Canonical punishments they expected they should perform what was enjoyn'd them formerly But because all sin is a blot to a mans soul and a foul stain to his reputation we demaud in what does this stain consist In the guilt or in the punishment If it be said that it consists in the punishment then what does the guilt signifie when the removing of it does neither remove the stain nor the punishment which both remain and abide together But if the stain and the guilt be all one or always together then when the guilt is taken away there can no stain remain and if so what need is there any more of Purgatory For since this is pretended to be necessary onely lest any stain'd or unclean thing should enter into Heaven if the guilt and the pain be removed what uncleanness can there be left behind Indeed Simon Magus as Epiphanius reports Haeres 20. did teach That after the death of the body there remain'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a purgation of souls But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an Authentick Doctor themselves can best tell 3. It relies upon this also That God requires of us a full exchange of penances and satisfactions which must regularly be paid here or hereafter even by them who are pardon'd here which if it were true we were all undone 4. That the Death of Christ his Merits and Satisfaction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye nor as it may happen of a long time after All which being Propositions new and uncertain invented by the School Divines and brought ex post facto to dress this opinion and make it to seem reasonable and being the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace of the righteousness of Faith and the infinite value of Christs Death must needs lay a great prejudice of novelty upon the Doctrine it self which but by these cannot be supported But to put it past suspition and conjectures Roffensis and Polydore Virgil affirm That who so searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers shall find that none or very rarely any one of them ever makes mention of Purgatory and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it But for the Catholick Church it was but lately known to her But before we say any more in this Question we are to premonish That there are Two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity The first is That the Ancient Churches in their Offices and the Fathers in their Writings did teach and practice respectively prayer for the dead Now because the Church of Rome does so too and more than so relates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory and for the souls there detain'd her Doctors vainly suppose that when ever the Holy Fathers speak of prayer for the dead that they conclude for Purgatory which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable For it is true the Fathers did pray for the dead but how That God would shew them mercy and hasten the resurrection and give a blessed sentence in the great day But then it is also to be remembred that they made prayers and offered for those who by the◠confession of all sides never were in Purgatory even for the Patriarchs and Prophets for the Apostles and Evangelists for Martyrs and Confessors and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary So we find it in Epiphanius St. Cyril and in the Canon of the Greeks and so it is acknowledged by their own Durantus and in their Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of St. Leo Of which because by their latter doctrines they grew asham'd they have chang'd the prayer for him into a prayer to God by the intercession of St. Leo in behalf of themselves so by their new doctrine making him an Intercessor for us who by their old doctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him of which Pope Innocent being ask'd a reason makes a most pitiful excuse Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed and indeed generally for all it is not now seasonable to discourse but to say this onely that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd the Church of England never did condemn by any express Article but left it in the middle and by her practice declares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead and her interest in the communion of Saints and that the Saints departed are a portion of the Catholick Church parts and members of the Body of Christ but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead infers the belief of Purgatory every man may satisfie himself by seeing the Writings of the Fathers where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause for praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place Which thing is so certain that in the very Roman Offices we mean the Vigils said for the dead which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture speaking of the miseries of this World Repentance and Reconciliation with God the bliss after this life of them that die in Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead and in the Anthemes Versicles and Responses there are prayers made recommending to God the Soul of the newly defunct praying he may be freed from Hell and eternal death that in the day of Iudgment he be not judged and condemned according to his sins but that he may appear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection but not one word of Purgatory or its pains The other cause of their mistake is That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of Iudgment and it is such a fire that destroys the Doctrine of the intermedial Purgatory We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it and so S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion for it was no more so does S. Basil S. Hilary S. Hierom and Lactantius as their words plainly prove as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis affirming that all men Christ only excepted shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgment even the Blessed Virgin her self is to pass through this fire There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers which greatly destroys the Roman Purgatory Sixtus Senensis says and he says very true that Iustin Martyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and S. Bernard did all affirm that before the day of Judgment the souls of men are kept in secret receptacles reserved unto the sentence of the great day and that before then no man receives according to his works done in this life We do not interpose in
to impiety is a stock and fountain of temptations and these which we have reckon'd in the matter of Repentance having influence upon the whole life are yet much greater by corrupting the whole mass of Wisdom and Spiritual Propositions There are indeed many others We shall name some of them but shall not need much to insist on them Such as are 1. That one man may satisfie for another It is the general Doctrine of their Church The Divines and Lawyers consent in it and publikely own it The effect of which is this that some are made rich by it and some are careless But qui non solvit in aere luat in corpore is a Canonical rule and though it was spoken in the matter of publick penances and so relates to the exterior Court yet it is also practis'd and avowed in satisfactions or penances relating to the inward Court of Conscience and penance Sacramental and the rich man is made negligent in his duty and is whip'd upon another mans back and his purse onely is the Penitent and which is worst of all here is a pretence of doing that which is too neer blasphemy but to say For by this Doctrine it is not to be said of Christ alone that he was wounded for our transgressions that he onely satisfied for our sins for in the Church of Rome it is done frequently and pretended daily that by another mans stripes we are healed 2. They teach That a habit of sin is not a sin distinct from those former actions by which the habit was contracted The secret intention of which Proposition and the malignity of it consists in this that it is not necessary for a man to repent speedily and a man is not bound by repentance to interrupt the procedure of his impiety or to repent of his habit but of the single acts that went before it For as for those that come after they are excus'd if they be produc'd by a strong habit and the greater the habit the less is the sin But then as the repentance need not for that reason be hasty and presently so because it is onely to be of single acts the repentance it self need not be habitual but it may be done in an instant whereas to mortifie a habit of sin which is the true and proper repentance there is requir'd a longer time and a procedure in the methods of a holy life By this and such like Propositions and careless Sentences they have brought it to that pass that they reckon a single act of Contrition at any time to be sufficient to take away the wickedness of a long life Now that this is the avowed Doctrine of the Roman Guides of souls will sufficiently appear in the Writings of their chiefeâ—t of which no learned man can be ignorant The thing was of late openly and professedly disputed against us and will not be denied And that this Doctrine is infinitely destructive of the necessity of a good life cannot be doubted of when themselves do own the proper consequents of it even the unnecessariness of present repentance or before the danger of death of which we have already given accounts But the reason why we remark it here is that which we now mention'd because that by the Doctrine of vitious habits having in them no malignity or sin but what is in the single preceding acts there is an excuse made for millions of sins For if by an evil habit the sinner is not made worse and more hated by God and his sinful acts made not onely more but more criminal it will follow that the sins are very much lessened For they being not so voluntary in their exercise and distinct emanation are not in present so malicious and therefore he that hath gotten a habit of drunkenness or swearing sins less in every act of drunkenness or profane oath than he that acts them seldom because by his habit he is more inclin'd and his sins are almost natural less considered less chosen and not disputed against but pass by inadveâ—tency and an untroubled consent easily and promptly and almost naturally from that principle So that by this means and in such cases when things are come to this pass they have gotten an imperfect warrant to sin a great deal and a great while without any new great inconvenience Which evil state of things ought to be infinitely avoided by all Christians that would be sav'd by all means and therefore all such Teachers and all such Doctrines are carefully to be declin'd who give so much easiness not onely to the remedies but to the sins themselves But of this we hope it may be sufficient to have given this short warning 3. The distinction of Mortal and Venial sins as it is taught in the Church of Rome is a great cause of wickedness and careless conversation For although we do with all the ancient Doctors admit of the distinction of sins Mortal and Venial yet we also teach That in their own nature and in the rigor of the Divine Justice every sin is damnable and deserves Gods anger and that in the unregenerate they are so accounted and that in Hell the damned suffer for small and great in a common mass of torment yet by the Divine mercy and compassion the smaller sins which come by surprize or by invincible ignorance or inadvertency or unavoidable infirmity shall not be imputed to those who love God and delight not in the smallest sin but use caution and prayers watchfulness and remedies against them But if any man delights in small sins and heaps them into numbers and by deliberation or licentiousness they grow numerous or are in any sense chosen or taken in by contempt of the Divine Law they do put us from the favour of God and will pass into severe accounts And though sins are greater or less by comparison to each other yet the smallest is a burthen too great for us without the allowances of the Divine mercy But the Church of Rome teaches that there is a whole kind of sins which are venial in their own nature such which if they were all together all in the world conjoyn'd could not equal one mortal sin nor destroy charity nor put us from the favour of God such for which no man can perish etiam si nullum pactum esset de remissione though Gods merciful Covenant of Pardon did not intervene And whereas Christ said Of every idle word a man shall speak he shall give account at the day of judgement and By your words ye shall be justified and By your words ye shall be condemned Bellarmine expresly affirms It is not intelligible how an idle word should in its own nature be worthy of the Eternal wrath of God and Eternal flames Many other desperate words are spoken by the Roman Doctors in this Question which we love not to aggravate because the main thing is acknowledged by them all But now we appeal to the reason and
indices are infinite testimoâ—â— against them both that they do so aâ—â— that they need it But besides these things we haâ—â— thought it fit to represent in onâ— aspect some of their chief Doctrines 〈◊〉 difference from the Church of Enâ—â—land and make it evident that they 〈◊〉 indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles Sect. II. FIrst we allege that that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by â—he sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus â— That it should not be lawful for any Man â—o publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall â—are to compose or offer any such to any â—ersons willing to be converted from â—aganism Iudaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of P. Martin the fifth declar'd foâ— the Popes Supremacy But Iohâ— Gerson who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advance'â— the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of thâ— Pope which afterwards moderate Meâ—â—durst not speak but yet some otheâ— spake them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Lateran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an article of faith But for the present it is a probationary article and according to Bellarmine's expression is ferè de fide it is almost an article of Faith they want a little age and then they may go alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new article but it is sine controver si â credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted that although the Ancient Fathers did give the Communion to infants yet they did not believe it necessary to salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himselfâ— and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian belief But we proceed to other instances Sect. III. THe Roman Doctrine of indulgences was the first occasion of the great change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproch to Christendom it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Prieriaâ— Bishop Fisher of Rochester says that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of indulgences and that they began after the people were awhile affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the XII Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the first of England 1300 years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely form himâ—elf to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon Law written by Gratian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of P. Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as ancient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease lest they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merits and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of merits or at lest of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these
is something more this may be done if he impose new Gabels or Imposts upon his Subjects without the Popes leave for if they do not pretend to this also why does the Pope in Bulla Coenae Dominici excommnnicate all Princes that do it Now if it be inquired by what Authority the Pope does these things It is answered That the Pope hath a Supreme and Absolute Authority both the Spiritual and the Temporal Power is in the Pope as Christs Vicar said Azorius and Santarel The Church hath the right of a superiour Lord over the rights of Princes and their Temporalties and that by her Jurisdiction she disposes of Temporals ut de suo peculio as of her own proper goods said our Countreyman Weston Rector of the College at Dâ—way Nay the Pope hath power in omnia per omnia super omnia in all things thorough all things and over all things and the sublimity and immensity of the Supreme Bishop is so great that no mortal man can comprehend it said Cassenaeus no man can express it no man can think it So that it is no wonder what Papirius Massonus said of Pope Boniface the VIII that he owned himself not onely as the Lord of France but of all the World Now we are sure it will be said That this is but the private opinion of some Doctors not the Doctrine of the Church of Rome To this we reply 1. It is not the private opinion of a few but their publick Doctrine own'd and offer'd to be justified to all the World as appears in the preceding testimonies 2. It is the opinion of all the Jesuit Order which is now the greatest and most glorious in the Church of Rome and the maintenance of it is the subject matter of their new Vow of obedience to the Pope that is to advance his Grandeur 3. Not onely the Jesuits but all the Canonists in the Church of Rome contend earnestly for these Doctrines 4. This they do upon the Authority of the Decretals their own Law and the Decrees of Councils 5. Not only the Jesuits and Canonists but others also of great note amongst them earnestly contend for these Doctrines particularly Cassâ—naeus Zodericus the Archbishop of Florence Petrus de Monte St. Thomas Aquinas Bozius Baronius and many others 6. Themselves tellâ— us it is a matter of Faith F. Creswell says it is the sentence of all Catholicks and they that do not admit these Doctrines Father Rosweyd calls them half Christians Grinners barking Royalists and a new Sect of Catholicks and Eudaemon Ioannes says That without question it is a Heresie in the judgement of all Catholicks Now in such things which are not in their Creeds and publick Confessions from whence should we know the Doctrines of their Church but from their chiefest and most leading Doctors who it is certain would fain have all the World believe it to be the Doctrine of their Church And therefore as it is certain that any Roman Catholick may with allowance be of this opinion so he will be esteemed the better and more zealous Catholick if he be and if it were not for fear of Princes who will not lose their Crowns for their foolish Doctrines there is no peradventure but it would be declared to be de fide a matter of faith as divers of them of late do not stick to say And of this the Pope gives but too much evidence since he will not take away the scandal which is so greatly given to all Christian Kings and Republicks by a publick and a just condemnation of it Nay it is worse than thus for Sixtus Quintus upon the XI of September A. D. 1589. in an Oration in a Conclave of Cardinals did solemnly commend the Monk that kill'd Henry the III. of France The Oration was printed at Paris by them that had rebell'd against that Prince and avouched for Authentick by Boucher Decreil and Ancelein And though some would fain have it thought to be none of his yet Bellarmine dares not deny it but makes for it a crude and a cold Apology Now concerning this Article it will not be necessary to declare the Sentence of the Church of England and Ireland because it is notorious to all the World and is expresly oppos'd against this Roman Doctrine by Laws Articles Confessions Homilies the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy the Book of Christian Institution and the many excellent writings of King Iames of Blessed Memory of our â—â—â—hops and other Learnned persons against Bellarmine Parsons Eudaemon Iohannes Creswel and others And nothing is more notorious than that the Church of England is most dutiful most zealous for the right of Kings and within these four and twenty years she hath had many Martyrs and very very many Confessors ia this cause It is true that the Church of Rome does recriminate in this point and charges some Calvinists and Presbyterians with Doctrines which indeed they borrowed from Rome using their Arguments making use of their Expressions and pursuing their Principles But with them in this Article we have nothing to do but to reprove the men and condemn their Doctrine as we have done all along by private Writings and publick Instruments We conclude these our reproofs with an Exhortation to our respective Charges to all that desire to be sav'd in the day of the Lord Iesus thaâ— they decline from these horrid Doctrines which in their birth are new in their growth are scandalous in their proper consequents are inâ—initely dangerous to their souls and hunt for their precious life But therefore it is highly fit that they also should perceive their own advantages and give God praise that they are immur'd from such infinite drngers by the Holy Precepts and holy Faith taught and commanded in the Church of England and Ireland in which the Word of God is set before them as a Lantern to their feet and a light unto their eyes and the Sacraments are fully administred according to Christs Institution and Repentance is preach'd according to the measures of the Gospel and Faith in Christ is propounded according to the rule of the Apostles and the measures of the Churches Apostolical and obedience to Kings is greatly and sacredly urg'd and the Authority and Order of Bishops is preserv'd against the usurpation of the Pope and the invasion of Schismaticks and Aerians new and old and Truth and Faith to all men is kept and preach'd to be necessary and inviolable and the Commandments are expounded with just severity and without scruples and holiness of life is urg'd upon all men as indispensably necessary to salvation and therefore without any allowances tricks and little artifices of escaping from it by easie and imperfect Doctrines and every thing is practis'd which is useful to the saving of our souls and Christs Merits and Satisfaction are intirely relied upon for the pardon of our sins and the necessity of good works is
earnestly and therefore Controversies may become necessary but because they are not often so but oftentimes useless and always troublesom and as an ill diet makes an ill habit of body so does the frequent use of controversies baffle the understanding and makes it crafty to deceive others it self remaining instructed in nothing but useless notions and words of contingent signification and distinctions without difference which minister to pride and contention and teach men to be pertinacious troublesome and uncharitable therefore I love them not But because by the Apostolical Rule I am tyed to do all things without murmurings as well as without disputings I consider'd it over again and found my self reliev'd by the subject matter and the grand consequent of the present Questions For in the present affair the case is not so as in the others here the Questions are such that the Church of Rome declares them to reach as far as eternity and damn all that are not of their opinions and the Protestants have much more reason to fear concerning the Papists such who are not excus'd by ignorance that their condition is very sad and deplorable and that it is charity to snatch them as a brand from the fire and indeed the Church of Rome maintains Propositions which if the Ancient Doctors of the Church may be believ'd are apt to separate from God I instance in their superaddition of Articles and Propositions derived onely from a pretended tradition and not contain'd in Scripture Now the doing of this is a great sin and a great danger Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Si non est scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus detrahentibus destinatum said Tertullian I adore the fulness of Scripture and if it be not written let Hermogenus fear the wo that is destin'd to them that detract from or adde to it S. Basil says Without doubt it is a most manifest argument of infidelity and a most certain sign of pride to introduce any thing that is not written in the Scriptures our blessed Saviour having said My sheep hear my voice and the voice of strangers they will not hear and to detract from Scriptures or adde any thing to the Faith that is not there is most vehemently forbidden by the Apostle saying If it be but a mans testament nemo superordinat no man adds to it And says also This was the Will of the Testator And Theophilus Alexandrinus says plainly It is the part of a Devillish spirit to think any thing to be Divine that is not in the authority of the holy Scriptures and therefore S. Athanasius affirms that the Catholicks will neither speak nor endure to hear any thing in Religion that is a stranger to Scripture it being immodestiae vaecordia an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written Now let any man judge whether it be not our duty and a necessary work of charity and the proper office of our Ministry to persuade our charges from the immodesty of an evil heart from having a Devillish spirit from doing that which is vehemently forbidden by the Apostle from infidelity and pride and lastly from that eternal Wo which is denounc'd against them that adde other words and doctrines than what is contain'd in the Scriptures and say Dominus dixit The Lord hath said it and he hath not said it If we had put these severe censures upon the Popish doctrine of Tradition we should have been thought uncharitable but because the holy Fathers do so we ought to be charitable and snatch our Charges from the ambient flame And thus it is in the question of Images Dubium non est quin Religio nulla sit ubicunque fimulacrum est said Lactantius Without all peradventure where ever an Image is meaning for worship there is no Religion and that we ought rather to die than pollute our Faith with such impieties said Origen It is against the Law of Nature it being expresly forbidden by the second Commandment as Irenaeus affirms Tertullian Cyprian and S. Augustine and therefore is it not great reason we should contend for that Faith which forbids all worship of Images and oppose the superstition of such Guides who do teach their people to give them veneration to prevaricate the Moral Law end the very Law of Nature and do that which whosoever does has no Religion We know Idolatry is a damnable sin and we also know that the Roman Church with all the artifices she could use never can justifie her self or acquit the common practises from Idolatry and yet if it were but suspicious that it is Idolatry it were enough to awaken us for God is a jealous God and will not endure any such causes of suspicion and motives of jealousie I instance but once more The primitive Church did excommunicate them that did not receive the holy Sacrament in both kinds and S. Ambrose says that he who receives the Mystery other ways than Christ appointed that is but in one kind when he hath appointed it in two is unworthy of thâ— Lord and he cannot have Devotion Now this thing we oughâ— not to suffer that our people by so doâ—ing should remain unworthy of thâ— Lord and for ever be indevouâ— â—â— cozen'd with a false shew of devotion or fall by following evil Guides into the sentence of Excommunication These matters are not trifling and when we see these errours frequently taught and own'd as the onely true Religion and yet are such evils which the Fathers say are the way of damnation we have reason to hope that all wise and good men lovers of souls will confess that we are within the circles of our duty when we teach our people to decline the crooked ways and to walk in the ways of Scripture and Christianity But we have observed amongst the generality of the Irish such a declension of Christianity so great credulity to believe every superstitious story such confidence in vanity such groundless pertinacy such vicious lives so little sense of true Religion and the fear of God so much care to obey the Priests and so little to obey God such intolerable ignorance such fond Oaths and manners of swearing thinking themselves more oblig'd by swearing on the Mass-book than the four Gospels and S. Patricks Mass-book more than any new one swearing by their Fathers soul by their Godsips hand by other things which are the product of those many Tales are told them their not knowing upon what account they refuse to come to Church but onely that now they are old and never did or their Countreymen do not or their Fathers or Grandfathers never did or that their Ancestours were Priests and they will not alter from their Religion and after all can give no account of their Religion what it is onely they believe as their Priest bids them and go to Mass which they understand not and reckon their Beads to tell the number and the tale of
this opinion to say that it is true or false probable or improbable for these Fathers intended it not as a matter of faith or necessary belief so far as we find But we observe from hence that if their opinion be true then the Doctrine of Purgatory is false If it be not true yet the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory which is inconsistent with this so generally receiv'd opinion of the Fathers is at least new no Catholick Doctrine not believ'd in the Primitive Church and therefore the Roman Writers are much troubled to excuse the Fathers in this Article and to reconcile them to some seeming concorâ— with their new Doctrine But besides these things it is certain that the Doctrine of Purgatory before the day of Judgment in S. Augustins time was not the Doctrine of the Church it was not the Catholick Doctrine for himself did doubt of it Whether it be so or not it may be inquir'd and possibly it may be found so and possibly it may never so S. Augustine In his time therefore it was no Doctrine of the Church and it continued much longer in uncertainty for in the time of Otho Frisingensis who liv'd in the year 1146. it was gotten no further than to a Quidam asserunt some do affirm that there is a place of Purgatory after death And although it is not to be denied but that many of the ancient Doctors had strange opinions concerning Purgations and Fires and Intermedial states and common receptacles liberations of Souls and Spirits after this life yet we can truly affirm it and can never be convinc'd to err in this affirmation that there is not any one of the Ancients within five hundred years whose opinion in this Article throughout the Church of Rome at this day follows But the people of the Roman Communion have been principally led into a belief of Purgatory by their fear and by their credulity they have been softned enâ—ic'd into this belief by perpetual tales and legends by which they love to be abus'd To this purporse their Priests and Friers have made great use of the apparition of S. Hierom after death to Eusebius commanding him to lay his sack upon the corps of three dead men that they arising from death might confess Purgatory which formerly they had denied The story is written in an Epistle impuâ—ed to S. Cyril but the ill-luck of it was that S. Hierom out-lived S. Cyril anâ— wrote his life and so confuted thaâ— story but all is one for that they believe it never the less But theâ—â— are enough to help it out and if theâ— be not firmly true yet if they bâ— firmly believ'd all is well enough 〈◊〉 the Speculum exemplorum it is said That a certain Priest in an extasie saw the soul of Constantinus Turritanus in the eves of his house tormented with frosts and cold rains and afterwards climbing up to heaven upon a shining pillar And a certain Monk saw some souls roasted upon spits like Pigs and some Devils basting them with scalding lard but a while after they were carried to a cool place and so prov'd Purgatory But Bishop Theobald standing upon a piece of ice to cool his feet was nearer Purgatory than he was aware and was convinc'd of it when he heard a poor soul telling him that under that ice he was tormented and that he should be delivered if for thirty days continual he would say for him thirty Masses and some such thing was seen by Conrade and Udalric in a Pool of water For the place of Purgatory was not yet resolv'd on till S. Patrick had the key of it delivered to him which when one Nicholas borrowed of him he saw as strange and true things there as ever Virgil dreamed of in his Purgatory or Cicero in his dream of Scipio or Plato in his Gorgias or Phaedo who indeed are the surest Authors to prove Purgatory But because to preach false stories was forbidden by the Council of Trent there are yet remaining more certain arguments even revelations made by Angels and the testimony of S. Odilio himself who heard the Devil complain and he had great reason surely that the souls of dead men were daily snatch'd out of his hands by the Alms and Prayers of the living and the sister of S. Damianus being too much pleas'd with hearing of a Piper told her brother that she was to be tormented for fifteen days in Purgatory We do not think that the wise men in the Church of Rome believe these Narratives for if they did they were not wise But this we know that by such stories the people were brought into a belief of it and having served their turn of them the Master-builders used them as false arches and centries taking them away when the parts of the building were made firm and stable by Authority But even the better sort of them do believe or else they do worse for they urge and cite the Dialogues of S. Gregory the Oration of S. Iohn Damascen de Defunctis the Sermons of Saint Augustine upon the Feast of the Commemoration of All-souls which nevertheless was instituted after S. Augustins death and divers other citations which the Greeks in their Apology call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— The Holds and the Castles the corruptions and insinuations of Heretical persons But in this they are the less to be blamed because better arguments than they have no men are tied to make use of But against this way of proceeding we think fit to admonish the people of our charges that besides that the Scriptures expresly forbid us to enquire of the dead for truth the Holy Doctors of the Church particularly Tertul. S. Athanasius S. Chrysost. Isido and Theophylact deny that the souls of the dead ever do appear and bring many reasons to prove that it is unfitting they should saying if they did it would be the cause of many errors and the Devils under that pretence might easily abuse the world with notices and revelations of their own And because Christ would have us content with Moses and the Prophets and especially to hear that Prophet whom the Lord our God hath raised up amongst us our Blessed Jesus who never taught any such Doctrine to his Church But because we are now representing the Novâ—lty of this Doctrine and proving that anciently it was not the Doctrine of the Church nor at all esteemed a matter of faith whether there was or was not any such place or state we add this That the Greek Church did always dissent from the Latines in this particular since they had forg'd this new Doctrine in the laboratories of Rome and in the Council of Basil publish'd an Apology directly disapproving the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory How afterwards they were press'd in the Council of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half consent put into the
first of all Apostles not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles but all the Apostles were first It is also evident that S Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence but he was as St. Chrysostom truly says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did all things with the common consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by special authority or principality and if he had any such it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him had succeeded him in it rather than the Bishop of Rome and it being certain as the Bishop of Canaries confesses That there is in Scripture no revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it and we being there told that S. Peter was at Antioch but never that he was at Rome it being confessed by some of their own parties by Cardinal Cusanus Soto Driedo Canus and Segovius that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church nor that Christs institution of this does any other way appear that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the primitive Church but that the holy Fathers both of Africa and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen when they began to interpose with a presumptive Authority in the affairs of other Churches and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Roman Bishop as with a brother not as their superiour and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preeminence with the Bishops of Rome and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome and after all this since it is certain that Christ who foreknows all things did also know that tâ—ere would be great disputes and challenges of this preeminence did indeed suppress it in his Apostles and said not it should be otherwise in succession and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vicars more than what he commanded concerning all Bishops it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so but that it is more than probable tha◠〈◊〉 never intended any such thing and 〈◊〉 the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great schism and usurped a title which is not their due and challenged an authority to which they have no right and have set themselves above others who are their equals and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving and have made great preparation for Antichrist if he ever get into that Seat or be in already and made it necessary for all of the Roman Communion to believe and obey him in all things Sect. XIâ— THere are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture and the practise of the Catholick Apostolick and primitive Church Such are these The Invocâ—â—â—n of Saints the Insufficiencie of Sâ—â—â—â—ures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation their absolving sinners before they have by canonical penances and the fruits of a good life testified their repentance their giving leave to simple Presbyters by Papal dispensation to give confirmation or chrism selling Masses for Ninepences Circumgestation of the Eucharist to be ador'd The dangerous Doctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in collating Sacraments by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he please of his own parish their affirming that the Mass is a proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead Private Masses or the Lords Supper without Communion which is against the doctrine and practise of the ancient Church of Rome it self and contrary to the tradition of the Apostles if we may believe Pope Calixtus and is also forbidden under pain of Excommunication Peractâ consecratione omnes communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia When the consecration is finished let all communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church for so the Apostles appointed and so the Holy Church of Rome does hold The same also was decreed by P. Soter and P. Martin in a Council of Bishops and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Canon Law There are divers others but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted may be sufficient to verifie this charge of Novelty But we have done this the rather because the Roman Emissaries endeavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity and calling their Religion the Old Religion and the Catholick so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth their Religion as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland being neither the Old nor the Catholick Religion but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences But they have taught every Priest that can scarse understand his Breviary of which in Ireland there are but too many and very many of the people to ask where our Religion was before Luther Whereas it appears by the premises that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther than for them to shew theirs before Trent And although they can shew too much practise of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the purest and first ages and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded and where polished and where furnished But when the Keepers of the field slept and the Enemy had sown tares and they had choak'd the wheat and almost destroyed it when the world complain'd of the infinite errors in the Church and being oppressed by a violent power durst not complain so much as they had cause and when they who had cause to complain were yet themselves very much abused and did not complain in all they might when divers excellent persons S. Bernard Clemangis Grosthead Marsilius Ocham Alvarus Abbat Ioachim Petrarch Savanarola Valla Erasmus Mantuan Gerson Ferus Cassander Andre as Fricius Modrevius Hermannus Coloniensis Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun Paulus Langius Staphilus Telesphorus de Cusentiâ Doctor Talheymius Francis Zabarel the Cardinal and Pope Adrian himself with many others not to reckon Wiclef Hus Hierom of Prague the Bohemians and the poor men of Lions whom they call'd Hereticks and confuted with fire and sword when almost all Christian Princes did complain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church and of Religion and
God hath forbidden and to say it is done for God's sake is to say that for his sake we displease him for his sake we give that to a Creature which is God's own propriety But besides this we aâ—firm and it is of it self evident that whoever Christian or Heathen worships the image of any thing cannot possibly worship that image terminatively for the very being of an image is relative and therefore if the man understands but common sense he must suppose and intend that worship to be relative and a Heathen could not worship an image with any other worship and the second Commandment forbidding to worship the likeness of any thing in Heaven and Earth does onely forbid that thing which is in Heaven to be worshipped by an image that is it forbids onely a relative worship For it is a contradiction to say this is the image of God and yet this is God and therefore it must be also a contradiction to worship an image with Divine worship terminatively for then it must be that the image of a thing is that thing whose image it is And therefore these Doctors teach the same thing which they condemn in the Heathens But they go yet a little further The Image of the Cross they worship with Divine honour and therefore although this Divine worship is but relative yet consâ—quently the Cross it self is worshipped terminatively by Divine adoration For the Image of the Cross hath it relatively and for the Crosses sake therefore the Cross it self is the proper and full object of the Divine adoration Now that they do and teach this we charge upon them by undeniable Records For in the very Pontifical published by the Authority of Pope Clement the VIII these words are found The Legats Cross must be on the right hand because Latria or Divine honour is due to it And if Divine honour relative be due to the Legates Cross which is but the Image of â—hrist Cross then this Divine worship is terminated on Christs Cross which is certainly but a meer Creature To this purpose are the words of Almain The Images of the Trinity and of the Cross are to be ador'd with the worship of Latria that is Divine Now if the Image of the Cross be the intermedial then the Cross it self whose Image that is must be the last object of this Divine worship and if this be not Idolatry it can never be told what is the notion of the Word But this passes also into other real effects And well may the Cross it self be worshipped by Divine worship when the Church places her hopes of salvation on the Cross for so she does says Aquinas and makes one the argument of the other and proves that the Church places her hopes of salvation on the Cross that is on the instrument of Christs Passion by a hymn which she uses in her offices but this thing we have remark'd above upon another occasion Now although things are brought to a very ill state when Christians are so probably and apparently charg'd with Idolatry and that the excuses are too fine to be understood by them that need them yet no excuse can acquit these things when the most that is or can be said is this that although that which is Gods due is given to a Creature yet it is given with some difference of intention and metaphysical abstraction and separation especially since if there can be Idolatry in the worshipping of an Image it is certain that a relative Divine worship is this Idolatryâ— for no man that worships an Image in that consideration or formality can make the Image the last object Either therefore the Heathens were not Idolaters in the worshipping of an Image or else these men are The Heathens did indeed infinitely more violate the first Commandment but against the second precisely and separately from the first the transgression is alike The same also is the case in their worshipping the consecrated Bread and Wine Of which how far they will be excused before God by their ignorant pretensions and suppositions we know not but they hope to save themselves harmless by saying that they believe the Bread to be their Saviour and that if they did not believe so they would not do so We believe that they say true but we are afraid that this will no more excuse them that it will excuse those who worship the Sun and Moon and the Queen of Heaven whom they would not worship if they did not believe to have Divinity in them And it may be observed That they are very fond of that persuasion by which they are led into this worship The error might be some excuse if it were probable or if there were much temptation to it But when they choose this persuasion and have nothing for it but a tropical expression of Scripture which rather than not believe in the natural useless and impossible sense they will defie all their own reason and four of the five operations of their soul Seeing Smelling Tasting and Feeling and contradict the plain Doctrine of the Ancient Church before they can consent to believe this error that Bread is chang'd into God and the Priest can make his Maker We have too much cause to fear that the error is too gross to admit an excuse and it is hard to suppose it invincible and involuntary because it is so hard and so untempting and so unnatural to admit the error We do desire that God may find an excuse for it and that they would not But this we are most sure of that they might if they pleas'd find many excuses or rather just causes for not giving Divine honour to the Consecrated Elements because there are so many contingencies in the whole conduct of this affair and we are so uncertain of the Priests intention and we can never be made certain that there is not in the whole order of causes any invalidity in the Consecration and it is so impossible that any man should be sure that Here and Now and This Bread is Transubstantiated and is really the Natural body of Christ that it were fit to omit the giving Gods due to that which they do not know to be any thing but a piece of bread and it cannot consist with holiness and our duty to God certainly to give Divine Worship to that thing which though their doctrine were true they cannot know cetainly to have a Divine being Sect. XIII AND now we shall plainly represenâ— to our charges how this whole matter stands The case is this The Religion of a Christian consists in Faith and Hope Repentance and Charity Divine Worship and â—elebration of the Sacraments and finally in keeping the â—ommandments of God Now in all these both on Doctrines and Practises the Church of Râ—me does dangerously err and teaches men so to do They do injury to Faith by creating new Articles and enjoyning them as of necessity to salvation * â—hey spoil their Hope by placing it