the acts of the Apostles â 5. v. 15. and c 19 v. 11. and St. Paul in his Epist to the Philippians â 2. v. 10. commands us to honour the name of Jesus which is only asign or Image of our redemptioÌ as the name Iehoâa is of our creation which was in so great honour with the Jewes that the common people durst not utter it no nor the very Priests but only in the time of sacrifice and solemne benediction as Philâ relates writing the life of Moses nay the very plate on which the name of God was written on the high Priest's forehead is calld the plate of sacred veneration Exodus c. 18. v 36. 38. and we read in the 22. c. v 26 of Ezekiel that God commanded the temple which was an Image of his heavenly house to be honour'd as a holy place and reprehended those Priest's who poluted it saving thus her Priests have violated my law and have prophaned mine holy thinks they have put no diference betwen the holy and prophenâ Now let us see did those of the PrimitiÌve Church ever use or worship Images Tertulian who liv'd in the 3 age in his 2 book de Pudici affirms that the Image of ChriÌst bearing a lambe on his sholders was graven on the chalices us'd in Churches St Gregory Nysen who liv'd in the 4th Century in his Oration of Theodorus sayes that the silent picture painted on the wall doth declare several things and that it is very profitable this same holy Father was wont to weep contemplating the Image of Abraham facrifizing his son Isaac as himself testifies in his ser preach'd in Constantinople S. Basil who liv'd in the same Century in his Epist to Julian the Emperour after numbering seyeral points of faith which himself believ'd brings in the Apostles Prophets and Martyers then concluds saying thus the characters of their Images I do honour and worship thiefly being this was deliver'd by the Apostles and not prohibited and why shu'd it not be shewed painted in all our Churches in hisser of Barlaam he also sayes the followiÌg words âye famous painters raise-up and extoll your arts in painting this saint's Image and likwise let Christ's Image be painted St. Hierome who liv'd in the year â90 writing the life of Paula sayes that shee was wont to prostrate herself before the crucifix and ador'd it as if shee had beheld the Lord crucifi'd bâfoâe her eyes S Crysostome in his ser quod veteris et novi Testamenti unus sit Legislator declar'd that himself lov'd a picture of melted wax full of piery and in his Liturgy he sayes that the Priest was wont to how down his head before the Image of Christ he makes also mention of Christ Image in his ser deferia quintâ Caena Dâmini Paladius who liv'd in the same time in his 11th Epist relates that the Bishop of Jerusalem was wont yearly at the solemnitâ of Easter to expose the crosse to be ador'd by the people he himself first adoring it St. Cyrill of Alexandria who liv'd in the 5 Century in his homily against Nestor sayes thus hail mother of God through whom the precious crosse is made famous and ador'd throughout the world Caelius Sedulius who also liv'd in the 5 Century in his 5th book sayes the following words neither is there any who dose not know that the Image of the crosse ought to bâ worshipp'd S. Gregorie who liv'd in the same Century in his 7 book Epist 5 bids the Bishop Januarius to take the crucifix and the Jmage of the blessed virgin from the Jewes who did not give them the due veneration And in his 53 Epist which is to SecuÌdinus he sayes thus I do know that you long for our Saviour's Image that by contemplating it you might burn the more with the love of the Lord Eusebius writing the life of Constant the great relates that agreat many of Golden and Silver Images were put up in the Churches which he caus'd to be built in Palestine in his 7. book c. 14. he affirms himself to have seeÌ the Apostles Images which then were very old and in great veneration with the people Damas relates writing the life of St. Sylvester that the aforesaid Constantine commanded an Image of pure Gold to be made which he order'd to be put up in the Church wherein he was baptiz'd on the right hand of which he plac'd the Image of our Saviour and on the left hand the Image of St. John the Baptist he also order'd the Image of our Saviour of four Angels and of the twelve Apostles to be put up in the Church of St. John Latran in Rome in order to be venerated by the Christians Evodius in his 2. book writing of S. Stephen's miracles sayes that his Image was put up in the same Church wherein his reliques were pre serv'd and that agreat multitude-of people were vs'd to freqent that Church out of particular devotion who venerated both the Image his reliques The Disciples of S. Epiphanius plac'd his Image in the Church which they built in his honour and were wont to pray most fervently before the same Image as the Fathers of the 7th General Council do declare in the 6th Action St. Ambrose in his Oration of Theodosiu's death sayes that it was discreetly done of Helena to order the crosse where upon our Saviour was crucifi'd to be taken up our of the ground where the Jewes absconded it that it might be worshipp'd by the Christians and in his Epist de invention sanctorum Gervasy et Protasy he declares that he knew him who appear'd to himself to be S. Paul by his Image which he had before S Augustin in his first book de Consensu Evangelistarum affirms himself to have seen in several places Christ's Image painted betwen S. Peter and St. Paul's Images and in his 3th book of the Trinity c. 10. in his 2. de Doct. Christ c. 25. and also in his 3. book c. 9 he sayes that Images are very profitable in order to move the people to devotion Metaphrastes in the life of Constantine the great Euagrius in his 4tâ book c. 26 and Damsâenus in his first book de Imaginibus do relate that a painter endeavoring to âraw the Image of Christ whose splendour when he cou'd not behold our Saviour himself tooke a peece of white âânen and saving it on his face imprinted there-on the Image of his divine countenance and after-wards sent it to King Abagarus who long'd to see our Saviour which Image after awhile out of of particular veneration was brought by Philip the General of Mauritiuâ's army unto the field and gain'd thereby a most glorious victory from the Persians as Theopaâes relates in his 17th book Marianus scotus in his Cronicles writing of the 39 year makes mention of an other Image painted after the same manner by our Saviour in a handkerchief offer'd to him by a devout woman call'd Veronica as he sweared carying the crosse to
plainly giveing the lye not only to the Angel Gabriel who dâclar'd that â of Christs Kingdoâ which is his Church ther shouââ be no end Luke chap. the 1. v. â but also to Christ himself who expressly promis'd that the Gates of Hell shou'd not prevaile agaiÌst his Church Math. chap. the 16. v. 18. and that he wou'd be with his disciples in the administration of their function even to the end of the world Math. chap 28. v. the 20. For a further confirmation of this point it is evident that no Church or society of Christians can shew their lineal and lawfull succession of pastors and Bishops ever since the Apostles time but the present Church of Rome and such as are in communion with her for those that now stile themselves the Church of England cannot for their lives shew any before Cranmer in Edward the fixth time as appears by Goodman the Protestant Bishop of Hereford in his Catalogue of all the Bishops of England since the first plaÌtatioÌ of ChristiaÌ religion amoÌgst them where he expressly names Thomas Cranmer to be the first protestant Bishop thaâ was ever seen in England Upon the whole matter since none but the preseÌt RomaÌ Catholik Church can pretend to have had since the Apostles time a continued series of Bishops with whom all their coÌtemporaryes of the orthodox part of Christians alwayes agreed in one faith and comunion it plainly follows that she alone can pretend to the purity of the Christian faith And therefore whosoever desires to find and embrace a Church wherein the old incorrupted principles of Chrstianity are taught and such principles only as were maintain d by the Ancient and pure Church of Rome for upwards of 300. years after Christ let him embrace the present Church of Rome wherein the said principles are duely profess'd as I shall manifestly prove in my Answer to the aforsaid points for being the ancient Father St. Basile in his 63. Epistle declares unto us That we ought not to pase ââer calumnyes not out of revenge but lest we shu'd seem to give way to a lyeor suffer men seduc'd to be further decev'd I shall therefore answer my Adversary a challeÌge in the same order that he has laid ââ chap. 1. Proving both publick and privaââ Masses to have been celebâcated in the premitive Church This Challenger seens to lav his main stress upon the word privat Masse but what he means by it he does not explain t is certain that altho' Masses were said privately in all age especially during the persecution of the Heathens when Christians perform'd their Devotions in caves and vaults under ground yet the word privat masse was seldom us'd by Catholick writers either before or since the year 600. until Martin Luther by his book de-Missa privata oblig'd Catholick Divines to write upon that subject and confute to the full Luthers arguments against it but why is the question rais'd about private masse does my adversary own that publick Masses were in use in the primitive church If so he must either quitt the old as well as the present Church of Rome or condemn his own Church of England which declares against all masses both privat publick and indeed whosoever admits one can have no tolerable reason to deny the other contrary to the practice of so many ages But let him deny or own what he pleases t is evident to us by the undeniable testimonyes of several Fathers and Councils more ancient than the year 600 that both publick and privat masses were then in use in the Catholick Church and offer'd to the Almighty both for the living and the dead as occasion requir'd St. James the Apostle speaking to Almighty God in his liturgy sayes we offer unto thee an unbloody sacrifice for our sins and for the ignorance of the people And St. Andrew likewise said as the Priests and Deacons of Achia in the book they writt of this Apostles passion I sacrifice daily unto Almighty God an immaculate lamb who when he is truely sacrific'd and his flesh truely eaten remains still wholy and alive St. Ireneus who liv'd the year 180 in his 4. book against heresies c 32 after speaking of the sacrifices which were offer'd in the old law sayes that our Lord taught the Apostles to offer anew sacrifice which the Church afterwards beiÌg taught by the Apostles offer'd through the universal world St. Cyprian who liv'd the year 250. prohibit'd to offer any sacrifice for the soul of Gemininus Faustus because he did not observe the decree of his own antecessors the Bishops Cornelius Bishop of Rome who liv'd about the year 254. complains that the persecution was so great in his own time that they could not say masses either in publick Churches or in Caves under ground which Authority may be seen Tomo 1. Biblia Sanctorum Patrum Tertuiliam who liv'd in the same century sayes in his book decorona miâit s c. â that masseâ were then offer â so the souls of the dead and Fusebius Cesariensis who liv'd the year 326 relates in his 4. book c 4â that there were masses said for the soul of Constant the Great St Cyriâl of Jerusalem who liv'd in the same century Catech 5. sayes thus we belive that the holy and dreadfull sacrifice which is offer'd upon the altar is agreat relief to those for whom its offer'd so Zomenus relates in his 7. book c. 5. that St. Gregory Nazianzen said Masse in a privat chappel and Paulinus writing the life of St. Ambrose affirms that St. Ambrose said Masse in a certaiÌ Gentel somans house St. Ambrose himself in his commentary on the 38 Psal â bids the Priests to offer this holy sacrifice for others Theâdââet who liv'd the year 4â0 in his History c 20. declareâ himself to have said masse in a Hermits cell and St Gregorie in his 37. Homily affirms that the holy Bishâp Cassins was wont to say masse in his oratory being hinder'd from going to the church by reason of his infirmity St. Hierome who liv'd the year 390. in his Commentary on the â chap of the proverbs sayes the following words It s to be Observ'd that altho' there is no hopes of pardon for the wicked after their death yet there are those who dye with small sins and after their death can be discharg'd either by chastifing them with punishments or by their friends prayârs alms and celebration of masses In his commentary on St. Pauls Epist to Titus he sayes thus If the Laity are commanded to abstaine from their wives in the time of communion what is to be suppos'd of the Bishop who daily for his own and the peoples sins offers to God the underfiled sacrifice he hath such an other Authority in his first book against Jovinian c. 19. speaking of the priests St. Chrisostome who liv'd in the later end of the 4. century in his homily on St. Pauls Epist to the Philippians speaking of those who dye in the fear of God
of temporal punishments after this life as St Augustin heresie 33 and St. Epiphanius heresie â5 do relate the Cerinthians held the same as St. Epiphanius writes heresie â8 the Cerinthians errors were comdemn'd by the General Council of Ephese the year 431. as may be seen tomo 3. Conciliorum as for the Aârians errors they have been condemn'd by all the following Councils viz by the Council of Alexandria the year 3 5. tomo 1. Conciliorum by the Councils of Rome which sate the year â37 and the year 369. by the first General Council of Nice the year 325. the first General Council of Constantinople the year 381. and by the Council of A reminium which sate the year 359. all which Councils are to be seen tomo 2. Conciliorum their errors were also condemn'd by the General Council of Ephese the year 431 tom 3. Conciliorumâ by the Council of Calcedon that sate the year 451 tom 4. Counciliorum and by the Fathers of the 2. Council of Constantinople the year 536. which may be seen tomo 5. Conciliorum Luther in his Epist to the Valdinians Calvin in his book of Institutions c. 5. taught also this last point of the Aerian heresie about Purgatory which now all their followers do firmly believe 6 The Novatians believ'd that confirmation was no sacrament as Theodoretus in his 3 book de Haere Fab. writes the Donatists believ'd the same as Optatus in his 2 book against Perminian relates Luther in his book of the Captivity of Babylon cap. dâ Confirmatione and Calvin in his 4th book of Institutions c. 19 did embrace teach the same heresie 7 The Novatians held that the Church had no power to forgive sins committed after Baptism consequently they did not allow auricular confession or that the Church cu'd grant Indulgence as all the following Fathers do write St Cyprian in his 57. Epist to Pope Cornelius St. Epiphanius heresie 59 St Augustin heresie 38 and Theodoretus in his 3 book de haereticis fabulis the Novations errors have been condemn'd by the Council of Carthage the year 252. by the Council of Rome the year 253. by the Council of Italy the same year by the Council of Arles the year 452. as may be seen âomo 1. and 4. Conciliorum Luther in his book of the Capitivity of Babylon Cap. de extrema unctione Calvin in his 4. book of Institutions c. 19 held also this point of the Novatian heresie 8 The Donatists gave out that the Catholick Church fell from the true faith of Jesus Christ and that themselves were renewing it again in Africk as Optatus in his 1. 2. 6. book against the Donatists and St. Augustin heresie 69. and in his book de vnitate Ecclesiae c. 12. do relate Luther in his discourse tomo 2. cap. de partibus and Calvin in his 4th book c. 2. likewise gave-out that the holy Catholick Church fell visibly from the true faith and that themselves were reviving it again ãâã therefore they their followers are call'd reformers 9 The Donatists held that the holy Eucharist ought not to be ador'd they brake-down the Altars and gave the blessed sacrament to their dogs as Optatus in his 2. 6 book against Perminian and St. Augustin in his 2. book against Petilian c. 51. 60. in his 3 ââ book c. 40. and also in his 163 Epist do relate Luther in his book de Eucharistia ad Waldenses and Calvin de vitand is superstiâionibus held likewise that the holy Eucharist ought not to be ador'd 10 The Donaâists deny'd the Pope of Romes sâpremacy âs Opatus and St. Augustin do declare in the aforsaid books Luther in his book de potestate Papae and assertione articuli 25. and Calvin in his 4th book of Institutions c. 6. deny'd the same 11 The Donatists reprov'd the life and vows of monks and religious people as also Optatus St. Augustin write in the aforesaid books Vigilantius and Petilianus reprov'd the same as St. Hierome in his book against Vigilantius and St. Augustin in his 3. book c 40 against Petilianus do affirmâ but the Donatists errors were declar'd to be false erronious Doctrines by the Council of Rome the year 313. by the Councils which sate in Africk in the time of Jânocentius the first being the begining of the 5. Century and by several other Councils Martiâ Luther writing of the monastical vows held also this last point of the Donatists hereâe that he might have some kind of pretence to dispence with himself in his three religious âows merrie Cathrine the Nun whom he deluded out of her monastery our Saviour Iesus Christ most strictly commands us to be ware of the doctrine of such false Prophets and he tells us that we shall know them by their fruits here are his very words Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheâps clothing but in wardly they are ruvening wolves ye shall know them by their âruits do men âather grapes of thorns or âigs of thistles even so every good tree bringâth forth good fruit but a bad âree bâângeth forâh evil fruit Matt c. 7. v. 15. 16. 17. 12 The Eustachians endeavor'd to demolish and extirpate the Ecclesiastical convents as socrates in his 2 book c. â3 and sozomenus in his 3. book c. 13 do relate the Eustachians errors have been condemn'd by the Fathers of the Council of Gangris which saâe the year 324. Luther anâ Calvins Disciples did embrace this Eustachian error for they threw-down all the convents and monastarves of those Countryes and Provinces wherein they made any conquest 13 All the following hereâicks rejected matrimony denâ'd it to be a Sacrament as these Fathers do write of their heresie Simon Magus as St Augustin in his book âe hereâibus c 1. Nicolaites as ât Epiphanius heresie 25 Titiaâus as St. Irenaeus in his first book ââ 31 Adâmiani as St. Augustin âeresie 31 the Manicheans as St. Augustin heresie 46 the âustaâhians as socrates in his 2. book â 33. Marcian as St Hierome in âis first book against Jovinianus and the Prisillanists as St Leos ââ Epist dâclares the Prisillanists errors were condemn'd by all the following Councils viz by the Council of Caesaragust the year â8â by the Council of Toleto the year 400 the Council âf Burdeaux the âear 385. and by the Council of Spaine in the year 447 which CouÌcils are to be seen âomo 2 â Conciââorum Luther in his book de captivitate cap de matrimoniâ Calvin in his 4 book of Institutions c 19. held also that matrimony is no sacrament 14 Iovinianus held that there are no venial sins but that all sins are mortal as St. Hierome relates in his 2 book c 15 16. against Jovinianus and also St. Augustin heresie 28 the Pelagians were of the same opinion as St. Hierome writes in his 2 book against them Jovinianus's errors were condemn'd by the Fathers of the Council of Milan which âate
the year 390 tomo secundo Conciliorum and so were the Pelagians errors by the following Councils viz by the Milevian Council the year 416 by the Aâican Council the year 4â8 as ây be seen tomo ãâã Conciliorum âand also bâ ãâã âral Council of ãâã which ââe the year 43â ãâã Conciâorum Luther assertione articuli 32 âalvin in his 2 book of Insââuâons c. 18 and in his 3 book c 4 âeld likewise that all sins are morâl 15 Simon Magus and Menander âeld that Christs true flesh is not ââlly present in the holy Euâharist as St. Ignatius declares ââ his Epist to those of Smyrna âf which Theodoretus makes âention in his 3. dialogue other ââreticks of the Primitive Church held the same as Sâ Cyrill writes in his Epist to Calosirius Tho' Luther never expreâslâ affirm'd this point of the old he reââe yet all his Disciples do endeavouâ to defend it and so diâ Calvin in his book de Caena Domini where he reprehends Luther for not holding it and alsâ in his 4 book c. 17. 16 Simon Magus held that faitâ alone is suââicient for salvation and consequently that good woâkes are needless in order to savation as St. Irenaeus in his firâ book c. 20. and Theodoretâ de heretic is fabulis do write Eunomius held the same erroâ as St. Augustin in his book dâ âeresibus declares c. 54 Luther in his book de libertate âhristiana and Calvin in his 3. âook of Institutions c. 19. held âo the same error that thereby âey might provoke others to be âven to all kind of vices as themâlves were 17. The Eunomians held that âe reliques of Saints ought not â be veâerated as Magnes in âs 4 book against Theostines âfirms and Vigilantius held the âe error as St. Hierome writes â his book against Vigilantâus âut the Eunomians errors have âeen condemn'd by the â Counâil of Rome the year 369. by the âeneral Council of Constantinoâe the year 381 tomo secundo by the Council of Calcedon which sate the year 451 tomo 4. CouÌciliorum also by the Council of Constantinople the year 553. tomo 5 Conciliorum Luther in his ãâã de cruce and in his book de missa abroganda held the same and so did Calvin admonitione de reliquiis 18 Vigilancius affirm'd that it is unlawfull to invocate Saints as St. Hierome writes in his book against Vigilantius's errors Luther in his book de Eucharistia ad Waldenses and Calvin in his 3 book of Institutions c. 20. believ'd and held the same error 19 The Massalians rejected the fast commanded by the Church as St. Epiphaniâs heresie 8. and Theodoretus in his 4. book c. 11. do relate the Aerians did the same as St. Augustin declares in his book of heresie c. 33. and so did the Eustachians as St. Epiphanius heresie 75. and Socrates in his 2. book c. 33. do write Calvin in his 4th book of Institutions c. 12 rejected the same which error both his and Luthers Disciples do willingly embrace that théy might indulge their own bodies whilest they are in this world 20 Thë Massaliaâs held that holy order is no sacrament as St. Damascenus relates in his âirst book of haeresie the Massaâians errors were condemn'd by âhe Fathers of the Council of Syda who sate the year 383. as may be seen Tomo 2. Conciliorum and by a nother Council in the Orient the year 417 Tomo 3. Conciliorum Luther in his book of the Captivity of Babylon cap. de ordine held also that holy order is no Sacrament which error his Disciples do now firmly believe 21 Helvidius raught that the Blesled Virgin Mary bore children to Joseph who were brothers to Iesus Christ as St. Hierome relates in his book against Helvidius's errors which were condemn'd in the Council of Milan the year 390. as may be seen Tomo 2. Conciliorum Calvin ad Caput 1. Lucae affirm'd the same error which several of his followers do now certainly believe 22 Eusebius in his 3. book of history c. 25. and St. Hierome in his book de viris illustribus do make mention of certain hereticks who deny'd the Epist of St. James oâ Juda the 2. Epist of St Peter also the 2. 3. of St. John to be canonical Luther in his prologue on these Epist rejects St James and Juda's Epistles and he doubts of the rest to be canonical 23 The Marcionites deny'd the revelations of St. John to be canonical as Tertullian relates in his 3. 4. book against Marcion the Theodotians deny'd the same as St. Epiphanius wriâes hereâie 51. 54. the aforesaid Martionâtes did also deny St. Pauls âpist âo the Hebrews to be canonical as St. Hierome declares in his preface on St. Pauls Epist to Tiâus and so did Arius as Theodâretus relates in his preface on St. Pauls Epist to the Hâbrews Luther in his preface on the old Testament affirms the âevelation not to be canonical and in his prologâe on that to the Hebrews he sayes likewise that it is not canonical 24 The Marcionites Basilidians held that all the old TestameÌt was apocryphal as St. Irenaeus relates in his book c. 20. 22. 29. the Manicheans held the same as St Epiphanius affirms heresie 66. but the Maniâheans errors were condeân'd by the General Ephesian Council the year 431. Toâo â Concilioruâ and also by the Council of Rome the year 444. which is to be ãâã in the saâe Tomâ as for thâ Mâââiâni-teââââors they ãâã bâân câdemn'd by the Geââral Coânâil oâ Calâââoâ the ãâ¦ã 51. âoâo 4. Conciliorum and by the ãâã Council of Constanâinââle the year 553. where also the ãâã errors were condemn'd as may be seen Tomo 5. Conciliorum Luâââr and Calvins Disciples are something milder than the aforesaid hereticks for they do noâ ãâ¦ã thaâ all the old Tâstament is apocriphal yet théy deny several books of it to be canonical and chiefly those books which âvidently do falsifie their own principles If I had not suppos'd that the premisses might sufficiently demonstrate what Doctrines my adversary and the reformers do maintain I wou'd produce several other points of âold heresies which also they maintain but lest I shu'd be too troublesome to thè reader I will only conclude with the following passage Whosoever maintains or hath for his principles the aforesaid points is lawfully accus'd for maintaining old heresies false and erronious Doctrines confuted by the holy Fathers and lawfully condemn'd by several CouÌcils of the Primitive Church but thâ pretended reformers do maintain and have for their principles the aforesaid points therefore the pretented reformers are lawfully accus'd for maintaining old heresies false and erronious Doctrines confuted by the holy Fathers and lawfully condemn'd by several Councils of the primitive Church the minor is manifest as for the major ti 's prov'd by what I have already produc'd for certaiÌly all those holy Fathers and Doctors wou'd not make it their business to reprehend and confutâ the chief promoters of
denys Peter to have been bishop for it was resolv'd by those that were in that âssâmbly that it wou'd be expeâient to send Bishop to the Samarians who then receiv'd thâ faith in order to confirm them in the same so that it was agreed that John and the chifest Bishop viz Peter shoud go thither to perform the same which they did to the Samarians great satisfactâon After this Whealy produces an argument which he sound in a manuel of coâtroveâsie priâted at Doway the âear 654 proviÌg that to be the only Church of God whiâh hath had a cotinued succession of Bishops pastors from the time of Christ and the Apostles to this present daâ which he denys with out giving any Authority or reason but promises in the following page to confute it I will be silent in the matter untill I see what he can alleadge agaiÌst it He afterwards âites out of the same manuel the following texts Isa c. 59. v. â c. 60. v 1. 3. 1. c. 62 v. â Ezâââiâl c. 37 v. 26 Daniel c. 7 v. 13. 14 proving the infallibility of the Church which in Whealy's opinion can have no relation âo ââ they being write long before the Apostles dayes but if this shu'd taâe place it would as well prove that all the prophesies of the old Testament concerning Christs passion resurection and assention could have no relation to the said Mysteries they being prophesy'd loÌg before any âf hâm came to pass all Whealy's witt can shew noe tolerable reason for denying the one and admitting the other as for the texts which he brings out of Matt c. 28 v. 20 John c 14 v. 16. Ephe c. 4 v. 11. 12 it is but some of Whealy's calumnyes to alleage that the Author of the said Manuel ever Produc'd them in order to prove St Peter supremacy whereas he only âakes use of them to prove the visibility and infallibility of the true Church and its contiÌnued succession of Bishops Pastors from the time of the Apostles till now as appears in the 2. 37 45 page of the same Manuel After this Whealy denyes Peter to have been Bishop of Antioch or Rome for six several reasons and sayes in the first that he cannot grant it because the scriptures are wholy silent in the mattâr But if he can grant nothing wherein tâe scrâptures are silent he is no true Christian for he does not believe or grant the Apostles creed or tâat the present Bible of which he makes use himself to be the uÌcorrupted word âf God or the baptism of children before they come to the years of discrection to be lawfull and sufficienâ for salvatioÌ seeing the scriptures are â holly silent in these matters beside he Possitively swears to several poiÌts that are not mention'd therein and consequently contradicts his owne assertion this is too evident to require a proof for he wickedly swears believes that the true flesh blood of Christ are not really present in the blessed Sacrament that the Virgin Mary Mother of God hath no more power than a nother Woman that the Bishop of Rome hath no spiritual or temporal jurisdiction over England Ireland or Scotland and several other points propos'd by the present goverment therefore he believes and wickedly swears to several points as articles of faith wherein he himself pretends the Scripture to be wholly silent but let Whealy deny or own what he pleases its evident to us by the testimonies of all ancient writers and the following holy Fathers Doctors that Peter was Bishop of Rome viz St. Irenaeus in his 3. book c. 36. Tertullian in his book de Prescrip adversus hereticos St. Cyprian in his first book Epist 3. and in his 4. book Epist 2. Eusebius in his chronicle of the 44. year S. Epiphanius heresie 27. S. Athanasius in his Epist to those who lead a solitary life Dorotheus in his Inventory Sozomenus in his 4. book c. 4. Optatus in his 2. book against PerminiÌan S. Ambrose in his book of the Sacraments c. 1. St. Hierome de Viris Illustribus and in his first Epist to Damas St. Augustin in his 2. book against Petilian c. 51. and in his 165 Epist Theodoret in his Epist to Leo. Isidorus writing the life of Peter and all other ancient writers till the year 1400. before which time I defie Whealy to produce any Author that ever write of Peter's not being Bishop of Rome Whealy's second reason for denying this matter the office of an Apostle was deriv'd immediatly from Christ and by consequence more honourable and supream than that of Bishop which was ordain'd by men only it were therefore no less than madness to think Peter so weake of judgment to quitt the more honourable for the lesser or the superiour for an inferior But in this Answer Whealy makes two false suppositions first he supposes that Peter was ordain'd Bishop by men and not by Christ as Aron was formerly ordain'd by God chief Priest over the Isralites secondly he supposes that there is an incompâââbility between the office of an Apostle and that of Bishop which âs also ãâ¦ã tho' they be two ãâ¦ã they do not tend to incompaâible effects for they both tend to the glory of God propagating the Doctrine of Christ and establishing the holy Catholick Church which no man of sence can deny As to Whealy's third reason wherein he sayes that the commission of an Apostle go ye forth teach all nations c. was then more universal than that of Bishoprick c. If this wou'd prove any thing against Peters being Bishop it wou'd also prove that James was not Bishop of Jerusalen or John Bishop of Ephese because their commission was also to go forth and teach all nations c. which hinder'd them not from being Bishops of the aforesaid seas as all ancient writers do unanimously testifie as to that which he adds saying that 't is epressly agaiÌst the special command of Christ to accept of bishoprick at all 't is but some of his presbyterian Doctrine where with he not only attakes the Church of Rome but also the present Church of EnglaÌd as manifestly appears by what he produces in his last argument out of Luke c. 12. v 25 26. His fourth reason against Peter being Bishop is that Peter was Apostle of the circumcision and such as write his Epistles from Babylon not to Rome but to the scatered âeâes c. which reason coÌtradicts Whealys third Answer where in he sayes that it was agaiÌst Christs commaÌd that Peter should accept of bishoprick at all because as he alleages he was oblig'd to go fââth and teach all nations but if Peter was oblig'd to teach all nations he was not only an Apostle of the circumcision for the word all nations compreheÌds both the Jewes and Gentiles by which it appears that Whealy in his owne discourse coÌtradicts himself as for Peters being Apostle only of the circumcision and Paul only of the Gentiles 't
peoples owne Devotion but in the time of the aforesaid solemnityes specifi'd by the council of Agatho all which may be confirm'd by St. Chrysostomes words who in his 3. Homily on Saint Pauls Epistle to the Ephesians complains that then the people were so undevout that tho' there was Masse daily celebrat'd yet none of them Communicated There are several other Authorityes that might be produc'd for the further proof of this point but to avoide tediousnesse J will conclude with the following passage 'T is not pertinent to the Essence of a Sacrifice the standers by or those for whom 't is offer'd to be partakers of it but Masse is a Sacrifice therefore 't is not pertinent to the essence of Masse the standers by or those for whom it 's offer'd to be partakers of it The major is evident out of the 6. 7. chap. of Leviticus where we read that the Priests of the old law were commanded to offer Sacrïfices that the standers by or any of those for whom they were offer'd did not take the least particle of them the minor also is evident out of the 9 thâ canon of the Apostles and out of the 24 chap of the 3 Council of Cartage who sate in the year 397 and declar'd masse to be a lawfull sacrifice as for the consequence t is undenyable being the argument is in forme Chap. 2 Provâng that the Communioâ was admiÌnistred under one kind in thâ Primitive Church The Authorityes which my adversary defies to be produc'd doe clearly make-out the ancient pratice of Receiving the Communion under one sole species in the Primitive Church therefore this doctrine was not first brought in by the present Chuch of Rome either in the 6 7 8 or 9 age the consequens is manifest as will appear hereafter As for the anticedent it may be prov'd by the example of Christ himselfâ Luck c. 24 v 30. 35 where we read the following words It came to passe as he sate at meât with them he tooke bread bless'd iâ bâake gave to them And they told whaâ things were done in the way how he waâ knowân by them in breakiÌg of bread But there is no mention made of the cup no not in the whole Chapter St. Hierome in Paula's epitaph St. Augustin in his 3 book dâ consensu Evangelistarum c 23 venerable Bede Thèophilactus and several others in the commentary of this chapter doâ plainly affirmâ that our saviouâ gave then the blessed sacremenâ to those two disciples moreoveâ we read in the acts of the Apostles c 2 v 42 that the beliverâ Continued stedfastly in the Apostleâ Doctrine and fellowship in breakinâ of bread and in prayers but wâ see no kind of mention made oâ the cup but rather a confirmation of the contrary as is manifest bâ the 46 verse of the same Chapter wherefore I may lawfully iÌfeâ that our Saviour Jesus Christ did not oblige all the belivers to Communicate in both species otherwise certainly himself wou'd not be the first transgressor of his own law neither wou'd he promise everlasting life to those who wou'd receive the communion under the forme of bread as he did John c. 6 v 51 saying thus I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever where by we see plainly that everlasting life is promis'd to us for eating worthily that heavenly bread Now let us see did those of the primitive Church ever practice to give the communion in one sole species to prove which will produce the Authoritye and examples of those Fatherâ who then liv'd Tertulian whâ Liv'd thâ year 230 in is boââ of Oration c. 14 and in his book ad Uxorem c. 5. gives ââ understand that it was then custom to carry the Eucharâ home for private Communiââ St. Ambrose who liv'd in the Century relates in his Oration ââ Obitu Satyri that then the peopââ were wont to keep the Eucharâ about them and that his oââ brother Satyras once in a shiââârak was miraculously Saââ from being drown'd by the vâtue of the blessed Eucharâ which was ty'd about his neââ St. Basil who liv'd in the same Century expressly affirms in his Epist to Caesaria Patricia that it was a common practice to bring the Eucharist home to their houses and to receive it when they pleas'd which is a manifest sign that then the people did not alwayes receive the Communion in both species for those who tooke it under the forme of wine receiv'd it in the Church from the Priests or Deacons as St. Cyprian relates in his ser De lapsis and those who pleas'd to bring it home under the forme of bread for privat Communion were not hinder'd until by reason of several abuses which happen'd the Father of the Council of Caesaragust who sate the year 382 Can 3 prohibit'd it St. Denis who liv'd in the 2 ãâ¦ã in his book de Eceles ãâ¦ã Chap affirâs that it was ãâ¦ã custom to give the Communion to the children under the ãâã of wine and St. Cyprian who liv'd the year 250 in his sermon Delapsis makes mention of acertain child who receiv'd the Communion under the forme of wine and also of three more who receiv'd it under one sole species St. Denis of Alexandria who has been St. Cyprians contemprory in his Epists to Tobias tells of a certain Priest who gave a particle of the consecrat'd host to aboy in order to bring it to serapion who waâ desparate ill in his dying bead Paulinus who has been very familiar with St. Ambrose and present at his deah relates writing his life that he receiv'd the Communion only under the form of bread and St. Basil did the same as also we read in his Life which neither of them wou'd offer to do if they had believ'd it to be either agaiÌst the doctrine of the Church or the institution of Christ Sozomenus in his 8 book c 5 Nicepherus in his 13 Book c 7 writes of a certain womaÌ who was infected by the Macedonian heresie but thinking to conceal her wickedness and pretending before the people to be a Catholick she receiv'd the blessed Sacrement under the form of bread from the haÌd of St. Chrisostome which afterwards she gave privately to her maid thinking to eat in its sted other bread which shee brought from home but it seems that God Almighty was pleas'd to discover her prophane intention for that bread which she thought to eat was sudeÌdly turn'd into a stone before all the coÌgregatioÌ The Manichees who abhorr'd wine believing it to be the Devils gall never Communicated by only under the forme of bread as St. Leos 4 Ser in âent expressly testifies but Epiphanius St. Augustin several others who writt of the Manichean errors never mention'd that they err'd in Receiving the Communion in one sole species But I acknowledge that the Bishops of Italy about the year 444. did much Recommend the
aforsaid do expressly testifiâ and also Sozomenus in his booâ c. â Under whose wings did Sâ Chrysostome fly for justice beit depos'd by Theophilus and hâ adherences but under the winâ of Innocentius the first as appeaâ by St Chrysostome's 1. 2. Epiââ to the same To whom did Forââ naâus Felix being depos'd Africk appeal but to Corneliâ Pope of Rome as St. Cyprian ââ his first book Epist 3 declares To whom did Basilideâ appeal but to Pope Stephen as St. Cyprian testifies Epist 68. To the Pope of Rome Valent and Ursacius came to give an account of their treachery against St. Athanasius and to crave pardon for the same as Epiphanius heresie 68 relates Marcion being excommunicated by his own Bishop in Asia came to Rome to be absolv'd by Pâus the first as St. Epiphanius relates heresie 42 who depos'd Anthimus the Patriarch of Constantinople and establish'd in his place Mena but Agapetus the Pope as Liberatus affirms in his bâeviatâ 62. and also Zonarias writiÌg the life of Iustinian Who depos'd Flavianus the Patrian of Antioch but Pope Danias Theodoret relates in his 5 âââ c 23 who depos'd Polychronâ Bishop of Ierusalem about â year 434 but Pope Sixtus thâ as appears in the acts of Sixâ Who depos'd Dioscorus Paarch of Alexandria but the of Rome as Gelatius's Epistle the Dardanian Bishops expreââ declares wherin he also relaâ that Pope Iulius the first resloââ Athanasius AlexaÌdrinus Pauâ Constantinopolitanus Marâlus Ancyranus to their own Biââopricks who re-establish'd Peâ St. Athanasius successor be wrongfully depos'd by the Aââans but Pope Damas as Sozoâ âus affirms in his 6 boâk c 9. who âestor'd Theodoretus being also ârongfullâ depos'd by the Aââiâns in the 2 Ephesian svnod but Pope Leo as is manifest by the first action of the General Council of Calcedon It was only the Popes of Rome âhat had iâ the Primitive Church their deputies and Vicar-generals in all foraign and remote Countryes viz. Anastasius Bishop of ThesaloÌica in the Orient as aâpears by St. Leo's 84 Epist Potentius ' in Africk as the same Leo's 87 Epist declares Aâacius Patriarch of Constantinoâle in Egypt whom the Pope of Rome commanded to depose the Bishop of Alexandria as Gelatius relates in his Epist to the Dardanian Bishops Celestinus Pope of Rome Authoriz'd St. Cyrill of Alexandria to procâed against Nestor then Bishop of Counstontinople as appears by Caelestinus's Ep to St Cyrill which is to be seen in St. Cyrill's 4. tome where also St Cyrill declares in his Epist to those of Counstantinople that the charge of that Bishoprick was committed unto himself by the Bishop of Rome Pope Hormisda instituted Salustius Bishop of Sevil his Vicar-general through Spain and Portugall as appears by the said Hormista's Epist to the same and St Gregory instituted Vigilius Bishop of Orleance to be his Vicargeneral thro' all France as may beseen in St Gregory's 4th book Epïst 52. It was also the Pope of Rome's Legates that were Presidents in the General Councils of the Primitivc Church as for example Hosius Vitus and Vincentius St Sylvester's Legates have been presidents in the General Council of Nice as Cedrinus in his Compendio Potius in his book de 7 Synodis and St Athanasius in his Epist to those who leade a solitary life do relate St Cyrill of Alexandria Pope Caelestinu's Legate preceded in the Council of Ephesias as Liberatus in his Breviate c 15. Evagrius in his first book c. 4 do write Paschasius Lâcââsius and Bonifacius St. ãâã Legates were Presidents in the General Council of Calcedon aâ is evident by the â action of âhe âame Couâcil and also by S Leo's 47 Epist Archâdâmus and Philaxenâs Iulius the first 's Legates preâeââd in the General Council of Sardâs as St. Athanasius in his â Apology and Theodoretus in his a book c 15 do declare It was only to the Pope of Rome the decrees and Canons of all General and famous Councils where sent in the primitive Church in order to be approv'd and confirm'd by his holynesse as for example it was to St. Sylvester Pope of Rome the Fathers of the Council of Nice sent a letter most humbly beseeching his holynesse to Ratifie and confirme the decrees of the said Council which letter is to be seen in the second Tome of the Councils The Fathers of this Council were in number 318 and sate in the year 325. The Fathers of the General CouÌcil of ConstaÌtinople being in number 150 assembled in the year 381 writ to Damas Pope of Rome by Cyriacus Eusebius and Prisâianus Bishops praying him to aprove and confirme their Canons this Councils letter is to be seen in Theodoret's 5th book c. 9. The decrees of the General Council of Ephesâs wherein 200 Fathers sate in the year 431 were sent to Pope Celestinus in order to be confiâm'd as St. Cyrill's Epist testifies which Epistle is to be seen in the 3 Tome of the Councils The Fathers of the General Council of Calcedon being in number 630 and sate in the year 451 sent their Canons to Pope Leo in order to be confirm'd by him as appears by the said Council's Epistle to the same which is to be seen in the 4th Tome of the Councils The Fathers of the Milevian Council sent their CanoÌs to Pope Innocentius the first in the year 416 to be confirm'd as appears by this Council's Epistle which is to be seen in the 1 Tome of the CouÌcils The Fathers of the Council of Carthage sent their CanoÌs the year 356 to be confirm'd by Pope Stephen as is manifest by their own Epistle which is to be seen in St. Cyrill's 2 book and also in the first Tome of the Councils I might produce several other convincing proofs concerning this point but that I may be easie to the reader I will conclude only with these followiÌg Councils who sate in the Primitive Church and acknowledg'd in their very Canons the Pope of Rome's Supremacy viz. the 20 chap of the Council of Rome who sate in the year 324. The 3 chap of the 3. 4th Council of Rome who sate in the year 502. The 3 4th 9th Canon of the Council of Sardis wherein 376 Fathers were The 6th Canon of the General Council of Nice The 5 CanoÌ of the General Council of Constantinople The 1 2 3 16. Action of the General Council of Calcedon who sayes thus in the 16th we throughly consider âruly that all Prâmacy chief honour is to be keept for the Arch Bishop of old Rome Chap 5 Proving that the Real Presence was believ'd by those of the Primitive Church The very words of Iesus Christ and also the Authentical Testimonyes of the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Primitive Church do clearly affirm that Christ's true body and blood are Really and Substantially present in the holy Sacrament therefore this Doctrine was not newly brought-in since the Primitive Church the consequens is most certain as we shall see here-after
not rashly searââ them over âest you should burn in their search St. Epiphanius who liv'd in the year 370 in his book nam'd Ancoratus sayes thus We see thaâ our Saviour tooke in his hands as thâ Evangelist hath when he gave thanks he said this is my body none mistrusts his words for he whâ dose not believe it to be his true fleâh falls from grace life and in a nother place cited by the Fathers of the 7th General Council in the 6th Action he sayes the following words Never shall âo find our Lord or his Apostles or the Fathers saying that the unbloody sacrifice which is offer'd by the Priests is an Image but his very body blood St. Hierome who liv'd in the year 390 Epist to Hedib sayes thus but let us know that the bread which the Lord brake gave to his Disciples was the Lord our Saviours body himself saying to them take ye eat this is my body St Chrysostom who liv'd the year 398 Hon â1 in Matt sayes the following words he who bestowed his own life for you why will he sâorn to give you his own body therefore let us hâarken the Priests how noble how admirable is that thing which is granted unto us he has given us his own flesh c. He also sayes thus Hom 53 Let us believe God let us not contradict him altho' what he sayes may seem strange to our sense imagination for it surpasâes our sense reason I beseech you what may we suppose of his words in all things chiefly in mysteries not only considering âhese things which layes before us but also his words for we cannot be deceiv'd by them but our senses may easilie be deceiv'd his words cannot be false therefore because he said this is my body let us he convinc'd by noe ambiguity but let us believe perceive this with the eyes of our understanding O how many now sayes I wou'd fain seâ his face countenance I wou'd wish to see his garments therefore you see him you feele him you eat him you desire to see his garmeÌts truly he deliver'd himself to you not only that you may see him but also that you may touch him intertain him in yourself In his 3. book de sacerdotio he sayes thus he that âits above with his Father even in the same instant of time is touch'd by the hands of all gives himself to all those who are willing to receive him whereas Christ leaving his flesh to us yet ascending to heaven there also he hath it More of St. Chrysostom's Authorityes plainly confirmiÌg the same may be seen in his 8â Hom. on Matt. 45th on John 3 on St. Paus's Epist to the Ephes in his 2. to those of Antioch and in his 6th book de Sacerdotio St. Augustin who liv'd the year 420 expounding that of the 33. Psal he was carri'd in his own hands puts the question inquiring how can these words be understod aÌswers sayiÌg thus we cannot find this in David according to the litteral sense but we may find it in Christ for Cârâsâ ãâ¦ã in his own haâds wâe gâvâ ãâ¦ã body he said thiâ ãâ¦ã he caârid that bâdâ ãâ¦ã In his â book ãâ¦ã legis eâ Prophet c 9 he sayes âhe following wârds wâ receive the Mediator of God man Ieâus Christ with a fuâl heart mouth gâvâng us his own flâsh blood to be ãâã dranke Here the Reader may take notice of the word mouth that thereby he may understand S. Augustin to have openly declar'd that we do not receive the flesh blood of Christ in figure and by faith only as my adversary believes which may be further confirm'd by S. Augustin's own words in his 2. ser de verbis Apostoli where he sayes thus we understând the true master divine redeemer kiÌd Saviour recommending unto us our price his own âlood for he spoke of his own body blood More of S. Augustin's Authorityes proving the Real presence may be seen in his 11th 26th 27th 31 Treatise in John in his commeÌtary on the 98th psal in his 2. book agaiÌst PetiliaÌs letters in his 17th book of the City of God c. 20. In his 3. book or the Trinity c. 4. 10. in his book super Leviticum â 57. In his 2. ser de Temp. anâ in several other places which wouâd be too tedious to produce here therefore I will conclude only with the two following Authorityes S. Cyrâll of Alexandria who liv'd in the year 430 in his Epist to Nestor which Epist was aprov'd of by the Fathers of the General Council of Ephesiâ sayes thus so immediatly we come to the mystical blessings we are sanctifi'd being partakers of the holy body precious blood of Christ the Redeemer of us all not taking it to be common flesh God forbid But made the proper flesh of the word himself that âs to say of the son of God It was defin'd in the 18. Can. of the first General Council of Nice That Deacons who have no power to offer sacrifice ought not to give the body blood of Christ to Priests who have that power All which proofs do evidently make-out that it was alwayes believ'd iÌ the Primitive Church that Christ's body and blood were really and substancially preseÌt in the holy sacrament and consequently that our Saviour had no mystical or figurative meaning in the institution of this sacrament So that it is to be admir'd what pretence can my adversary aleadge for denying the real presence If he has not a mind to deny all mysteries that surpasles his own weake understanding if so he may be the same rule Presume to deny that of the blessed Trinity Incarnation ResurrectioÌ c. for they surpasse his understanding and capacity as well as this of the reall presence Chap. 6 Proving that the holy Eucharist was ador'd worshipp'd by those of the Primitâve Church If it was lawfull to fall down and worship our Saviour Jesus Christ with Godly honour when he was in this world t is also lawfull to fall-down and worship the holy Eucharist with Godly honour but it was lawfull to falldown worship our Saviour Jesus Christ with Godly honour when he was in this world therefore t is lawfull to fall down worship the holy Eucharist with Godly hoÌour The coÌsequence is most certain as we shall see hereafter and the minor is manifest Mat. c. 2 v 11. c. 14. v. 33. Jo. c 9 v. 38. as for The major it may be prov'd tâus the same Saviour Jesus Christ who was worship'd in this world is really substântially present in the holy Sacrament as I have prov'd in my answer to the adversarys 5th point and will confirm it in my answer to his 7th therefore if ât was lawfull to full-down and worship our Saviour Iesus Christ with Godly honour wheÌ he was in this world t is also lawfull to fall-down and worship tâe holy Eucharist with
substance was chang'd St. Gregorie Nysen who liv'd the year 380. in his Oration term'd Cateehetica c. 370. sayes thus I do also now rightly believe the sanctifi'd bread to be chang'd into the body of Christ and these things he bestows transelementing the thiÌgs that are seen into it by the vertue of his blessings which words do plainly make-out that St. Gregorie positively believ'd the Transubstantiation otherwise he wou'd not have said these words St Ambrose who siv'd about the same time in his 4th book of sacraments c. 4th sayes thus perhaps you may say my bread is ordinary but the bread is bread before the words of consecration but when consecration comes it is the flesh of Christ a nother convincing Authority of St. Ambrose may be seeÌ in my answer to the 5th point St Gaudentius who also liv'd in the 4th age in his 2. Treatis on Exod. sayes the following words the Cream and Lord of natures who brought forth the bread out of the earth and again of the bread because he can do it promis'd it made his proper body and who of the water made wine made of the wine his own blood S. Chrysostome who liv'd in the year 398. in his 83. hom on S. Matt. speaking of this mysterie sayes thus these are not the works of human power which the Lord perform'd in that supper the same also offers now the sacrifice he performs we enjoy the office of ministers truly t is he who sanctifies and chaâges these things And in his Homily of the Eucharist in âââaenys he also sayes the following words do you see the bread do you see the wine do they go like other meat to the privy the Lord forbid you ought not to imagin so for eveÌ as after wax is apply'd to the fire nothing of the substance remains even so consider here the mysteries the substance of the body to be consum'd that is to say that the breads substaÌce is annichilated when Christ's body inters under those accidents which formerly the bread had before it was annulâd St. Augustin in his â8 ser de verbis Apostoliâ sayes thus I told ye that the bread which is offer'd is call'd bread before the words of Christ but as soone as Christ's words are pronounc'd then t is not call'd bread but it is call'd the body And in the book of the IncarnatioÌ of Christ we read the following words t is not to be believ'd that the âubstance of the bread or wine remains but that the bread is cheang'd into Christ's body and the wine into his blood c St. Cyrill of Alexandria in his Epist to Calosyrius and Eusebius Emissenus Ser. de corpore Domini do affirm the same All which Authorityes do evidently make out the thing signifi'd by the word Transubstantiation that is to say the real change of the substance of bread and wine aâ the intrance of Christ's flesh blood to have been alwayes believ'd and maintain'd by the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Primitive Church so that it plainly appears that this Doctrine of Transubstantiation was not broughtin by the Church of Rome either in the 6th 7th 8th or 9th age or by the Council of Latran in the year 1215 as some of the preteÌnded reformers do falsly aleadge It is not worth my while to answer here the Adversary's 8th point for it is sufficiently answer'd by what I have produc'd in my answers to the three last points for t is manifest that all those who contradicted in the Primitive Church the aforsaid Doctrine that they were esteem'd and beliv'd by the holy Catholicke Churh to have been notorious heretickes as I will shew in the later end of this worke Chap. 8. Proving the use and veneration of Images in the Primitive Church If it be lawfull to worship other creatures t is also lawfull to worship Images but t is lawfull to worship other creatures therefore t is lawfull to worship Images the major is manifest for the saâe honour which the scripture forbids to be given to the one forbids it to be given to the other as I will shew hereafter therefore if it be lawfull to worship other creatures t is also lawfull to worshâp Images whose making and puting up in Churches is commanded by the holy scripture as evidently appears by the following texts Exodus c 25 v. 18. 19. 22 where we read that God commanded two Câerubins to be made of goâd which were to be set up on both sides of the Arke before which the people were to pray and promis'd that there he wou'd meet with Moses we read also Numb c. 21 v. 8 and 9 that the Lord commanded Moses to make a fiery serpent and to set it up on a pole and that it shu'd come to passe that if any one would be bitten by a serpent that he wou'd recover when he wou'd looke upon the serpent of brasse more examples may be seen in the 3 book of Kings c. 6. v. 35. c. 7. v. 25. 29. and 36. c. 10. v. 19. in the 2. book of Chronicles c 3. v. 10 and 14. where we read that Salomon caus'd at several times Images to be made but we can never find out that ever he was reprehended for so doing Now let us see is it lawfull to worship other creatures that thereby the minor may be prov'd Lot seeing the Angels bowââ himself with his face to wards the ground Gen. c. 19. v. 1. Baâaam did the same seeing the Angel of the Lord Numb c 22 v. 31. and also Joshua as may be seen Joshua c. 5. v. 14. Saul seeing the soul of Samuel stoop'd with his face towards the grouÌd and âbowed himself as may be seen in the first book of Kings c. 28 v. 14. and in the 3. book of Kings c 18 v 7. we read that Abadiah fell on his face and worshipp'd Elyah The sons of the Prophets seeing Elisha they came to meet him and bowed themselves to the ground before him as may be seen in the 4th book of Kings c. 2. v. 15. we also read in the 2. c. v. 46. of Daniel that the King Nebuchad-nezzar fell upon his face and worshipp'd Daniel and commanded that they shu'd offer an oblation and sweetodours unto him Chirist approv'd of the making and exalting of the brazen serpent and owens it to have been the type and figure of himself exalted on the crosse âohn c. 3 v 14. S. Iohn the Baptist worshipp'd the very latehet of our Saviours shooe the latchet of whose shooes saith he I am not worthy to unloose John c. 1. v. 27. for which fact St Augustin on that place concluds him to have been full of the holy Ghost the Patriarch Jacob ador'd the top of Joâeph's rod a signe or Image of his regal power as we read in S Pauls Epist to the Hebrews c. 1 v 2â the Primitive Christians venerated the very shadow and garments of S Peter and Paul and receiv'd thereby speciall benefit as may be seen in
golden censer there was given unto him much incense that he shou'd offer it with the prayers of all Saints upon the golden Altar which was before the throne the smoake of the incense which came with the prayers of the Saints ascended up before God out of the Angels hands we read in the 2. book of the Maccabees c. 15. that Judas Machabeus had seen Onias the high Priest and Jeremiah the Prophet after their death interceding to God for the people of Israel and that this book is Canonical I will prove in my answer to the next point we read also in the 15 c. v. â of Jeremiah that the Lord spoke unto him saying thus Tho' Moses and Samuel stood before me yet my minde cou'd not be towords this people cast them out of my sight and let thââ go forth which words our Lorâ wou'd not have said If Moses â Samuel tho' dead were not woââ to interced for the Jewes whiââ may be confirm'd out of Exodâ c. 32 v. 13. where we read thââ Moses himself beg'd of the Lorâ to shew his mercy to the peoplâ for the sake of Abraham Isaac aââ Israel his own servants for as Theodoret q. 67. on Exod sayeâ Moses thinking himself so ââ insufficient to pacifie the Lordâ he sets down not only his oââ promise but also the aforsaiâ Patriarchs merits that the rebâ the Lord might be more williââ to have commisseration upon thâ people and pardon them whicâ then he did as is manifest by the 14 v. of the same chap. Moses also endeavour'd an other time to pacifie the Lord's fury thro' the aforsaid Patriarchs merits assistance as is evident out of Deut. c. 9. v. 27 wherre he sayes thus remember they servaÌts Abraham Isaac and Jacob looke not unto the stoubbornness of this people nor to their wickedness nor to their sinne Was it not for the sake of Abraham tho' dead his son Isaac obtain'd several requests favours from the Lord Genesis c. 26. v. 3. 4 5. 24. wou'd not the Lord divide Salomon's Kindom give it to his servants If it had not been for the sake of David as may be seen ïn the 3 book of Kings c. 11. v. 11. 12. was it not for the sake of David Aby as obtain'd that his son Asa reign'd in Jerusalem as may be seen in the same book c. 15. v. 4. was it not also for the sake of David tho' dead the Lord sav'd the city of Jerusalem from being destroy'd by the Assyrians as is evident out of the 4th book of Kingâ c. 19. v. 32 3â â 20. v. 6. when Salomon beg'd any great request from the Lord was not he wont to set down the merits of David that thereby he might the sooner obtain his request as may be seen in the 131. Psalm v. 1. 10. which is in the Protestant bible the 132. Psalm Now let the reader consider what a great happiness it is to have a faithfull friend and Patron in great honour and request with God almighty thro' whoâe merits and intercission one may obtain several benefits which otherwise wou'd not be granted as the premisses do evidently make-out for as God almighty was graciously pleas'd thro' the bountifullnesse of his infinite mercy to grant for the merits and intercession of these Patriarches who then were but in Limbo Patrum so many benefits and requests to those whom they protected in this world why also now in the law of grace wou'd not the same God most mercyfully grant us any lawfull request for the intercession and great merits of his holy Mother beloved Apostles faithfull Martyres and true Confessors who are in great honour and request residing with himself in âeaven Especially being this dose not derogate to the honour of Christ as I will prove by the following passage If it be unlawfull to invocate Angel Saints either it is because they kânown not what we say or because it wou'd derogate to the honour of Christ who is said to be the mediator betwen God man according to that of John in his first Epist c. 2. v. 1. not for the first as I have already shew'd and shall confirm it by the following examples We read in the 4th book of Kings c. 5. v. 26 that Eliâha knew tho' abâeÌt Gehazie's Simonie and in the c 6th v. 12. that Elisha also knew what was said in the King of Syria's private Chamber in the 15th c. v. 10. of Luke that the Angels of God doth rejoyce at the conversion of a sinner which is the greatest secret that one can have yet it can be known to the Angels and also to the Saints in heaven either by a distinct revelation from the clear vision of God's essence or by the visioÌ of themselves as S. Gregorie in his 2. book of Dialogues c. 3. affirms saying thus what is it that there they know not where they know him who knowes all Neither dose it derogate to the honour of Christ for the Church of Rome certainly believes Christ to be the chief Mediator betwen God and man as St Paul affirms in his Epist to Timothy c. 2. v. 5. therefore she dose not allow to invocate Angels or Saints in order to obtain any request immediatly and directly from themsleves for she acknowledges that to be a folly consequently not to be in their power So that she only allows to beg of them to join their prayers intercessioÌ with those of the faithfull that thereby they might the sooner easier obtain from God their requests thro' the meriââ and inâeâcession of Jesus Christ which is manifest out of St. Leo's 2 Oration de Jejunio and also by the publick Orations of the Church wherein she implores the intercession of Angels and Saints for she wou'd have them to be efficacious thro' the assistance and merits of Christ it is therefore they alwayes end with the following words Per Domiâum nostrum Jesum Christum Filiâm ââum qui tâcum vivit et regnaâ in unitate spiritus sainti Deus per osnnia saecula saeâulorum A men whereby the reader may plainly perceâve that the invocations of Saints dose not derogate to the honour of Christ otherwise St Paul might be accus'd for beseeching the Romans Colossians Hebreâs Theslalonians to assist himself in his prayers and also to pray for him to God as is eâident by St Paul's own Epistles to the Romans c 15 v. 30. to the Hebrews c. 13. v. 18. 19. to the Colossians c. 4. v. 3. in his first and sâcond to the Thessalonians c. 5 v. 25. c 3. v. 1 so that the Adversary must either Confess the invocation of Saints not to derâgate Christ's honour or else to condemn St Paul's Doctrine for I dâfie him ever to make-out that the intercession of those who live in this world is acceptable to God nât the intercession of âhose who are coÌfirm'd in grace glory or that one is prejudice to Christ
the other not Now letus héare the holy Fathers Authorityes and the practice of the Primitive Church St Ireâaeusâ who liv'd in the 2 Century in his 5th book against hereses sayes thus and as Eve was seduc'd that the might avoid God even so maây was advis'd to obey God that she might become Eves advocate Origines who liv'd in the 3 Century in his first homily on Ezech sayes thus come Angel and receive the converted from the former error from the devilish Doctrine call the rest of your compaâions that ye may together instâuct in the faith all those who formerly has âeen deceiv'd more of Origen's Authorityes may be seen hom 3. in Diversa Loca Novi Tâestamenti hom 16. in âosue and hom 26 in Nume Cornelius who liv'd in the same century in his first Epist sayes thus we are Praying God our Lord Jesus Christ that by the intercessions of his own holy Apostles he may purge out the blemishes of your sinnes St. Cyprian who also liv'd in the 3. Century in his book de Disiplina et Habitu Virginum speaking to the Virgins sayes thus peform spiritually come prosperously and be mindfull of us Eusebius Caes who liv'd the year 326. in his 13. book de Evang. Praep. c. 7. sayes we âouldiers of true pieây do daily practise these thing honouring the friend s of God praying to them by whose intercession to God we do freely acknowledge to be much favour'd S. Athansius wâo liv'd in the same Century in his ser in Evangelium speaking of the blessed Virgin Mary sayes the following words incline they hearing to our prayers and do not forget they people we cry to thee be mindfull of us most holy Virgin who also after your delivery contânu'd a Virgin Lady Mistress and Queen and Mother of God intercede for us St Hilarius who liv'd the year 355. in psal â 9 sayes that the nature of God dose not want the intercession of Angels God being ignorant of nothiÌg that we do but our own weakness wants it he has such another Authority speaking of the Apostles and Prophets intercession expounding the 124. Psalm St. Basil who liv'd in the same age in his Oration of the 40. Martyâes sayes thus whosoever is oppress'â with trouble let him sly for refuge tâ these martyres that he may be ridd oâ his troubles and whosoever rejoyces let him Pray to them âhat he âay continue in his prosperityes And in his 205. Epist which is to Julian after specifying several points of faith which himself beliv'd he sayes the following words and I do embrace the holy Apostles Prophets and invocate them in my supplication to God that by their intercession he might be mercyfull to me S. Cyrill of Jerusalem who liv'd about the same time Catech. 5. sayes thus when we offer this sacrifice we also make mention of those who dâ'd before us first of the Patriarchs Prophets Apostles and Martyres that God may receive our prayer by their intercession S. Ephraem who also liv'd in the same Century in his ser de Laudibus Martyrum sayes the following words we beseech ye most holy Martyres who for the sake of the Lord readily and willingly suffer'd torments for which ye are all now most faââliar with God that ye may be pleas'd to intercede to the Lord for us poor sinners that the grace of Christ might light upon us St. Gregorie Nazianzen who liv'd the year 370 in his Oration speaking to S. Athanasius after his death sayes thus and look upon us favorably from alove and govern this holy people nuâish and feed us in peace direct and take us up in the battel and place us with your self and with those who are in the same condâtion with you he implores also St. Cyprian St. Basil's assistance in his Orà tions of them after their death St. Ambrose who liv'd the same time sayes the following words the Angeâs who are employ'd to asist us ought to be pray'd to and the Marâyres they can intercedâ for our sins who with their proper blood wash'd a way if they had any sins let âs not be asham'd to apply them a intercessors of our weakness More of this holy Doctors Authority may be seen in his 2. book de Virg. in his 10 book in Lucam expounding the 21. â and in his Preparation before mass where he begs the assistance and intercession of the Apostles Martyres CoÌfessors S. Gregorie Nysen who liv'd the year 380 in his Oration of St. Theodâr Mârâyer sayes thus we stand iâââed oâ great favours intârcâde aâd pâay eaânâstly to the âniversal Kiââ ãâã Lord for the Counâey for we ãâ¦ã âe exââct dangers the wicked Sâithioâs are ât far oâ dâclariâg war against âs ãâã for us as a Souâdier as a marâyer âse the liberty of ãâã for your fellow ârvant altho' you haâe âeâs the world ãâã you knâw thâ disposition interest ââd ãâã of ãâã nâture beg ãâã that these âublick assemblyes âay not give over ãâã the âurious wiââed and âorbârous ãâã woâ'd âaise agaiÌst us and assââls our Churchââ and Altars but if it be requisite ââ have more assistance and prayers gather your consorts the Martyres and pray along with them for the prayers oâ many righteous doth wash away the ãâã of many admonish Peter move Paul and John thât beloved Disciple thaâ they may take care of those Churches for whose sake they endur'd chains suffer'd dangers and death S. Hierome who liv'd the year 390 in his OratioÌ on Paula sayes thus âearwel O Paula and help with your prayers thy worshipper in his old age foâ you who is present will more easily obtain what you demand S. Chrisostome who also liv'd the same time in his 45. homily speaking of St. Meletuis sayes thus therefore let us all together men and women both young and old pray to holy Miletius c. In his ser speaking of the blessed Lady he sayes the followiÌg words ât us recurr to the most holy Virgin Mary Mother of God that by her interââssion âe may obtain our request we beseech ââee to intercede for us daily to our Lord Jesus Christ thy own son that ây thee thro' his grace and benignity âe may be pardon'd in his 66. hom to the people of Antioch he sayes thus he who gose in his purple âd royal crown laying by his pride âraws near the Saints sepulchres humbly beseeching them to intercede for him â God c. More of St. Chrysostoms Authorityes may be seen in his 5th hom in Matt. in his ser de Juventio and Maximio and in his first hom on St. Paul's first Epist âo the Thessalonians where he Numbers several benefitâ graÌted by the Saints intercession thro' their merits S. Augustin who liv'd the year 4â0 in his 7 book against the Donaââsts ãâã speaking of St. Cyprian sayes the âollowing words we beseech him to aâââââ us with his prayers c. in his 84. Treatise in John he sayes that it was therefore they did not pray
the arke was a prepariÌg Mâlachi c. 3 v. 3 and he shall sit is a refiner and a puriââer of silver and âe shall purifie the sons of Levi and âurge them as gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offeriÌg in righteousnesse Which text signifies the punishment of Purgatory as the following Fathers do testifies Origines hom 6. in Exod. S. Ambrose in his commentary on the 36. psal St Hierâme in the exposition of this text and St. Augustin in his 20th book of the city of God c. 25. we find in the 2 book of Machabees c. 12. v. â3 that Judas Machabeus had sent to Jerusalem twelve thousand peeces of silver to be offer'd for the souls of his souldiârs here are the very words of the scripture and making a âathering he sent twelve thousand dracmes of fââver to âerusalem for sacrâfice to be offer'd for âânne well and religiously thinking of the Resurection for unless he ââp'd that they that were slaiâe should raise againe it should seem superflous and vainâââ prayfor the dead and because he conâider'd thaâ they which had taken their sleep with Godliness had very Good grace lay'd up for them It is therefore a holy and healthfull cogitaâion to pray for the dead that tâey may âe loose from sinnes perhaps you may Answer saying that this book is not the word of God or canonical and consequently that it's Authority is of no force but in case it wou'd not be canonical it self it ought to be sooner belier'd then either Calvin or Luthers ând consequently prefer'd before their Authorityes being Juâas was always esteem'd to have âeen a most faithfull servant to God Almighty and then has âeen a high Priest of the true Church Moreover ti 's false that this book is not Canonical for Tradition and the Authority of the holy Catholick Church which is all the testimony we can produce to prove that any book of the whole Bible is canonical or the true word of God expressly affirms that this book is Canonical and consâquently the word of God as may âe seen in InnoceÌt the first 's letter to Exuperius in St Cyprian's first book c. 3. in his book de Exâorâatioâ Martyry c. 11. in St. Gregorie Nazianzens Oration de Machabaeis in St Ambrose's 2. book de Jacob c 10. 11. 12. in St. AugustiÌs 2. book against Gaudentâus Epistles c. 23 in his 2 book de Doc. Christ c. 8. in his 18. book of the City of God c. 36. and also in the 47 Chap. of the 3. Council of Carthage celebrated the year 397 whose very words are these Item placuit ut praeter scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum scripturarum Sunt autem canonicae Scripturae Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numeri Deuteronomium Jesus nave Judicum Ruth Regâum libriquatuor Paralipâmenon libri duo Job psalterium Davidicum Salomonis libri quinque libri duodecim Prophetarum Isaias Jeremia Ezechiel Daniel Tobias Judith Ester Esdrae libri duo Machabaârum libri duo Novi autem Testamenti Evangeliorum libri quatuor Actuum Apostolorum liber vnus Pauli Apostoli Epistolae tredecim ejusdâm ad Hebraeos una Petri Apostoli duae JoaÌnis Apostoli tres Judae Apostoli una et Jacobi una Apocalipsis Joannis âiber unus Whereby the reader may plainly see that my adversary can have no kind of tolerable reason to reject the books of Mâchabees more than any other book of the whole Bible Now let us heare those texts of the new Testament which speaks of Purgatory Mat. c 5. v. 2â But I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of judgment whosoever shall say to his brother Racha shall be in daÌger of CouÌcil but whosoever shall say thou fool shall be in danger of hell fire Which text expressly declares the soul to be punish'd after leaviÌg this world for three several sinnes and that only for the last of them he shall suffer Eternal fire so that I mây lawfully infer that there must be some other place wherin the souls are punish'd for the two other sinnes but that other place cannot be heaven as is evident neither is it hell as the text makes-out therefore it must be that place of teâporal Punishment which the holy Catholick Church commonly call's Purgatory Which may be confirm'd by the 2â â6 v. of the same Chap. where we read thus agree with your adversarâ quickly whilâs you are in the way with him lest the adversary would deliver thee to the judge the judge deliver thee to the officer thou be cast in prâson verâly I say unto thee thou shalâ by nâ means come ouâ thence till thou hast payed the uttermost farthing Whereby the reader may see that the word of God confirms the premâsses by bidding us to make penance in this world lest we shu'd be sent to that prison out of which ââ cannot go till we pay the last farthing that is to saâ untill our souls will be purifi'd from all manner of âinnes as the following Fathers do expressly declare âertullian in his book de Anima c 17. S. Cyprian in his 4th book Epist 2 Origines hom 35 in Lucaâ Eusebius Emiâsenus homâ de âpiphâia St Ambrose expoundiÌg the 12. c of Luke St. Hierome on thee aforesaid text where he sayes the following words this is what St. Matthew declares you shall not go out of the prison till also the small sinâ be punish'd Matt. c. 12 v. 32. and whosoever speakeâh a word against the son of maâ iâ shall be forgiven him but whosoever speaketh against the holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world neiâherân the world to come Which words S Matthew wou'd âot have said If he haâ not suppos'd that some siââ will be foâgiven in the world to come We fiâd also the following words in St. Pauls first Epist to the Corinthians c 3 v. 15. âf any manâ wârâe shall be burnt he shall suffer cosse but hiâself shall be sav'd yet so as by fire By which words S. Paul clearly firms that some souls after leaving this world shall be purgâd and purifi'd by a temporal fire as the following Fathers do testifie St. Ambrose in his coâmentary on this text in his 20. ser on the â18 psal Sâ Hierome on the 4. Chap. of Amos St. Augustin on the 37. Psal S Gregorie in his 4. book of Dialogues c. 39. Now let us beare the holy Fathers very words S. Denis who has been St. Paul's Disciple in his book de Eccâes Hier c. 7. sayes thus Then the Venerable Bishops do draw near and perform the hoây prayers over the dead beseechâng the divine clemency to forgive the dead all the sinnes which he commitâd by his human weaknesse and to place hââ in light and in the region of the living Terâullian who liv'd in the year 230. in his book de Monogamia bids acârtain womân
to prevent which now their very tinkers coblers butchers tailers and all sort of curious and ignorânt mechaâicks do take the liberty of interpreting and expounding the whole Bible to their own ruine and destruction 2. Petri c. 3. v. 16. for how can such ignorant people understand or expound either âo themselves or to others the prophesie of Ezekiel of Daniel the Revelaâions of St. Iohn where aâ S. Hâerome affirms every sentence is a misttery which of them can expound the Canticles or what Salomon meaÌt by those similitudes of Gods Church or the following texts I am the Lord they God visiting the iniquit of âhe Fathers upon the children unto the 3. 4. Generation Exod. c. 20. v. 5. which seems to be contradicted by that of Fzekiel c. 18. v. 20 saying thus the soul that sinneth it shall die the son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father we are expressly commanded by the 20 c. v. â2 of Exodus to honour our Fathers and mothers But it is said in the 14. Chap. of Luke v. 26 that he ãâã heats not his Father and mother cannot be the disciple of Christ Moreover Deuteronomie c. 6. v. 13. it is written that thou shall fear the Lord thy Gâd serve him and âwâar by his Name Which seems to be conâradâcted by that of St. Mat. c. 5. v. 34. where we read thus I sa untâ yoâ swear not at all these and several other texts which âight seem to the unlearned to contradict each others and also the misterâes of the holy scripture do exceeâ the poor ignorant people's understanding and weake capacity nay the very Disciples of Christ cu'd not understand the prop esiâs of the old Testament untill their understanding were open'd whereby they came to their true knowledge as evidently appears Luke c 24. v. 27. and 45 where we read the following words and begining at Moses and all the prophets he expâuâded unto them that things concerning himself then he opened their understanding that they might understand the scriptures For want of which understanding in the law of God the pretended reformers and also the ancient hereâââks of the Primitive Church deserted their true Mother the holy Catholick Church by misinterpreâing the word of God as for example the Aerians denâing tâe 2. person of the Blâssed Tâinâtâ to be God and alleâging for their ground that of St. John c. 17. v. ââ saying thus holy Father keep through thine own Name thoâe whoâââou hast given me that they may be one as we are the Eunomians asserting the holy Ghost not to be God and producing for their Authority that of Christ Matt. c. 11. v 27. where he sayes thus all things are deliver'd unto me by my Father neiher knoweth any man the Father save the son ' and he to whomsoever the son will reveal him the Eutychians affirming the divine nature in Christ to have been converted into his human nature and alleaging for their ground that of St John c. 1. v 14. where we read the following words the word was made âlesh and dowleth among us The Berengarians Wicklefians Husites Lutherans and Caluinists err'd so grossly in so many texts of scripture by reason of the great liberty they tooke in interpreting and expounding it to the advantage of their own design that their errors iâ they were all related woud require a whole book to themselves so that it plainly appears that the reading and interpreting of the serâpture is not profitable to all people specially to those who do not âecur for the interpretation thereof to the holy Catholick Church which has a promise of the infallible asistance of the holy Ghost to the consumation of the world Matt c. 2â v. 2â so that the Church of Rome had great reason to hunder the ignorant sort of people who might easily be deceiv'd ârom perusing it with-out having license from their respective Bishops especially in those countryes where heresie abounds and where Bibles are corrupted fearing lest that instead of acquiring more knowledge thereby they might peradventure fall into greater ignorance or some heresie as the aforsaid sectaries have done in so prohibiting she imitateâ the example of fond parents who keeps all sort dangerous weapons from the hands of their children forbids them all kind of dieaâ which might occasion or creat any ill distemper Chap. 12 Proving that the pretended reformers Doctrines are but a heap of several old heresies lawfully condemn'd by the Primitive Church Having sufficiently made-out by the same Authorityes which my adversaây in his Challenge defies to be produc'd that the old and present Church of Rome is still the same in priÌciples ti 's now fit that I shu'd let my adversary know what principles himself the rest of the new reformers do embrace I will only produce the following point 1 The Aerians demolish'd and threwdown the Altars where upon the holy sacrifice were wont to be offer'd as the following Fathers do relate St. Athanasius in his Epist de fuga sua Theodoretus in his 4th book of History c. 19. 2â and Ruffinus in his 11. book c. â Martin Luther who apostated from the Church of Rome the year 1517. and John Calvin who did the same the year 1538. caus'd alâo the Altars of those Churches which ere under their jurisdictions to be throwdown demoâish'd as may be seen in Luther's booâ de Formula Missa pro Ecclesia Wittâmbergenâi in Calvin's 4th book of Institutions c. 18. 2 The Aârians rejected all traditions which were not written in the word of God as St. Augustin in his first book against Maximiâus c. 2. last testifies which heresie the Nestorians âutychians held afther-wards as appears by the first Action of the 2 General Council of Nice the Nâitorians errors were condemn'd by the General Council of Ephese the year 4â1 as may be seen Tomo 3 Coâciliorum Luther in his commentary on St. Pauls âpist to the Galaââans c 2. and Calvin in his 4. book of Institutions â 8. held also the same heresie 3 The Aerians and Eunomians deny'd that Images ought to be venerated as the Fatherâ of the 2 Council of Nice do relate in the 6. Action John Calvin in his first book Chap. 11. and in his â 4 book c. 9. and now all the reformers do teach the same 4 The Aerians held that there is no difference between Bishops and Priests but that they are of equal dignity and jurisdiction As St. Epiphanius heresie 75. St Augustin heresie â3 do write Luther in his book of the Captivity of Babylon cap. de Ordinis Sacramento and adversus falso nominatum ordinem Episcoporum and Calvin in his 4. book of Instutions c. 3 held likewise the same hereâie which now the presbyterians and several others doe embrace 5 The Aerians did not judge it lawfull to pray for the dead or to offer any sacrifice or alms for their releasment and did not believe that there was any place
Antioch to Rome But in case this had been true which I will shew hereafter to be false his illegal consequeÌce does not follow for tho' the Authors do not agree about the begining of the wââcks of Daniel c. 9. v. 24. prophesyiÌg the comâiÌg of Christ or how many years Saul did reign in Isrâel or how many years there are since the creation of the world shall we infer that Daniels prophesie never began that Saul never reign'd in Israel and that the world was never created no we leave such illegitimate consequeÌces to Whealy who as it seems cannot infer better His secoÌd argument is he that suffers âebuâe is not superior to him that giâes it but Peter suffer'd rebuke from his ââllow Apostle Paul Gal. c. 2. v. 11. 12. â âherefore Peter was not superior to Paul This maâor is evideÌâly false as apâears in the first book of KiÌgs c. 13 âhere we read that Saul tho KiÌg of Israel suffer'd to be rebuk'd by Samuel and in the second book of Kings c. 12. that David suffer'd to be rebuk'd by Nathaâ finally we read in the 6th Chap. of St. John that our âaviour suffer'd not only the Jewes but also the very Disciples to reprâhend his words âhen he told them that he wouâd gâve them his flesh to eat and his blood to drinke we see also by dââly experience that Kings Magistrates and superiors are reprehended by their inferiors not only privatly but in publick Sermons wâen they preach against the âices of the said superiours indeed we see that the Prince of Orange has been often rebuk'd these six or seaven yearâ past by Whealy in his yearly Almanacks wherein he reflects with the vâlest expressions imaginable on their âacred Majesties King âames his Queen the Prince of Wales whereby the Prince of Orange himself is consequently rebuk'd yet never order'd the Author to be punish'd As for that action of Peter not eating meat with the Gentiles for which he was rebuk'd by Paul let the adversary know that if Peter had ãâã then eaten with the Gentiles he would âââharply reprehended by ãâ¦ã the Jewes Pharâsiâs who thought it to be unlawfull by any means to keep company eat or drink with the Genâââ anâ so Peter beiÌg between these âwo extreams he thought it beââ to eat with the Gentiles and in so doing he is not only excus'd but highly commended by all the Eastern and Greâian Faâheâs in their commentary on the aforsaid text and St. Chrisostome in his commentary on the 10. Chap. of the Acts affirms that it was done by divine dispensation which evidently appears Actâ c. 1 v. 7. 8. 9. where we read that Peter was ãâã commaÌded to eat with the Gentiles And the motive that mov'd St. Paul to reprehend him was fearing leât that others who would not be in the same circumstances wherein Peter then has been or dispens'd with as he was should be lead by his example for inferiors are commoÌly led by the examples of their superiors which to prevent in that point St. Paul thought it convenient to reprehend him whose humility for not contradicting Paul his inferior is most highly prays'd by the following Fathers viz St. Cypâian in his Epist to Quintus St Augustin in his â9 Epist St. Gregorie hom 18 oâ EzekiÌel saying thus behold St. Peter reprehended by his owne inferior and does not feââ ãâã reprehension As for these texts which the adversary brings out of St. Pauls second Epist to the Cor. c. 11. 5. and c. 12. v. 11. they prove nothing against Peâer's supremacy for Pauls inteâtion was to sâop ââe mouths of some adversaryes he had among the Cârinthians that oppos'd his Doctrine alleaging it to be grounded ân some subtile and sophistical arguments and not thought by Christ as that of Peter John Jameâ was consequently ought not to be of any great Authority which suspicion occasion'd him to declare in the aforesaid text that he was not inâerior to anââf the Apostâes that is to say that his Doctrine was as true of as much Authority being written by the inspiration of the holy Ghost â as any of the Apostles Doctrine which is true but nothiÌg to tâe present purpose Whealy's third argument he that is accus'd by other and pleadâ his cause before them is not supeââor ââ those that accâses him or before whom he plead but St Peter was acâus'd before the rest of the Apostles âlended his cause before them at Hieruâalem Acts. c. 11. v. 1. c. therefore Peter was not superior to âhe rest of the Apostles The major is false for tho' a King is accus'd by some of his own subjects and pleads his cause before the Paâlâment or a Prince before a Council â superior before his community It does not argue that the King has no superemmency over the Paââment the Prince over his Council the superior over his cââmunity otherwise it might be lawfully inâer'd that our Saviour had no superemmeâcy over his own Disciples before âhoâ he was often accus'd by the Jewes as appears Matt. c. 21 Maâke c. 15 Lâke c. â3 Iohn ââ 7 8. As for that which Whâaly brings out of Peter's second âpist c. 3. v. â ti 's not to hiâ puâpose tho' he deceiâfully wrests it in order to infâr aâ uâatural consequence for it was Peâerâ iââcut in that Chap. to assure certain people of Christs coming to judgment c. and to thinke the paââence of God to conduce to their salvatioÌ as Paul write to them in his Epistles so thât it was necessary for Peter to speake in the plural number but perhaps Whealy by some new fâund Ariâmeâick may make two into one ââ foâ I acknowledge that Peter ought to speake in the singular number but it is too late for Wâealy after so many ages to pretend to teach him how ought to expresse himself in matters of such great consequences Whealy's fourth argument he that is sent is not superior to him that sends him but when the Apostles at Hierusalem heaâd that Samaria receiv'd the word of God they sent to them Peter Iohn Acts. c. 8. v. 14. therefore Peter was not superior to the rest of the Apostles this major is false for one may undergo such a mission by his iÌferiors advise of his own accord with out any subjection to those that sendâ him as is evident in the second book of Kings c 15 where we read that Sâmuel sent Saul tho' King to destroy Amalââk the children of Israel sent Phine has their high Priest and superior to the chiâdren of Ruben Gâd then in the land Gâlead as may be seen in the 2â Chap of Joshua v. 13 and finally Hârod sent the wisemen over whom âe had noâ pâwer to Beâhelem to searge diligââtly for the child Matt c 2. v 8. so that Whealy can make no advantage of Peters missioÌ to Samaria which favours not his design in the âesâ but rather confirms the contrary whereas he
and I prove the first part of the Anticedent by our Saviour's own words Iohn c 6 v 51 where he sayes thus I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live forever and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world But then the Iewes wanting true faith said one to an other how can this man give uâ his flesh to eate v 52. certainly then our Saviour who came to this world to instruct and leade us out of all darknesse to the true light hearing the Iewes murmuring so and doubting of what he said to be true wou'd explain the aforesaid words if he had any mystical meaning but he was so far from so doing that he confirm'd and repeated them again over and overâ as is manifest by the 53 54 c. v where we read the following words then Iesus said unto them verily verily I say unto ye except ye eate the flesh of the son of man and drinke his blood ye have no life in ye whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drinke indeed he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I ãâã him as the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father so he that eateth me even he shall live by me This is the bread which came down from heaven not as your Fathers did eate âanna and are dead he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever So that every faithfull sincere Christian may plainly understand that if our Saviour then had not meant that he was to give his own true flesh and blood to be really eaten and dranke that he wou'd not so proceed in confirming what he said in the begining and also that he wou'd not suffer his own disciples to part with-out declaring his mind to them as he did often before when he spoâe in parables neither wou'd he declare at his last supper that he gave to his discples his own body and blood saying thus Take eate this his my bâdy and he tooke the cup and gave thankes and gave it to them saying drinke ye all of it for his is my blood of the new testâmeât which shall be shâd for many for the remission of sinnes Matt c 26 v 26 27 28 I leave it to all faithfull Christians seriously to be consider'd whether Christ gave only figuratively his own body and blood for the remission of our sinnes or his reall body and blood If he gave them really for our Salvation he also gave them really tâ his disciples as his own wordâ do manifestly affirme to deny which is of no less consequence than to charge Christ with untruth or at lest that he had not words significant to explain his intention which is rash and impious to judge of his infinite power therefore all Christians are oblig'd not to mistrust of the truth of Christ's words or doubt of their literal sence in the aforesaid text for being we acknowledge that Christ is omnipotent and consequently that it is in his Power to make of the bread and wine his own flesh and blood by his divine benediction we ought not to doubt of what he said to be true and if in case he had not exprest so plainly his mind unto us concerning this mysterie we ought to believe it firmly by St Paul's testimonye âae Corinth c 11 v 23 24 c. saying thus for I have receiv'd of the Lord that which also I deliver'd uâto ye that âhe Lord Jesus the same night in which he wââ betrayed âooke bread and when he had given thankes he brake and said take eate this is my body which shall be ââliver'd for ye thiâ do ye in remembranâe of mâ afteâ the âame maÌner also he tooke the câp when he had supped saying this cup is the new testament in my blood this doe ye as often as ye drinke it in remembraâce of me for as often as ye eate thâs brâad and drinke this cup ye do shew the Lords death till be come whosoever shall âat this bread ââ drinke this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the âoâd By which words St Paul openly declares that Christ gave his own body blood to his disciples at his last supper and also he affirms himself to have been taught this doctrine by the Lord and that he deliever'd the same to the Corinthians that there by he might perswade them not to doubt of what he said to be true but to firmly believe the reall presence beâng it was the Lords doctrine delieuer'd unto him in order to teach it to the Christians Now let us heare the Authorityes of the holy Fathers Doctors of the Primitive Church wherewith I shall prove the second Part of the antecedent St. Ignatius the Apostles Disciple in his Epist to those of Smyrna ciâed by Theodoret in his â Dialogue sayes thus they ââmit not the Eucharists and oâlations because they confess not the Euchârâst to be the flesâ of our Saviour who suffer'd for ouâ sinneâ Let the reader take âotice of those heretickes against whose principles St Ignatius speaks in the aforsaid text for they rejected the Eucharist lest they would be forc'd to confess that Christ had true flesh but if the Eucharist had not then been believ'd to be Christ's ârue flesh those heretiks could have no kind of reason to re-ject it for they did noâ deny the figure or Image of Chrisâ but what they deny'd was thaâ Christ had true flesh The like argumenâ may be form'd against the Jewes admiration hearing the word of Christ Iohn c 6 v. 51 c. for if then the jewes would believe that Christ was to give his flesh only in figure and remembrance they would have no reasoÌ to murmur or to mistrust the truth of Christ's words so that it manifestly appears that the Jewes suppos'd that Christ meant his true flesh and also that those heretiks of the prmitive Church believ'd and acknowledge that it was then some of the Catholickâ Doctrine to believe that Christ's true flesh was really present in the holy Eucharist St. ââustin Martyr who liv'd in the year 150 in his 2 Apology to Antoninus sayes thus we do not receive this as common bread or as common drinke but as the son of God Iesus Christ ouâ Saviour inâârnate had flesh and blood for our salvation so are we taught that thâ Eucharist is the flesh blood of the same Iesus incarnate St Irenaeus who liv'd in the same Century speaking of the hereticks of the Synagogue who deny'd Christ to have been the son of God sayes the following words in his 4th book c 34 how can they be assured the bread in which thankes are given to be the body of our Lord the
chalice his blood if they acknowledge him not to be the son of the maker of the world Tertullian who liv'd in the year 230 sayes thus in his book of the resurrection of the flesh the flesh is wash'd that the soul may be clean'd the flesh is anointed that the soul may be consecrated the flesh eateth of the body and blood of Christ that the soul may be âurish'd Origânâs who liv'd in the same age sayes thus hom 7th in Eum speakiÌg of the old law thân the manna was meat in figure but now the flesh of God is meat inspecie as himself sayes my flesh is mâat in deed and in his 5th Hom in diversa loca Evangely speaking of the Centurian he sayes the follwing words whân you receive the holy meat and uncorrupted banquet when you receive the bread and cup of âief you eat drinke the body blood of the Lord then the Lord inters into your house you therefore humbling yourself immitate this Centurian sayâ o Lord I am not worthy that thou shoââest inter into ây house St Cypriaâ who liv'd in same Century in his 5th ser de Lapsis sayes thus Violence is infer'd to his body blood they offend now more the Lord wiââ their hands mouâh than when thâ deny'd the Lord and in his ser oâ the Lords supper he also sayes the following words the doctrin of this Sacrament is streange â the Evangelical schooles publiâh'd ãâã this doctrine it first appear'd to thâ world by Christ the teacher thereof thâ Christians should drinke blood who drinking is most strictly forbidden ââ the Authority of the old law but ââ Gospel commends to drinke it Befoââ I shall proceed further I muââ take notice of St. Cyprian's words positively affirming that this Doctrine of the real presence has been first taught by Christ and his Disciples and also that Christians are commanded to drinke blood which was prohibited by the old law for the old lawâ did not prohibit to drinke blood in figure or in remembrance for the Jewes did drinke the blood of Christ figuratively in drinking the water which flow'd our of the Rocke therefore that which was prohibited by the old law was only to drinke true and real blood but St. Cyprian clearly affirms that the Gospel commaÌds the Christians to drinke that which was prohibited by the old law therefore St. Cyprian affirâ that the Christians are commanâed by the Gospel to drinke tââ and real blood and consequenâ not in figure as my adversaâ would faine perswade St. Hilaâus who liv'd in the 4th Centâry in his 18th book of the Tânity says thus If the word be tââ incarnate we do truly receive the wââ flesh of the flesh blood 's âââ there is noe roome left for being doubt for by the Lord 's own confesâ and by our faith it is truly flesh truly blood let us read what is wriââ and let us understand what we rââ and then we will perform the dutâ perfect faith for according to the tural truth of Christ in us what ââ we learn unless we learn it fâom â we learn it imprudently impiously fâr he said my flââh is meat in deed c. St. Cyril of Ierusalem who liv'd in the sâme Century Catech 4 sayââ the following words This of St. Paul's Doctrine can sufficiently make ye most certain coâcerning the divine mysteries seeing Christ himself so affirms sayes of the bread this is mâ body whâ afterwards can presume to doubt the same also saying confirming this is my blood who I say can doubt say that it is not his blood St. Ambrose who also liv'd in the same Century in his book de Mysterys Initiandis c 9th sayes the following words Perhaps you may say I see the contrary how can you affirm to me that I can receive Christ's body this now we are to prove therefore wâ use great examples that we may prove this not to be what nature form'd but what benediction consecrated the benediction to be of more power than the naturâs because even âhe very nature is converted by the benediction Moses threw a rod which he converted into a serpent aftârwards he tooke the serpent's tail converted the same into a rod therefore you see the nature of the serpent of âhe rod to have been twiâe chang'd by a Prophetical benediction If human benediction be of such power that it can change nature what do we say to the divine consecration where the very words of the Lord our Saviour do worke for the SacrameÌâ which you receive is perfected by the words of Christ what if Elias's words were of such force that they cou'd draw fiâe out of heâven will not Christs wârds be able to change the nature of the elements Of all the workes in the world you have read because he said they were made he commanded they were created therefore Christ's words which cou'd make that which was not of nothing can they not change these things which are into that which they were not for it is not less to give things new beings than to change their natures but why doe wâ use arguments but let us use his own examples prove the truth of this mysterie by the IncarnatioÌ's example did the course of nature take place when the Lord was born of Mary it is manifest that the Virgin conceiv'd contrary to the order of nature this body which we perform is of the Virgin Why do you iâquire here thâ câuâse of ãâ¦ã Chââst's body when the Lord himself wâââorâ of the Virgin beyond the coârsâ of nature Surâly the true flesh of Christ was crucifi'd buri'd truly thân the sâcrament iâ of that same flesh Tho' what I have already produc'd of this eminent Doctor 's Authority might satisfie any impartial reader yet I will adde these other Authorityes of his confirming the same in his 4th book de Sacram c 5. he sayes thus The Lord Iesus Christ declar'd unto us that we receive his own body blood why shu'd we doubt of his Authority testimoney and in his 6th book c 1 he also sayes thus as our Lord Iesus Christ is the true son of God even so it is true flesh which we receive as himself said St. Gregory Nazâanzen who liv'd in the same age in his 2 Oration de Paschaâe sayes the followings words eate the body drinke the blood with-out confusion doubt be constant firm stedfast you need not be any thing troubl'd in mind for the adversary's discourse St Ephrem who liv'd in the year 365 in his book de Natura Dei minima Scrutanda c 5 sayes the following words why do you track-out unsearchable things If you search curiously these things new you will not be call'd faithfull but curious be faithfull innocent partake of the immaculate body of thy Lord with full faith being sure that you do eat the intire lambe the mysteries of Christ are everlasting fire do
to pray and give offerings for the soul of her deââased husband Origenes who liv'd in the year 220. hoâ 6 on Exod. speaking of the soul's progresse when it comes to Purgatory sayes the following words and when it is arââslâd there ãâ¦ã willbriÌg many good worâs aâd alââtle iniquity that ãâã is purg'd and disolv'd even as lead is by ââre St. Athanasius who liv'd in the 4 age in his 34. Question to Antââchus speaking of the Prayerâ and oblaâions offer'd for the dead sayes thus If they wouâd âot receive some benefit by this certainly there wou'd be ââno commemorat on made in grief âorrââ and ânerals we know the âoâls â sinners to receive somâ bââefit by the ââ bloody sacriâiâe by the graâific âiââ offer'd for them âs our Lord who hââ the dominion of both the quâck aââ the dead ârdeâ'd and commanded Sâ Cyrill of Ierusaâem who liv'd iâ the same age Catech. Myst â sayes the following worâis we ââ pray fâr all âhose who dy'd amongââ us believing the oblâtion of the holy terrible sacrifice to be a gâeat help to those souls for whom it is offer'd St. Ephrem who liv d the âame time in his laât will earnestly be âeches the people to be alwayes mindfull of himâelf in their Prayers St. Baâil who also theÌ liv'd instituted an Oration in his Liturgie in order to âe said for the dead and on the 9. ââp of Isaiah he sayes thus there ââ if we wââl discover the sinne by âinfession we shall drââ even aâ the âây which is eaâeâ and it is âât that âurrasory fire soâuld make anâ eâd of ãâã âdose not treaten peâpâtuaâ death ââd exile but it grants purginâ a corâng to that of the Apostle buâ hâmâelf shall be sav'd yeâ so as bâ fâre Gregorie NaZâanzân who livâd the year â70 in his Funeral Oraâtion of Caesârius most humbly beseecheâ the Câristians to pray for the souâs of the dead and himself prayes for the soul of Caeâarius in the same Oration St. âpâphanius who as been conâemporary to St Gregorie in thâ end of his âork against Heresis â numbers the prayers for the dead amongst thâ doctrine of the holy Catholicâ Church and Heresie 75. he callâ Aerius an heretick for denying it to be âawfull to pray for the deâ ad St. Ambrose who also liv'd about the same time in his 2 booâ Epist 8. which is to Faustus concerning his sisters death sayeâ thus therefore I do judge that she iâ not as much to be moan'd as she iâ to be oblig'd bâ prayers neither is sââ to he griev'd by your tears but rathâ hâr soul is to be recommended to Gââ by âblations in his Oratiâs of The odosius ValeÌtinianus Satyrus death he prays most fervently âo their souls promisses to offer sacrifices for them And expoundâ the 3 Chap. of St. Paul's Epist â âorinthians he sayes the folloâing words but whân âaul sayes âso as by fâre indeed âe decâares it he shall be sav'd but he will sufâr the punishmeât of fire that he may âpurg'd bââire and maâe sound and musâ not be tortur'd perpetually by ânal fire aâ the traitouâs âre he has âch a nother passage in his 20th ââ in psal ââ8 St. Gregorie Nysân who liv'd the year 380 in is Oration of the dead sayes âus wherefore that both the digniââ of human nature and free will miâht left and that the evil might cease âivine wâsdom invented this means ât either in this pesent life one must â purg'd by prayers and exercise of ârtue or after his death to be cleaâs'd the forâace of purging fire he cannot be capâble to enjoye Câd unleââ Puâgatory fire will take away the spiââ dispeâs'd on the soul St Hieromâ who liv'd in the year 390. in hiââpist to Pammachus concerning â the death of Paulina sayes thus other husbaâds dospread violets roseâ lilyes and flowers âpon the toâbs ãâã their wifes but our Poâmachus ââ uses the balâom of almsâ knowing ãâã to be written that as water quenchetâ fire even so alms quencheth the sinnâs and expounding the 4. chap. of Amos he also sayes thus according to thaâ whiâh we read in St Paul heâ shall be sav'd yet so as by fire therefore he âho is sav'd by fâre is hurry'd away as if ââ were a fire-brand out of the buâniâg slame St Chrisostoâe who liv'd in the year 398 hom 41 on St âuls first Epist to the Corinthiâs speaking of the dead sayes âe following words lât us assâst âum not with tears but with prayers ââ supplicaâions alms and oblations â these things has not been rashly vânted neither is it in vain that we ââember those wâody'd in the diviââ Mysteries and that we pray for ââm beseâehing the expos'd lambe âho takes away the sinnes of the world âat thence forth they might have some ââsolation therefore let us help ââm and let us perâorm their commeânation for if âobs sacrâfice made saâsfaction for his âons what do you ââubt if thoâe who dyâ haâ some ââsolation we effeâing sacrifice for ââm More of St. Chrisâstom 's Authority may be seen in my answer to the first point and in his â hom in Ioann 2â in act a Aposâ St Augustin who liv'd in thâ year 426. in his 21. book of thâ Câty of God c. 27 sayes that theââ are some Saints who aâter theiâ death gose straight to heaven anâ afterwards can help othârs anâ that there are others of such a bad life who after their death are noâ sav'd neither can they help others and finally that there are others who after their death cannot goâ straight to heaven by the vertue of their own proper merits but that they can be reliev'd by the merits and good works of their friends and in the 16th chap of the same book speaking of the infants who immediatly dye after ââeir Baptism he sayes thus It is âât only that Eternal punishment is ââ prepar'd for them but neither shall ââey suffer Purgatory torments and ââ tâe 24 Chap. he puts a question âquiriÌg why dose not the Churâh pray for those who dye withâut repentance answers sayiÌg âhus Ti 's because they are computed be of the divels party but the âhurch faithfull's prayers are heard ââ the behalâ of others who did not âhave themselves so ill in this life âither did they deserve to go directly âheaven In his bookâ of Homil yes âom 16. he sayes that those who ââs sinnes deserving temporal âunishments shall go thro' purââtory fire according to that of ââul he shall be sav'd as by fire And expounding the 37. psalm he sayes thus that âire is slighted because ti 's said he shall be sav'd ti 's sure but altho' he shall be sav'd by fire yet that fire is more grievous than any thing that a man can suffer in this life In his 2. book de Genesi c. 20 speaking of him who makes not good use of his life he sayes thus after this life he shall either suffer the