are sure the eternal Son of God hath â—…ot taught us thus to pray so we may be assured he will not he cannot 〈◊〉 us in this Prayer Esto mihi in Deum Protectorem Psal. 31. 4. will not agree with this Tu nos ab hoste protegeâ—… In maÌ„us tuas coÌ„mendo spirituÌ„ meuÌ„ will not agree with this Et horâ mortis suscipe why should I leave the Communion of Gods eternal Son either in not saying the one or in saying the other For I may no more now venter to have Religion then I may hereafter hope to have a salvation out of his Communion And though it be more like a Heathen then a Christian to say If it be a question of words and of names and of your Law Acts 18. 15. for words are to be regulated in the exercise of Religion according to Gods Law by vertue of the third Commandement no less then thoughts by vertue of the first Gestures by vertue of the second and Deeds by vertue of the fourth yet is that saying very unfitly applyed in the defence of this Prayer For this is as formal an Invocation of the Blessed Virgin as if she were God Calling her the Mother of Grace and Mercy and praying her to protect us in our life and to receâ—…ve us at our death And who can say more then this to God putting but Father instead of Mother who can ask more then this of God This is in effect to say Mater de coels Dea instead of Pater de coelis Deus miserere nobis miseris peccatoribus O blessed Mother of God instead of O God the Father of Heaven have mercy upon us miserable sinners And we ought to say Libera nos Domine Good Lord deliver us not so much in regard of any other evil and mischief as in regard of such Letanies Therefore this Invocation of the Mother of God is faulty in Objecto cultus in modo colendi both in the object
these two words And I ask no more about the â—…ow words Covenant and Testament to vindicate this my observation from domestick impertinencie and from forrein calumâ—…e which takes notice That Christ is called â—…he Mediator of the New Testament Heb. 9. 15. not the Mediator of the New Covenant as in other places 3. For even your own Latin Interpreter though in the Books of Moses he commonly say Faedus orpactum as Gen. 17. yet after them He doth much more delight in the word Testament then in the word Covenant as Psal. 50. v. 5. Qui ordinant Testamentum ejus super sacrificia not those who have made a Covenant but those who have made a Testament with me by Sacrifice looking through the Sacrifices of the Law upon the Sacrifice of Christ and in his death seeing that made a Testament which was before but a Covenant so again v. 16. Why takest thou my Covenant in thy mouth Pactum meum saith Pagnine and faedus meum saith the Hebrew as before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my Compact or Covenant but your Latin Testamentum meum my Testament And though Exod. 24. 7. he saith Volumen Faederis the Book of the Covenant yet Heb. 9. 4. he saith Arcam Testamenti The Ark of the Testament notwithstanding the Ark was so called from the Book that was kept in it therefore either he should have said the Book of the Testament or he should not have said the Arke of the Testament but as in Exodus he said The Book of the Covenant so in the Hebrews he should have said the Arke of the Covenant using the same word in both places as the Seventy Interpreters and ours do since both relate to the same Thing I say not this to blame your Interpreters but to shew you upon what slight grounds you have blamed ours and more particularly Bâ—…za for using the words Covenant and Testament promiscuously for he did no more then your own Latin Translators had done before Him Therefore since you have respect to the man with a gold ring in goodly apparel that in your account weareth the rich clothing of Authority equally with the Original Text it self and say unto him sit thou here in a good place which however the Ancient Fathers did vouch safe only to the Original Text placing the Greek Testament but not any Translation of it on a Throne in the midst of their assembly in the four first general Councils you may not justly say to the poor man in the vile raiment for such is Beza in your account as being a Protestant Interpreter though you put the Master upon him that he may be thought a Gentleman rather then a Divine stand thou here or sit here under my footstool unless you will be Partial in your self and become a Judge of evil thoughts James 2. 4. And yet even Beza himself prefers Testament before Covenant in the Title to his Translation saying Testamentum Novum The New Testament though he also adde sive Novum faedus Domini nostri Jesu Christi or the New Covenant of our Lord Jesus Christ haply to shew that Jews and Christians had but one and the same Covenant to be saved by one and the same way of salvation though under defferent forms of administration and that was through our Saviour Christ who was to them no less then to us The way the Truth and the Life But to return again to your Interpreter for I left Bâ—…za to follow him that 〈◊〉 might say of Christ he was the Mediatour of the New Testament not of the new Covenant Heb. 9. 15. 't is very observable that Exod 24. 8. he saith Hic est sanguis Faederis This is the blood of the Covenant But Mat. 26. 28. Hic for Hoc est sanguis Novi Testamenti Tbâ—… is the blood of the New Testament Nay those very words of Moses which in Exodus he interprets sanguis faederis The blood of the Covenant Exod. 24. 8. in the Epistle to the Hebrews he interprets sanguis Testamenti The blood of the Testament Heb. 9. 20. Sure he saw either more efficacy or more comfort in the word Testament than in the word Covenant or he would not have exchanged the one for the other in the Interpretation of the very same Hebrew Text. 4. But why should I mention one single Interpreter for so he is accounted though he be made up of two interpretations the old Vulgar and St. Hieroms when the whole Catholick Church recording the Books which contain the mysteries of our salvation had rather call them the Old and the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then the Old and New Covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeking rather to bring the Law to be called the Testament in compliance with the Gospel then to permit the Gospel to be called the Covenant in compliance with the Law And indeed though the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Covenant between two parties both living then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Testament which supposeth one party to be dead yet the Sept. never interpret it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Covenant but by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Testament Symmachus renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 44. 18. but the Sept. there also hold to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 surely by some special Providence and for some special reason happily to shew us That as all the Promises of God were Truth in Christ so they were also Mercies in him as in Christ Jesus every Promise was Yea and Amen so also in him alone it was such as to make us say of it Amen so be it even the Covenant of not drowning Noah with the world Gen. 6. 18. where this word is first used and of not drowning the world any more Gen. 9. was no mercy but in Christ the promised seed the Saviour of the world For what mercy is it not to perish by water to be reserved to everlasting fire to be suffered to prolong the pleasures of a sinful life that we may encrease the torments of an eternal death Therefore I conceive the seventy Interpreters in rendring the Hebrew Berith did make choyce of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Testament rather then of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Covenant that they might direct all mens thoughts and desires only to Christ and fix all their hopes and delights upon him for that the word Testament doth as expressely point at our Saviour Christs passion as St. John Baptists finger did point at his Person and doth in effect say what he said Ecce Agnus Dei Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world for he took away ous sins by his death plainly presignified and necessarily included in the word Testament because that could not be ratified and confirmed without his death For where a Testament is there must also of necessity be the death of the Testator Heb. 9. 16. But where a