Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n church_n pope_n rome_n 4,587 5 6.8117 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A26858 Against the revolt to a foreign jurisdiction, which would be to England its perjury, church-ruine, and slavery in two parts ... / by Richard Baxter ... Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1691 (1691) Wing B1182; ESTC R22132 311,021 600

There are 21 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

c. to come to us in Consultation and let us know their Sence and many came And I remember not one Man that dissented from what we offered you first which was Archbishop Vsher's Primitive Form which took not down Archbishops Bishops or a farthing of their Estates or any of their Lordships or Parliamentary Power or Honour unless the Advice of their Presbyters and the taking the Church Keys out of the hands of Lay Chancellors cast you down 3. That when the King's Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs 1660. granted yet much less Power to Presbyters and left it almost alone in the Bishops we did not only acquiesce in this but all the London Ministers were invited to meet to give the King our joyful Thanks for it And of all that met I remember but two now both dead who refused to subscribe the Common Thanksgiving which with many Hands is yet to be seen in Print And those two exprest their Thankfulness but only said That because some things agreed not to their Judgments they durs● not so subscribe lest it signified Approbation but they should thankfully accept that Frame and peaceably submit to it All this being so I appeal with some sense of the Case of England to your self and common reason whether it be just and beseeming a Pastor or Christian or a Man to make the Nation believe 1. That we are Presbyterians 2. And against Bishops 3. And therefore that we are Schismaticks 4. And therefore that we must be Imprisoned or Banished as those that would destroy the Church and Land Would a Turk own such dealing with his Neighbour Is this the way of Peace Will this bring us to Conformity Was it Anti-Episcopal Presbytery which the King's Declaration 1660 determined of Nothing will Serve God and the Churches Peace but Truth and Honesty or at least that which hath some appearance of it II. I find that almost all the Strength of his Book as against Presbyterians who are his Fanaticks is his bare word saying that they are Schismaticks and that they forsake the Judgment and Practice of the Universal Church by forsaking Episcopacy And will this convince me who am certain that I am for that Episcopacy which Ignatius Tertullian Cyprian c. were for and am past doubt that the Episcopacy which I am against is contrary to the Practice of the whole Church for 200 Years and of all save two Cities Alexandria and Rome for a much longer time If I prove this true which I undertake must I then take his turn and desire the Banishment of the Contrary-minded Bishops as dangerous Schismaticks for forsaking the Practice of the Church III. I understand not in his Platform of the Rule which denominateth Dissenters Schismaticks Pag. 353. what he meaneth by the very highest Power most necessary to be understood in these words The Laws and Orders of the Church Vniversal to which every Provincial Church must submit What the Scots mean by a General Assembly I know and what the old Emperors and Councils meant by an Vniversal Council Viz. Universal as to that one Empire But I know no Vniversal Law-givers to the whole Church on Earth but Jesus Christ neither Pope nor Council If I am mistaken in this I should be glad to be convinced for it is of great moment And is the hinge of our Controversie with Rome IV. He doth to me after all give up the whole Cause and absolve me and all that I plead from the guilt of Schism and lay it on your Lordship and such as you if I can understand him when he saith Pag. 363. It is clear that in the Church of England there is no sinful Condition of Communion required nor nothing imposed but what is according to the Order and Practice of the Catholick Church there can be no pretence for any Toleration c. And Pag. 360. There is no Question to be made but where there is an interruption in the Churches Communion there is caused a Schism and it must be charged on them that make the breach which will lye at their Doors who by making their Communion unlawful do unjustly drive away good Christians from it neither doth such a Person that is driven away at present from the external Communion cease to be a Member of that Church but is a much truer Member thereof than that Pastor that doth unjustly drive him from his Communion This fully satisfieth me and if you will read my late small Book called The Nonconformists Plea for Peace you will see what it is that I think unlawful in the Impositions And if you will read a new small Book of your old troubled Neighbour Mr. Jo. Corbet called The Kingdom of God among Men I have so great an Opinion that by it you will better understand us and become more moderate and charitable towards us that I will take your reading it for a very obliging Kindness to Your Servant Ri. Baxter December 11. 1679. Add. V. His terms of Communion are not right as I have proved VI. He speaketh against Toleration so generally without distinction as if no one that dissented but in a word were tolerable which is intolerable Doctrine in a pretended Peace-maker VII He inferreth Toleration while he denieth it in that he is against putting us to Death How then will he hinder Toleration Mulcts will not do it as you see by the Law that imposeth 40 l. a Sermon For when Men devoted to the Sacred Ministry have no Money they will Preach and Beg Imprisonment must be perpetual or uneffectual for when they come out they will Preach again And it contradicteth himself for it will kill many Students being mostly weak as it kill'd by bringing mortal Sickness on them those Learned Holy Peaceable and Excellent Men Mr. Jos. Allen of Taunton Mr. Hughes of Plimouth and some have died in Prison And he that killeth them by Imprisonment killeth them as well as he that burneth them or hangeth them And the Prisons will be so full as will render the Causers of it odious to many and make such as St. Martin was separate from the Bishops the same I say of Banishment Dr. Saywell's Principles infer as followeth I. Schismaticks are not to be Tolerated They that are for the sort of Diocesane Prelacy which we disown are Schismaticks Ergo not to be Tolerated The Major is Dr. S's The Minor is proved thus They that are against that Episcopacy which the Primitive Universal Church was for and used are Schismaticks The foresaid Diocesane Party are against that Episcopacy which the Primitive Universal Church was for and used Ergo they are Schismaticks The Major is Dr. S's The Minor is thus proved I. They that are for the deposing of the Bishops that were over every single Church that had one Altar and those that were over every City Church and instead of them setting up only one Bishop over a Diocess which hath a Thousand or many Hundred Altars and many Cities are against the Episcopacy
sapientiam quae de terra est detruserunt usque in coenum Et quod ex toto non corruerit est ex gratia Dei salvatoris nostri Haec ego loquor eo liberius quia mihi Conscius sum non ex quaestu non ambitu non ad laudem propriam meae professionis sed pro assertione veritatis utilit●●e publica haec dicere O happy England if Protestants had been as much in this against Popery and Error § 5. And here the Roman Deceivers and some peaceable Men of them have joyned to draw us to them on Pretences of Peace and Reconciliation Some honest peaceable Men have been destroyed by the rest for their Moderation The Learnedst Moderator that we have had was M. Ant. de dominis Archbishop of Spalato whose Books de Republ. Eccles. are full of both Learning and Judgment and so moderate that I cannot call him a Papist Though being enticed to Rome again by flattery he perished by their Cruelty What Leander was I am not fully acquainted Fr. de Sancta Clara aliàs Davenport was a real Papist and designed on the pretence of Reconciliation to draw us over to them And hath shewed more acquaintance with Scotus and other Schoolmen than with the Protestants in his attempt to reconcile our Articles to their Doctrine Dr. Morley Bishop of Winchester tells us That in his Conference with the Jesuit F. Darcy he would have drawn him to them by perswading him that they are not unreconcileable but can abate us many things P. 5. The Father replied that perhaps we should not find them so stiff in all Points for in things of Positive and Ecclesiastical Constitution only the Church might in order to Christian Peace alter something which she had before Established and he doubted not but she would And his Instances were the Latine Service the Sacrament under one Species and the Caelibate of Priests But as for Matters of Faith they could not alter or abate any thing instancing in the Point of the Churches Infallibility And this is their ordinary Opinion and yet they would not grant the Cup to the Bohemians and to this day the Churches Peace hath not prevailed with them for such Alterations as they say are in their Power What of this Kind they offered in the Treaty with Archbishop Laud we shall see after The Book called The Catholick Moderator goeth this way But no man hath attempted it with so much ability of Judgment and Success of late as Hugo Grotius in his Votum Pro Pace Consultatio and Notes on Cassander his Annotations on the Revelations and De Antichristo and his Writings against Rivet The Dutch dealt hardly with him as an Arminian and Judged him to perpetual Imprisonment when they had not such another Man among them from which his Wife delivered him getting him carried out in a Trunk on pretence of carrying from him his Arminian Books And being escaped into France he was intimate with the Learned Jesuits especially Petavius and made the Queen of Sweden's Embassador who shortly after turned Papist and is yet living at Rome And it is no censoriousness to suspect that his great exasperation might have influence on his judgment And because he is the Man whom our English Defenders of a foreign Jurisdiction own I will next tell you what his late judgment was in his own words I confess I have a far greater honour for those Men that were bred in Popery and are Moderators than for those being bred Protestants revolt from Reformation to a Coalition I doubt not but Gerson was a very holy Man Cassander seemeth to have been an excellent Pious learned Man And I doubt whether most of our nominal Protestants that are for a foreign Jurisdiction be near so moderate as he He oft as de Officio Pii Viri p. 788 789 c maketh the Church of Rome to be but a part of the Universal Church He maintaineth that some called Schismaticks are not indeed departed from the Church for departing from Rome as long as they depart not from Christ the Head of the Church and that only defection of Love and not diversity of Rites and Opinions cuts Men off from Christ And that as long as they are joyned to Christ the Head by sound belief of him and by the Bond of Charity and Peace they are joyned to the Church and are not to be taken for Schismaticks and Aliens from the Church though they be rejected and seem separated from their Society and Communion by another more powerful part of the Church which doth obtain the Government How much more moderate and sound is Cassander than such as Mr. Dodwell And Pag. 791. he saith the same of the Oriental Churches and the Ethiopians that are not under the Pope And he still speaketh so cautelously that it is not easie to understand how far he took the Papacy to be necessary Yet sometime he only excuseth the unwilling departers from Rome and asserteth Consult de Pont. Rom. p 931. That it is not alien from the consent of the ancient Church that Obedience to our Chief or Supream Rector the Successor of St. Peter in Governing and Feeding the Church is required to the Unity of this external Church And it is not only Primacy of Order but Obedience to one Chief Ruler that he Pleads for And in his Epistle to Lindanus and frequently he still professeth only to desire some Reformation in the Roman Church but never to depart from it nor own those that do Chap. VI. Grotius's Judgment in his own Words § 1. TO give you Grotius's Judgment to the full would be to transcribe many Books I shall choose some plain Passages Discussione Apologet. Rivet p. 255. Those that knew Grotius knew that he always wished for the restitution of Christians into one and the same Body But he sometime thought even after he was known to the most excellent Vairius that it might be begun by a Conjunction of the Protestants among themselves Afterwards he saw that this was altogether unfeasible because besides that the Genius of almost all the Calvinists is most alien from all Peace the Protestants are not joyned among themselves by any common Government of the Church which are the Causes that the Parties made cannot be gathered into one Body of Protestants yea and that more and more Parties are ready to rise out of them Wherefore Grotius now absolutely judgeth and many with him that the Protestants cannot be joyned among themselves unless at once they be joyned to them that cohere to the See of Rome without which there can be no common Government hoped for in the Church Therefore he wisheth that the Division which fell out and the Causes of that Division were taken away The Primacy of the Bishop of Rome according to the Canons is none of these c. Ib. P. 185. Grotius professeth that he will so interpret Scripture God favouring him and Pious Men being consulted that he cross not the
5. If any Soveraign may Rule England and all other Churches as a Bishop ruleth his Flock then that Soveraign Power may when they judge it deserved Excommunicate the King and all the Kingdom and silence all the Bishops and Ministers and forbid all Church Communion as Popes and their Councils have done But the consequence is false Ergo Arg. 6. If any have such power they must be such as people may have access to to decide their Causes and may hear their Accusations Defences Witnesses But so cannot the Universal Church of Bishops They confess these thousand years they met not in Council and whither else should we carry our Witnesses and where else should we expect their sentence Paul's charge was 1 Thes. 5.12 13. Know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and esteem them very highly in Love for their work sake But we cannot know all the Bishops over the Earth that never were among us An unknown Judge cannot be obeyed That is One whom we cannot know to be indeed our Judge But it 's impossible for us now to know what number of Bishops and who must be called the Universal Judge And an unknown sentence cannot be obeyed but it 's impossible for us to know the sentence of the Majority of the Bishops on Earth about any case to be judged by them these thousand years But enough is said of this already And Dr. Barrow hath utterly confounded your pleas for Foreign Jurisdiction Pastors and Churches may Reprove one another who Govern not one another And do you think we are so sottish as not to see that your Colledge and Council must have some to call them together or to gather Votes and preside and approve And that the question will be only of the Degree of the Popes power and whether the French sort of Popery be best § 2. Dr. S. addeth p. 343. So the Scripture plainly tells us elsewhere that Churches of Kingdoms and Nations have a Soveraignty over them to which they must yield Obedience Isa. 60 12. where the Prophet speaking of the Christian Church saith The Nation and Kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish yea those Nations shall be utterly wasted If Nations and Kingdoms must serve the Church then she hath Authority to Command their Obedience in things that belong to Peace and Holiness Ans. I confess Campanella de Re●no Dei doth thus make the Papacy the Fifth Monarchy and confidently brings many such Texts for their Clergies Universal power But 1. Is it the King of the Church or the People that must be obeyed The people have no Ruling Power And if it be the Soveraign the question is Who that is Protestants say It is only Christ And the Text plainly meaneth The Nation that will not serve Christ the Head of the Church for the good of his Body shall perish But the Italians say It is the Pope and Council and the French That it is the Council and Pope as President and Prime Patriarch that is here meant 2. This may be discerned by considering Who it i● that is to destroy such Nations It is Christ as the second Psalm sheweth If it were the Pope and Council you threaten all Nations as terribly as Bellarmine doth 3. And what is the perishing and wasting here meant No doubt their Souls that rebel against Christ shall perish and he will also punish Bodies and Kingdoms as such Put doth any of all this belong to the Bishops None of it 1. Excommunicating is their destroying work But the Heathen and Infidel Nations are not to be Excommunicated What have you to do to judge them that are without Will you cast them out that never were in 2. And destruction by the Sword is no Bishop's Work 4. And when is it that all Nations that obey not shall utterly perish We see that 19 parts in 30 saith Brierwood of the World are Heathens and Mahometans and yet prosper Ever since Abraham's days till now the Church is a small part of the World And it is not by any Power of the Church Governours that the Souls of Infidels perish but by themselves And their Kingdoms are unlikely to be destroyed till Christ's second coming And if it be his destroying them at his Judgment that is meant that proveth no Power in the Church against them But I confess you tell us what to fear and whence it is that the French Protestants suffer They must utterly perish that obey not a Governing Universal Soveraignty Nay not only French Subjects by their Lawful King but Protestants States and Kingdoms that thought they had no Soveraign but their own proper one and Christ But this is in Ordine ad Spiritualia Yet O you intend no Cruelty § 3. Pag 344. He tells us of the Churches Power to decide Controversies and of the Council Act. 15. Answ. A multitude of Protestant Writers have long ago answered all this 1. The word Church is ambiguous When Christ and his twelve Apostles were on Earth they were the Church as to Rule And then the Vniversal Church met in a House together celebrated the Sacrament together c. Must they do so now It was no General Council that met Act. 15. unless you will say that there dwelt a General Council at Jerusalem as long as the Apostles dwelt there None of the Bishops of the Churches planted by Paul Barnabas and others about the World are said to be there nor any at all but the Inhabitants of Jerusalem save Paul and Barnabas who were sent as Messengers and were not the Men sent to And you now say that none but Bishops have decisive Votes 2. And there are more ways of deciding Controversies than one We doubt not but every Pastor may decide them by Evidence of Scripture and Reason And many assembled may contribute their Reasons and be helpful to each other and may see more than one if they be meet Men. And Pastors thus by Teaching Evidence do that as Authorized Officers as Tutors and Schoolmasters which Private Men do but as Private Men and not as Officers so that even thei● Teaching Decision is an act of Authority as well as of Skill And so far as Humane authority must go the concurrent Judgment of a multitude of Divines as of Physitians Lawyers c. Cateris paribus deserveth more reverence than a singular opinion But for all that 1. An Assembly of Lay Men have no Authority but from their Evidence and Parts 2. An Assembly of Bishops have no deciding Authority but by an office by which they are entrusted as fallible Men to teach others what they know themselves by the same Evidence which convinced them and to guide their particular Congregations in mutable Circumstances 3. But an Assembly of Apostles had Power to say It seemeth good to the H●ly Ghost Obj. 1. There were the Brethren also 2. Single Apostles had the Holy Ghost yet they did it in an Assembly Answ. 1. The Inspiration
take them to mean seven Ages and States of the Catholick Church and two of them to mean the blessed Thousand years State For whether by the Angel be meant the Bishop alone or the Bishop with his Elders or the Presbyters as a College it is plain one Governing Power over each Church whether Monarch or Aristocracy is there mentioned by the word Angel And if the Universal Church have such in all Ages and that by Christ's Institution should we be against it Even that which the Thousand years shall have § III. It is a very ordinary Doctrine with us that the Jewish Church was the Universal then in Infancy or at least a Type of it And if so that Church had one summa Potest●s both in Magistracy and Ministry sacredly Civil and Ecclesiastical And Christ plainly offered to gather them under him and continue their Polity tho' not their Laws and set up twelve and seventy over them accordingly You I say Though one Aaron was their Head yet Christ is now the only High Priest it followeth not that the Universal Church must have one Humane Priest or King I answer By your way it will follow that it must have one Vniting Specifying Humane Soveraignty Civil and Ecclesiastical If Aaron be down so is not the Sanedrim Civil or Priestly Christ plainly offered to continue them in one Visible Body by his choice of twelve and seventy And it is an Aristocratical Universal Jurisdiction that is as bad as the Monarchical 2. Christ was not a Priest according to the Order of Aaron but of Melchizedeck 3. Christ is Universal King as well as Priest and hath National Kings under him supreme Therefore his being King or Priest in Israel would not exclude the necessity of a supreme King or Priest under him And if Israel was the Catholick Church in Type or Infancy it would follow that it also must have one such Head § IV. Too few Protestants have sufficiently answered the Papists Argument fetcht from the instance of the Apostles viz. The College of Apostles Peter called Primus were one Aristocratical Governing Power over the Universal Church Ergo such a Polity was instituted by Christ. And Christ never revoked this institution Government as well as Word and Sacraments is an ordinary work to be continued And not as Miracles Writing Scripture Witnessing what they saw and heard the extraordinary part of the Apostles VVork Ergo in this they have Successors This is the plausiblest of all Arguments for an Universal Jurisdiction I have shewed you how it prevailed with Bishop Guning and other New Church-men I am not willing to say The new Church How it is to be answered I have before shewed and more fully in my Treatise of National Churches § V. Have not the old and many later Nonconformists advantaged Popery by decrying all Episcopacy or Imparity of Ministers VVhen it is so plain that Christ did set Twelve above Seventy and kept up the number by Matthias and gave power to Apostles and they to other to be exercised over other Churches and Pastors And when it is apparent that all the Churches for many hundred years had Episcopal Government though not such as Popery and Tyranny hath since brought in Those called Hereticks and Schismaticks were for it The Novatians and Donatists over zealous for it Nestorians Eutychians Monothelites Macedonians Acacians and all the Sects in the time of Heathen Persecution I find not that Aerius alone excepted did ever call it unlawful or saw that it was better for the Churches to be with them But that the Bishops and Presbyters Officers were equal And will it not greatly confirm the Papists to find such Protestants reject the judgment and practice of all the ancient Churches and differ from the rest of the Christian VVorld § VI. But it advantaged them much more than our opinion when the Scots Covenant was imposed as the necessary terms of Ministry and Magistracy Thereby weakening the Protestants by a doleful Division that by opinions were divided too much before VVhen so great a part of the Kingdom Clergy Gentry and Vulgar were for the renounced Prelacy to shut all these and all of their mind that ever should come after from Ministry and Magistracy such men as Vsher Beadle Downame Davenant Brownrig Ward Prideaux Field c. Oh how many and how great was this to unite the Protestants and to strengthen them against the United Papists § VII And alas how greatly have those Zealous Protestants confirmed the Papists and dishonoured the Church and Christ their King that maintain that the Church became Antichristian in Anno 300 or 400 or at least 606 if not as soon as Christ by Constantine took possession of the Imperial Visible Government I will not aggravate this as it deserveth But I wonder not if it make thousands of Papists § VIII And Protestants too many have greatly hardened Papists by too bold and forced Expositions of the Apocalyps and laying too much of the stress of their Cause on it as that Pagan Rome is not the Babylon there meant nor that Rome as the Mother or Nurse of Pagan Idolatry the Whore nor the Pagan Empire the Beast with seven Heads and ten Horns nor the Pontifical Oracular Foretelling and Literate Tribe the Beast with two Horns nor the Jew and Gentile Miracle-working persecuted Christians radically Epitomized in Peter and Paul the two Witnesses and that Antichrist is spoken of in the Revelations and that Christ intended it as a Prophecy of all the great Affairs and Changes of the Church to the end of the World I say laying the stress of our Cause on these is next to giving it away When a Papist shall call for the proof of this and ask whether John and the seven Churches understood it and what one man on Earth so expounded it of a Thousand years or a Thousand four hundred after Christ and why Mr. Mede saith That the Waldenses were the first of all Mortals that took the Pope to be Antichrist And whether the Book was written for none but a few men that agree not of the sence of it so near the End of the World It will puzzle the Hearers before all these and many such Questions are well Answered When we have so much plain Evidence against Popery in the whole Bible to lay it mainly on these Expositions of the Revelation where I find not three men in thirty that differ not in great Material Points is almost to betray it when such a man as John Fox P. 111. Vol. 1. Sweareth that he had a Revelation contrary to much of this which he repeateth in his Comment on Revelations Specially those that venture to foretel thence the Year of Antichrist's fall and other particulars which time confuteth do expose us to the Scorn of Confirmed Papists § IX Protestants have too often advantaged Popery by ill answering the Question Where was your Church before Luther Pleading the Catholick Churches invisibility When non apparere and non esse
French Papists than the Italians For the Italian Party are at so visible a distance that they can design no way for their advantage but a Toleration unless they could get the Government And their Toleration would a while but make the Nation better know them and more dislike them But the French Party cry down Toleration and trust wholly to a Coalition and to force They hope to do their work before it s known what they are doing They will cry down Popery meaning only the Pope's absolute Power above Councils It is but abating the Latine Service Transubstantiation Priests Marriage granting the Cup to the Laity and two or three more such things and crying up nothing but the Name of the Church of England though changed by Subjection to a Forreign Jurisdiction and then crying up Obedience and Conformity to it and crying down Schism as an intolerable thing and the Papists shall seem to turn to us and not we to them and then no Dissenter shall be suffered Mr. Thorndikes Book of forbearance of Penalties tells us of no other hope of sufferance but on supposition that we all agree in subjection to the thing called The Vniversal Political Church And a Learned Tribe by Interest and Opinion engaged in the Cause may be ready by confident triumphant Writings and Disputes to make good all this and scorn and tread down Gainsayers as Schismaticks And the Coalition will take in the parts and labours of those that now are called Papists who are trained up in Militant Arts. XX. But as long as God and the King are against them we need not much fear the Success of their Endeavours Such a Care hath the King had to secure the Land against all suspicion of Popery in himself that a severe penalty is to be inflicted on any that shall so defame him Yea he hath passed Acts for the Clergy Corporations Vestries the Militia Nonconformists in which they are all obliged by Promise or Oath never to Endeavour any Alteration of the Government of Church and State And again I say what sober Man can be so sottish as to think that to subject the King Clergy and whole Kingdom to the Forreign Jurisdiction of a pretended Universal Sovereignty Monarchical Aristocratical or Mixt is no alteration of the Government of the Church yea of the Church-specifying Form XXI This is a great secondary reason why we cannot be for such a change because we cannot Consent that Church Vestries Corporations Militia c. should be all perfidious or perjured Yea all the Land that have taken the Oath of Supremacy against all Forreign Jurisdiction We accuse not others but excuse our selves Yea what Crime is it against King and Kingdom to make them the Subjects of a Forreign Power I leave to other men to enquire XXII God seemeth purposely to have confounded them in their Design by leaving them no Materials for their Fabrick I can imagine no pretences of possibility but in some of these following ways 1. That it is the Colledge of Bishops diffused over the Earth that must exercise Legislation and Judgment by Consent or by Majority of Votes And I shall never fear the prevalency of this Opinion till an Epidemical Madness turneth us into a Bedlam 2. That it must be a true General Council that must Govern us And this is no more to be expected than that all the World fall under one Monarch or that all Christians save one Kingdom Apostatize which God prevent 3. That Patriarchs with such Metropolitans as they will call be taken for the Governing Representers of all the Bishops and Churches on Earth But there is no possibility left us of this way For it must be either by the five old Patriarchs or by new ones 1. If the old ones Gods Judgments have made that way unpracticable 1. The Cities of Antioch and Alexandria are destroyed where two of the Patriarchs should be Bishops 2. The Turk is Lord of four of the old Patriarchal Seats and none can be chosen rule or come to Councils without his Consent And he can get almost whom he will Chosen and so the Turk should be our Chief Church Governour And the Places are bought with Money and the Possessors answerable Ludolphus tells us that the Patriarch of Alexandria is some unlearned ignorant Person that scarce knoweth Letters and that Men are made Clergy-men there against their wills all Men shunning the Office because of the Sufferings from the Turk which they must undergo They have no just Qualification Election or Power There are three nominal Patriarchs of Antioch chosen by three several Parties besides the Popes They are utterly uncertain which of them is right or rather certain that none of them are or can be such All the four Nominal Patriarchs are against the Romans and several against each other And many of the chief Christian Churches own none of them as their Governours and none own them all as such And must our Kings and Kingdoms be Subjects of ignorant Subjects of the Turk because once Men were advanced to high Titles over Towns now destroyed in one Christian Empire now dissolved or turned Mahometans 4. There is therefore but one way left which is for the Pope and his Privy Council of Cardinals to be the standing Governour by Judgment and Execution and to call when Princes force him to it such European Councils as he can and as he doth to make four Nominal Patriarchs of Const. Alex. Antioch and Jerusalem as Men make Kings Queens and Bishops on a Chess-board and to call these General Councils as he did that at Trent and to keep the people ignorant enough to believe it As for the making of a sort of new Patriarchs there must go so much to agree who they shall be among all Christian Princes and Nations and then to prove that they are the true Representers of all others and that the Representers or represented have any Universal Legislative Power that I am in no Expectations of any such Sovereignty I have proved against Mr. Hooker that the Body of the people as such are not the Givers of the Power of their Govern ours nd therefore cannot give power to an Universal Supream XXIII When I had seen all Mr. Thorndikes Books and Dr. Heylins and some other such and A. Bishop Bramhall's Book against me with a long and vehement reproving Preface I purposed to have again detected the design and have answered that Book But my Bookseller Nevill Simons told me that Mr. Roger Lestrange then Overseer of the Press came to him and vehemently protested that he would ruine him if he printed my Answer to it And when it might not be Printed I forbore to Write it Since then among others Mr. Dodwell hath appeared with most Voluminous confidence whom I have answered who I doubt not will want neither Ink Paper Words or Face for a reply My Conference with Bishop Guning I thought it against the Rules of Converse to publish But his Chaplain Dr. Saywell
here is no promise to subject himself to a Foreign Jurisdiction but to endeavour Peace and Concord which may better be by drawing the Papists to us than by coming to them The truest Adversaries to Popery are the greatest Lovers of true Concord and Peace § 4. All the lenity that was shewed them after here and the agency of Panzani Con. c. I pass by lest my recital be misunderstood The Reader may see enough if not too much in Rushworth and in Prin's Introduction c. I only add that this King who was so Zealous for Concord and that overcame so many Temptations to Popery distant and in his Bosom and was so firm as not to fear to grant them the audience promised yet was so much against all cruelty to them that he suffered very much for his Lenity and Clemency to them both from themselves and from the Protestants But the most odious injury that ever they did him was by pretending his Commission for that most inhumane War and Massacre in Ireland when in time of peace they suddenly Murdered two hundred thousand and told Men that they had the Kings Commission to rise as for him that was wronged by his Parliament the very fame of this horrid Murder and the words of the many Fugitives that escaped in Beggery into England assisted by the Charity of the Dutchess of Ormond and others and the English Papists going in to the King was the main cause that filled the Parliaments Armies I well remember it cast people into such a fear that England should be used like Ireland that all over the Countreys the people oft sate up and durst not go to Bed for fear lest the Papists should rise and Murder them And this is all that the Papists have yet got by their Bloody Cruelty to necessitate people in fear to take them for their Mortal Foes Bishop Morley saith in his Letter to the Dutchess of York p. 6 7. That by raising and spreading malicious and scandalous reports against the King that he was a Papist and intended to bring in Popery on that account only they raised many thousands against him without whose assistance they could never have overpowered him and oppressed him as they did And the success they had thereby against the Father encouraged them to make use of the same Engine against his Son by giving it out that the King by living so long abroad in Popish Countreys was so corrupted in his Religion that if he were suffered to return he would bring in Popery along with him So that with this groundless fear I found many considerable and very much interested Persons possest when I was sent into England about two Months before the Kings return most of which time I spent in undeceiving all I met with especially the Heads and Leaders of the Presbyterian and Independant Parties who seemed to be most afraid of such a Change by assuring them that those misreports they had heard of the King and his Brothers were nothing else but the malicious Inventions of those that were in fact or consent the Murderers of his Father For to my certain knowledge said I who was almost always an Eye-witness of their actions the King and both his Brothers c. And he was confident that this was the case of the Dutchess of York and that the Papists falsly gave it out that she was theirs to draw people to them And what then could have been more injurious to King Charles the First than this boast and report of the Irish Murderers By which they would make him to have so dreadfully begun for the rebellion was Octob. 23. 1641. and Edge-hill Fight the same day 1642. And hereby they have given the Scots occasion to publish to posterity these Scandalous words in their Books against the Cromwellians called Truth its Manifest printed 1645. pag. 17 19. The King seeing he was stopped by the Scots first in their own Countrey next in England to carry on his great design takes the Irish Papishs by the hand rather than be alway disappointed and they willingly undertake to levy Arms for his Service that is for the Romish Cause the Kings design being subservient to the Roman Cause though he abused thinks otherwise and believes that Rome serveth to his purpose But to begin the work they must make sure of all the Protestants if they cannot otherwise by Murdering and Massacring them p. 19. The next recourse was to the Irish Papists his good Friends to whom from Scotland a Commission is dispatched under the Great Seal which Seal was at that instant time in the Kings own Custody of that Kingdom to hasten according to former agreement the raising of the Irish in Arms who no sooner receive this new Order but they break out c. And I am not willing to believe this A report so dishonourable to the King his Life his Arms his Death and to all that fought for him that the Fifth Commandment forbids us to believe it though the Scots should say They saw the Sealed Commissions Yea though I had seen them my self seeing it is possible for the Irish to Counterfeit the Scots Broad Seal But by this it appeareth what wrong the King had by the Irish boasting of his Commission and the Papists pretending to more countenance than he gave them § 4. And as the said R. Bishop of Winchester was confident they slandered the Dutchess of York in her Life so he conjectureth that the Jesuit Maimbrough hath done since her death and that some of them devised the Confession which he printeth as hers which he professeth to be false as to the accusation of himself The words of Maimbrough translated are these A Declaration of the Dutchess of York translated out of Maimbourg's Histoire du Calvinisme A Person Educated in the Church of England and as much instructed in her Doctrine according to the Opinion of the most able Divines of her Party as her Condition and Capacity could admit ought to expect to be the Object of publick censure when she quits her Religion to imbrace that of the Church of Rome And as I freely confess that I have been one of her greatest Enemies if not in effect at least in will I have thought it reasonable that for the satisfaction of my Friends I should declare the Motives and Reasons of my Conversion and of the so suddain and unexpected change of my Religion yet without engaging my self in the Questions and Objections which might be made on this Occasion I Protest in the presence of Almighty God that since my return into England no Person whatsoever hath directly or indirectly perswaded me to imbrace the Catholick Religion It is a favour which I owe to the alone Mercy of God I dare not even think that the Prayers which I have made him every day since my return from France and Flanders to beg of him to discover to me the Truth have obtained for me It is very true that having seen the
Rule delivered by himself and by the Council of Trent c. P. 239. The Augustane Confession commodiously explained hath scarce any thing which may not be reconciled with those Opinions which are received with the Catholicks by Authority of Antiquity and of Synods as may be known out of Cassander and Hoffmeister And there are among the Jesuits also that think not otherwise P. 71. The Churches that join with Rome have not only the Scriptures but the Opinions explained in the Councils and the Popes decree against Pelagius c. They have also received the egregious Constitutions of Councils and Fathers in which there is abundantly enough for the Correction of Vices But all use them not as they ought And this is it that all the Lovers of Piety and Peace would have corrected as Borromaeus did Page 18. Speaking of false Doctrine These are the things which thanks be to God the Catholicks do not thus believe though many that call themselves Catholicks so live as if they did believe them But Protestants so live by force of their Opinions and Catholicks by the decay of Discipline Page 95. What was long ago the judgment of the Church of Rome the Mistress of others we may best know by the Epistles of the Roman Bishops to the Africans and French to which Grotius will subscribe with a willing mind Page 7. They accuse the Bull of Pius Quintus that it hath Articles besides those of the Creed but the Synod of Dort hath more But these in the Bull are New as Dr. Rivet will have it But very many Learned Men think otherwise that they are not new if they be rightly understood and that this appeareth by the places both of Holy Scripture and of such as have ever been of great Authority in the Church which are cited in the Margin of the Canons of Trent Page 35. And this is it which the Synod of Trent saith That in that Sacrament Jesus Christ true God and truely Man is really and substantially contained under the form of those sensible things Yet not according to the Natural manner of existing but Sacramentally and by that way of existing which though we cannot express in words yet may we by Cogitation illustrated by Faith be certain that to God it is possible The Councils expressions are that There is made a change of the whole substance of the Bread into the Body and of the whole substance of Wine into the Blood Which Conversion the Catholick calleth Transubstantiation Page 79. When the Synod of Trent saith That the Sacrament is to be adored with Divine Worship it intends no more but that the Son of God himself is to be adored Page 14. Grotius distinguisheth between the Opinions of School men which oblige no Man for saith Melchior Canus our Church alloweth us great liberty and therefore could give no just cause of departing as the Protestants did and between those things that are defined by Councils Even by that of Trent The Acts of which if any Man read with a mind propense to peace he will find that they may be explained fitly and agreeably to the places of Holy Scripture and of the ancient Doctors that are put in the Margin And if besides this by the care of Bishops and Kings those things be taken away which contradict that holy Doctrine and were brought in by evil Manners and not by Authority of Councils or old Tradition then Grotius and many more with him will have that with which they may be content Val. pro pace That which he blameth is 1. The School-mens liberty of disputing and Opinions not agreeable to Councils 2. And the Pride Covetousness and ill Lives of the Prelates and others which all sober Jesuits and Papists blame Page 16. That the labours of Grotius for the peace of the Church were not displeasing to many equal Men many know at Paris and many in all France many in Poland and Germany and not a few in England that are placid and Lovers of peace For as for the now-raging Brownists and others like them with whom Dr. Rivet better agreeth than with the Bishops of England who can desire to please them that is not touched with their Venom And whereas you may find Grotius and his Adherents yet disclaiming Popery and saying They are no Papists he tells you his meaning Ib. p. 15. In that Epistle Grotius by Papists meant those that without any difference do approve of all the sayings and doings of the Pope for Honour and Lucres sake as is usual By this description I suppose that many Popes even of late were no Papists such as condemned the Acts and Persons of their Predecessors and such as censured Liberius and Honorius nor Adrian the sixth that saith a Pope may be a Heretick nor Baronius Binnius Genebrard that exclaim against many of them Nor Bellarmine nor Queen Mary nor More or Fisher nor Bonner nor Gardiner nor any that ever I met with But others more moderately call only those Papists that are for the Popes Power above Councils And so the French are none nor the Councils of Constance and Basil were none Grotius addeth p. 45. that By Papists he doth not mean them that saving the Rights of Kings and Bishops do give to the Pope or Bishop of Rome that Primacy which ancient Customs and Canons and the Edicts of ancient Emperors and Kings assign them which Primacy is not so much the Bishops as the Roman Churches preferred before all other by common consent So Liberius the Bishop being so lapsed that he was dead to the Church the Church of Rome retained its right and defended the Cause of the Universal Church Ans. If it be a Primacy of Name and Honour only without any Governing Power it 's nothing to our case But seeing it 's a Governing Primacy that he means 1. It 's against the right of Kings and Kingdoms that Foreigners claim Jurisdiction over them 2. Emperors never gave Popes or Councils power over other Princes Dominions nor could give any such 3. Nor did ancient Councils nor could do Who gave it them And who knows to what Councils he will limit this power Councils these thousand years have been for much of Popery 4. If Common Consent give this power it binds not the Dissenters The Judgment of others concerning Grotius 1. Vincentius wrote a Book called Grotius Papizans 2. Claud. Saravius an Eminent Parliament-man in Paris in his Epistles p. 52 53. ad Gron. saith Heri invisi Legatum De ejus libro libello postremis interrogatus respondet plane Mileterio consona Romanam fidem esse veram sinceram solosque clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum Adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam Quid dicam Merito quod falso olim Paulo Festus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Sed haec tibi soli Infensissimus est Riveto Est sanè in praecipiti in quo diu stare non licet Deploro veris lacrymis tantam jacturam Deumque ex
animo supplex veneror ut illi spiritum suum mentemque meliorem det And in another Epistle to Salmasius p. 196. he saith being ask'd his Judgment of his last Books Tantum abest ut omnia probem ut vix aliquid in co reperiocui sine conditione calculum apponam meum Verissimè dixit ille qui dixit Grotium papizare Vix tamen in isto scripto aliquid legi quod mirarer quodve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occurreret Nunquid enim omnes istiusmodi authoris lucubrationes erga Papistarum errores perpetuam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erga Jesuitas amorem erga nos plusquam vatinianum odium produnt clamant In voto quod ejus nomen praeferebat an veritus est haec 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profiteri And how far he was familiar with Grotius he ●ells us p. 248. Ad Vincent Fabrit Cum eo nempe Communicaveram vel solebam mea fere omnia c. And what Salmasius thought of him these words of Saravius ad Salmas intimate Ex quo à vera orbita in religionis negotio deflexit captasti occasionem toto biennio antequam sato fungeretur eum illudendi certe irritandi I have formerly said that worthy Mr. Ereskin yet living since dead told me that Petavius told him that Grotius was resolved to have declared himself for the Church of Rome and joyned with them if he had returned safe from the Journey he died in Henr. Valesius in his Funeral Oration on Petavius saith p. 684. Bates●i Collect. Quid non praestitit ut clarissimum Virum Hugonem Grotium ad Catholica● Communionem adduceret Erat ille quidem minimè à nobis alienus poene noster quippe qui doctrinan Tridentim Concilii in omnibus sese amplecti palam profiteretur Id unum supererat ut Ecclesiae Sacrari●m ingressus Communionem nostram Sociaretur Quod ille nescio quas ob causas dum ad Catholicae fidei umtatem plurimos secum sperat adducere Consultò differebat But I make no other mens but his own words the Index of his Faith Chap. VII Of the several sorts of Conciliators or Peace-makers about our Controversies with the Papists § 1. IF any shall think that I who have spent so much time and labour for the Churches peace am now against it or would raise dishonourable suspicions on any just endeavours to that end they will utterly mistake me There are divers sorts of Endeavours for peace with the Papists by real Protestants § 2. I. The old Conformists that prevailed against the Dissenters in Queen Elizabeth's days were for going no further from the Papists than they needs must lest they gave them occasion of accusation II. Since then many Men have taken notice that many of our Doctrinal Controversies consist more in ambiguous words and misunderstanding of each other than most on either side imagine And they have endeavoured the lessening of such Controversies by better Explications and stating of the Case In this kind Spalatensis and Bishop W. Forbes have done very Learnedly but in some things yielded a great deal too far Camero Amiraldus Capellus Testardus the Theses Salmurienses and Sed●nenses have done much But no Man so much as Lude Le Blank in his Theses which he sent me his desire here to publish To these I adjoin my self as among many other Writings in my Catholick Theology and Methodus Theologiae I have openly and largely shewed the World And no Censures have deterred me from this honest and necessary way of pacification III. But there are others that would on pretence of Peace take in many of their Errors in Doctrine Government and Worship But yet are for no Foreign Jurisdiction IV. But those that I now write against go further and some under the Name of a Prince Patriarch and the Principium Vnitatis Catholicae would come under the Pope some by pretence of the power of General Councils or an Universal Colledge of all Bishops and some by these and Patriarchs conjunct would bring us under a Foreign Jurisdiction and contrive an Union on some French terms And would to this end let in abundance of corruptions in Discipline and Worship on pretence of Obedience to the Canons of Councils Yea some condemn those as Schismaticks yea as in a state of Damnation who are not in these matters of their mind It is these that I am against § 3. While I oppose these I still own my foresaid reconciling Books and no reproach of those that run into a contrary extream shall ever drive me from the true terms of Peace nor to desire any cruelty against them or any of their Sufferings but what necessary defence of Soul and Body require And though my Exposition of the Revelation have offended many upon far closer study of it since I am not less but more perswaded that Pagan Rome was Babylon and that John Fox Martyrol Vol. I. p. III. who took his Oath of a Divine Revelation to him which brought him to take the Pagan Empire for the Beast with Seven Heads and Ten Horns and to expound the Times and Thousand years accordingly is much to be regarded But if I be uncertain of such points I will rather suspend my Judgment than in uncertainty venture on any thing that is against Christian Love and Peace I hold Communion with the Romans in Christianity though not in Popery I take all true Christians among them for Part of the Catholick Church of Christ though I take their pretended Catholick Church as Headed by the Pope for no Church of Christ at all nor as Headed by any Usurping Humane Head whatsoever Chap. VIII The Doctrine of Archbishop Bromhall in defence of Grotius in his Book called His Vindication of himself and the Episcopal Clergy from the Presbyterian Charge of Popery as managed by Mr. Baxter in his Treatise of the Grotian Religion I fiercely Prefaced by a Dignitary of the Church Parker § 1. I mean to give you his own words and pass by his mistakes against my self Only saying That it was not fairly done to affirm that I numbered him with the Papists or those that designed to bring in Popery when I had no such words yea and praising him excepted him from that number only dissenting from his too near approach But whether he except himself his words will best shew § 2. Page 20 21. he saith I will endeavour to give some light what was the Religion of Grotius He was in affection a Friend and in desire a true Son of the Church of England And on his Death bed recomended that Church as it was Legally Established to his Wife and such other of his Family as were then about him obliging them by his Authority to adhere firmly to it so far as they had opportunity Page 81. I know no Member of the Greek Church that give them the Popes either more or less than I do Page 82. To wave their last four hundred years
determinations is implicitely to renounce all the necessary Causes of this great Schism And to rest satisfied with their old Patriarchal Power and Dignity and Primacy of Order which is another part of my Proposition is to quit the Modern Papacy both Name and Thing Page 84. In the first place if the Bishop of Rome were reduced from his Universality of Sovereign Jurisdiction Jure Divino to his Principium Vnitatis and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers which was the sence of the Councils of Constance and Basil and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we 2. If the Creed or necessary Points of Faith were reduced to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Councils according to the Decree of the third General Council admitting no additional Articles but only necessary Explications and those to be made by the Authority of a General Council or one so General as can be Convocated And lastly Supposing that some things from whence offence hath been either given or taken I say in case these three things were accorded whether Christians might not live in an Holy Communion and come in the same publick Worship of God free from all Schismatical Separation of themselves one from another c. We have no Controversie with the Church of Rome about a Primacy of Order but a Supremacy of Power I shall declare my sence in four Conclusions 1. That St. Peter had a fixed Chair at Antioch and after at Rome is a truth which no Man who giveth any credit to the Ancient Fathers and Councils can either deny or well doubt of 2. That St. Peter had a Primacy of Order among the Apostles is the unanimous voice c. 3. Some Fathers and School-men who were no Sworn Vassals to the Roman Bishops affirm that this Primacy of Order is affixed to the Chair of St. Peters Successors for ever c. Page 107. They who made the Bishop of Rome a Patriarch were the Primitive Fathers not excluding the Apostles and Christian Emperors and Oecumenical Councils What Laws they made in this case we are bound to obey for Conscience sake till they be repealed lawfully by virtue of the Law of Christ. Page 104. To my Objection that all Protestants must then pass for Schismaticks that take not the Pope for Principium Vnitatis and Patriarch c. he answereth still weaker and weaker Must a Man quit his just right because some dislike it Their dislike is scandal taken but the quitting of that which is right for their satisfaction should be the scandal given Whether is the worse 1. How are they forced to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks If they be forced any way it is by their own wilful Humours or erroneous Conscience Others force them not 2. I would have him consider which is worse and the more dangerous condition for Christians to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks or to fall into Schism it self Whosoever shall oppose the just Power of a Lawful Patriarch lawfully proceeding is a material Schismatick Reader I forbear confuting these things by the way being now but on the Historical relation of their Judgments You see how great necessity to avoid Schism they place in our subjection to a Forreign Jurisdiction The Confutation you shall have of all together Chap. IX The Judgment of Archbishop Laud as delivered by Dr. Heylin and by himself § 1. IN the Life of Archbishop Laud Pag. 414 415 416 412. Touching the Design of working a Reconciliation betwixt us and Rome I find it charged on him by another Writer Fuller Ch. Hist. lib. 11. p. 217. who holds it as unlawful to be undertaken as it was impossible to be effected Answ. If it be a Crime it 's Novum Crimen of a New stamp never coined before As to the Impossibility many Men of Eminence for Parts and Piety have thought otherwise Spalatensis and Sancta Clara are named as Reconcilers And if without prejudice to the Truth the Controversies might have been composed it is most probable that other Protestant Churches would have sued by their Agents to be included in the Peace If not the Church of England had lost nothing by it as being hated by the Calvinists and not loved by the Lutherans Admitting then that such a Reconciliation was endeavoured betwixt the Agents of both Churches Let us next see what our great Statesmen have discoursed upon that particular on what terms the Agreement was to have been made and how far they proceeded in it And first the Book entituled The Pope's Nuntio affirmed to have been written by the Venetian Embassador at his being in England doth discourse thus As to a Reconciliation saith he between the Churches of England and Rome there were made some general Propositions and Overtures by the Archbishop's Agents they assuring that his Grace was very much disposed thereto and that if it was not accomplished in his Life-time it would prove a work of more difficulty after his Death that in very truth for the last three Years the Archbishop had introduced some Innovations approaching nearer the Rites and Forms of Rome That the Bishop of Chichester a great Confident of his Grace the Lord Treasurer and Eight other Bishops of his Grace's Party did most passionately desire a Reconciliation with the Church of Rome That they did day by day recede from their ancient Tenets to accommodate with the Church of Rome That therefore the Pope on his part ought to make some Steps to meet them and the Court of Rome remit something of its rigour in Doctrine or otherwise no accord would be The Composition on both Sides in so good a forwardness before Pauzani left the Kingdom that the Archbishop and the Bishop of Chichester had often said that there were but two sorts of People like to hinder the Reconciliation the Puritans among the Protestants and the Jesuits among the Catholicks Let us see the Judgment and Relation of another Author in a Gloss or Comment on the former entituled The English Pope Printed at London the same Year 1643. And he will tell us that after Con had undertook the managing of Affairs the Matter began to grow towards some Agreement The King required saith he such a Dispensation from the Pope as his Catholick Subjects might resort to the Protestant Church and take the Oaths of Supremacy and Fidelity and that the Pope's Jurisdiction should be declared to be but of Human Right And so far had the Pope consented that whatsoever did concern the King should have been really performed so far as other Catholick Princes do usually enjoy and expect as their due and so far as the Bishops were to be Independent both from King and Pope There was no fear of breach on the Pope's part So that upon the Point the Pope was to content himself with us in England with a Priority instead of a Superiority over other Bishops and with a Primacy instead of a
true as it is not which you say How shall all Christians know it to be true When such as I with all our searching cannot know it yea are past doubt that it is false It 's like you 'll say It is our obstinacy And so all shall be Schismaticks and condemned with you whom you are pleased to call obstinate for escaping that Ignorance which would better serve your Ends. § 7. Dr. S. But Mr. B. objecteth That the Nestorians Jacobites Abassines c. renounce some of the six Councils yes three of the six They had a personal Veneration for the Persons of Nestorius and Dioscorus and did believe them when they said that the Councils were mistaken in Matter of Fact and Condemned them for Opinions which they did not own and thereupon did reject those Councils But they did not then nor do not at this day reject the Catholick Faith and the Rules of Christian Unity which are contained in the six General Councils So that in effect they own them For the principal thing required is to profess the true Faith and hold the Vnity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness which those Churches do in that they own the Nicene and C. P. Councils and deny not the Doctrine of the other four Answ. Do you think that none of your Readers will see how much you here overthrow or give up your Cause 1. If holding the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace and Righteousness will serve while they renounce the Councils as erroneous and tyrannical and holding the same Faith and Doctrine will serve what have you been Pleading for we are for all this as well as you 2. And if the Council may erre in Matter of Fact which may be known by common sence and reason how much more may they erre in matter of right and supernatural Revelation as the Articles of the Church of England say they have done 3. You confess here that Men may reject three or four of your six Councils and yet be no Schismaticks but hold Faith Unity and Peace And are the other two more necessary than all the rest You say They hold the two first Answ. They hold not the Infallibility of Councils nor that they may not be rejected when they erre nor that we may not be discerning Judges when they erre For all this is renounced in their renouncing all save two or three 4. You say They reject not the Rules of Christian Vnity Answ. Therefore they judged not the Decrees of Councils to be that necessary Rule Else the Decrees of those renounced by them would be as necessary as the rest 5. It 's apparent by this that they held the same with those Councils not because of the Authority of those Councils but on other Grounds For it is not possible that they who renounced the Councils should believe the Christian Faith on their Authority They believed it as a Divine Revelation fide Divina and so do we 6. And dare you say that a Man that believeth the same things because they are revealed by God in his Word shall be damned unless he believe them fide humana because a General Council decreed them 7. Did your other Councils add any Decrees to the first If not what need of believing any thing as theirs If yea then receiving the Decrees of the two first is not a receiving the Decrees of the later 8. And on whose Authority did Christians believe the first 300 years before there was any General Council § 8. Dr. S. P. 346. Obj. Did the Catholick Church die or cease after the sixth General Council Answ. The Essence of the Catholick Church doth not consist in the being of a Council Their meeting is but an external means for better declaring the Catholick Faith and holding mutual Correspondence between the several Churches Ans. 1. Still you are constrained to destroy your own Cause You confess then that Councils are no constitutive Governing part of the Church as a Governed Society And if so it hath some other Humane constitutive Regent part or none If none we are so far agreed This is it that we contend for If any other you must come to your Lords College of the diffused Pastors who never made Law never heard a Cause or judged out of Council to this day nor possibly can do 2. What is this that you call an external means of Correspondence Is it a necessary Supream Legislative and Judicial Power or not If it be it must be a constitutive Essential part of the Church as Political For every Politick Society is informed by such And you argued before that Nations must be under such as well as Dioceses under Diocesans If not habetur quaesitum 3. And because your former words assert an Vniversal Soveraignty I wonder how any of common reason can think this necessary to the whole Christian World during the few Years that those two or six first Councils sate and never before nor after Are dead Men our Governors VVill a Power of Governing never exercised serve for a Thousand Years last and 300 before and not for the other 300 Or hath the Church had one Form of Government for 200 or 300 Years and another for all the other 1300 And when you tell us that Kingdoms must be judged as well as single Persons did those first Councils judge all the sinning Kingdoms since If you own no Councils since the first Six all Kingdoms that have sinned these 1000 Years had no such Judges And what Councils or other Church Power save the Popes judged the many Southern and Eastern Countries that revolted Or the Western Nations in their various Changes and Crimes Must we have such an Uuniversal Judge now who never judged any these 1000 Years 4. Your Lord saith at last that they are Mutable Laws which Councils make If so why must we needs obey the six Councils that were 1000 Years ago under another Prince May not 1000 Years time and another King's Government make a Change in the Matter and Reason of the Law If you say it stands till another General Council change it I answer 1. VVhat Council abrogated the 20th Nicene Canon against Kneeling on the Lord's Day in adoration and many such other 2. Then if ever there was a General Council it's Decrees are immutable and so you contradict your selves For it 's certain there never will be a General Council to abrogate what is done till all the VVorld be under one Christian Monarch 5. The Laws of England bind us not now as the Laws of the Kings and Parliaments that are dead that is not by Virtue of their Authority though made by them But as the Laws of the present Legislative Powers who own them and rule by them and can abrogate them when they will And when the Canon-makers are dead 1000 Years ago where now is the Ruling Power whose Laws those are There is no General Council to own them nor ever will be A thousand Years sure
Regent Power in such Councils but what the Magistrate giveth them Monstra mihi inquit Hieron quisnam Imperatorum celebrari id Concilium jusserit saith Grotius ib. P. 168. Non ideo convocari Synodum quod in ea pars sit Imperii satis jam demonstratum arbitror Finis ergo ut Episcopus Wintoniensis recte notat hic est ut ad veritatis Pietatis amplificationem Consilium Principi praebeant hoc est Praeeant ipsi judicio directivo ut per Synodum stabili●i testataque fieri possit Consensio Ecclesiae Omnium autem horum finium nullus est necessarius simpliciter Neque Synodus simpliciter ad illos fines necessaria This he goeth on to prove and more than so that Synods are oft hurtful as well as unnecessary Cum potius saith August rarissimae inveniantur haereses propter quas damnandas necessitas talis exstiterit I will not repeat saith Grotius the Complaint of almost all Ages that the chief Diseases were brought into the Church à Sacerdotibus citing Nazianzen he addeth Neque agit de Arianis duntaxat Synodis sed de omnibus suorum temporum praecipue quibus ipse interfuit Mr. Morrice might easily know this Nec pauca referri possunt si opus sit infoeliciorum conciliorum exempla quale fuit sub Constantino Antiochenum Caesariense Tyrium cujus conventus Episcopis scribens Constantinus nihil ait ab illis fieri nisi quod ad odia dissensiones serendas ad perniciem denique humani generis faciat Zanchy's way cited by him is oft better than Councils that the Magistrate command Ministers in Controversies 1. Vti non suis sed Scripturae vocibus 2. Et à publicâ damnatione abstinere And Pag. 209. saith Grotius The Church hath no Legislative Power by Divine Right What was written in Synods before Christian Emperors for Order and Ornament are not called Laws but Canons and have either only the force of advice as in things which rather belong to singular persons than to all or they oblige by way of Agreement c. But some Legislative Power may be given by humane Laws But perhaps some will say that Mr. Dodwell speaketh only of National or Provincial or Diocesane Councils and not of General ones and therefore by the fixed President meaneth not the Pope Answ. 1. I would he were willing and able to tell what he meaneth But he felt what a fine advantage he had under the Name of Bishops Presidency to please a Party and say more than every one of them shall at first perceive But he expresly maintaineth that the Universal Church is one Political Society and hath a visible Supreme humane Government that is Absolute and from which there is no appeal And that this Society hath Legislative Power and is bound but by the Laws made in its own Assemblies And that these Assemblies are Rebels and punishable if not called by the President And though Mr. D. had the Prudence to use the word President rather than Pope if ever he speak intelligibly it 's here And Mr. Thorndike whom he valueth as a sound Protestant Archbishop Bromhall and the rest of the Tribe do openly assert the due Presidence of the Pope as Principium Vnitatis and first Patriarch Saith Mr. Dodwell further Pag. 522 523. Supposing those Presbyters that chose the President had invested him in his Office by Prayer and Imposition of hands and no Bishops had any more to do in his Consecration than Kings have in the Inauguration of our ordinary Kings it will not follow that those Presbyters who chose and consecrated him must have any more Power over him Nor is it only true that this way may be so but indeed it must be so whenever the Person so invested is supposed to be invested in the Supreme Power and whenever the Society over which he is placed is also Independent on other Societies As the Universal Church is Such a Person can never be placed in his Power if not by them who must after be his Subjects unless by his Predecessor which no Society can safely depend on for a constant rule of Succession And doth any but the Pope pretend to this Soveraign place In his own Society he can have none of his own Order that can perform the Ceremony to him because we suppose Him to be Supreme and there cannot be two such in one Society True And you make it your fundamental that the Catholick Church is one such Society and so must have such a Supreme And it 's worth the noting which he adds And therefore I for my part am so little solicitous for any consequence that may be hence inferred to the prejudice of my Cause as that I am apt to think that this must have been the way at first in the making of Bishops how Absolute soever I conceive them to have been when they were once made Ans. Are we not beholden to the Universal Presidentship for this concession I forced Johnson alias Terret to the same And yet both these men cry down a Power resulting from God's Law or Charter to the person duly receptive when yet the Instance of the Papacy constraineth them to make it their foundation Why then must Presbyterian Ordination be Nullity if Inferiors only chuse and Consecrate the Pope and Presbyters only at first chose and Consecrated Bishops Obj. The difference is that such Inferiors are but Electors and Investing Ministers and not Donors of the Power but Popes and Prelates are Donors Ans. 1. Then no Prelate could be such but by the Popes or Councils donation 2. Doth not Mr. D. oft say that the Body is the seat of Power and so giveth it 3. But why should he think that we must take his word for this difference and the Prelatical Donation instead of Ministry Do not the Papists themselves more commonly hold that the Presbyters or Priests Office is of fixed Divine Institution and more unalterable than that the Bishops is The latter is disputed the former undisputable It may be Mr. D. will thus prove that he is no Papist But I had rather he be one than worse Nay what will you say if after all he be half an Independent P. 523. saith he This seems best to agree with the Absoluteness of Particular Churches before they had by compact united themselves under Metropolitanes and Exarchs into Provincial and Diocesan Churches And this seems to have been fitted for the frequent Persecutions of those earlier Ages when every Church was able to secure its own Suecession by its own power withoue depending on the certain opportunities of the meeting of the Bishops of the whole Province And the alteration of this practice the giving the Bishops of the Province an interest in the Choice of every particular Colleague seems not to have been so much for want of power in the particular Churches to do it as for the security of Compacts that they might be certain of such a Colleague as would observe
speak for the clean contrary 4. What if we prove that Christ hath himself given the Church in the Scriptures an account of his own Institution of Church-Form and Government as much as is necessary to its Essence Unity and Salvation and that all altering Compacts contrary to this are diabolical Will Christ damn us for not breaking his Laws and serving the Devil Is it the sin against the Holy Ghost and unpardonable not to despise Christ's Laws and not to obey the Devil 5. What if we prove to him that the very Species of his Prelacy and specially of a Supreme Catholick Jurisdiction is condemned by Christ and Treason against him Are we Traytors for not being Traytors 6. What if we prove to him that according to his very Canons the Pope and Bishops that he damns us for not owning are no Bishops having no true Call and Title to that which they pretend to Will you have yet another of his Self-contradictions P. 7. I cannot but look on it as an Argument that God never intended to oblige Particular Churches to as great a dependence on other Churches as that is wherein he has obliged Subjects to depend on their own Churches because by his contrivance of things it does not follow that Separating Churches must be left as destitute of the ordinary means of Salvation on their separation from other Churches as particular Subjects are on their separation from their own Churches Abating what obligations they have brought on themselves by their own Compacts God has made them equal There is no way of judging who is in the right but by the intrinsick merit of the Cause I really believe that the true original design of those Compacts whereby particular Churches have voluntarily submitted to restrictions of their original Power was ONLY that every particular Church might have her Censures confirmed in all other Churches in reference to those who were originally her own Subjects not to gain a Power over any other Subjects but her own nor to submit to any other Power c. Alas And have Compacts by we know not who brought us all into the snare of the unpardonable sin Though Christ died for the World he saveth none but Consenters And can Men in Asia in Towns whose Names we poor Countreymen never heard of make Laws to Damn all to the Worlds end that obey them not and this without our own Consent To conclude this Gentleman hath yet an easie remedy against all this He doth indeed frequently prove if you will believe him that though you have Faith that works by Love and do all other duty that is in Love to God and Man you cannot be saved without external Communion that is subjection to this humanly compacted Catholick Church so said Pope Nicholas long ago yea and Aeneas Sylvius when Pius 2d that all other Graces and Duties will not save a Man that is not subject to the Bishop of Rome But saith this Man p. 13. They may easily avoid the danger only by returning to the Catholick Vnity Mark Catholick Vnity National Unity will not serve We grant it But what Catholick Vnity is and whether Catholick Councils with a Catholick President that hath an Antecedent Power to call and oblige them without which they are null rebellious and punishable and to whom all Power escheateth in the Intervals of Councils whether I say this be necessary to Catholick Unity or to Antichristian Church Tyranny is the doubt I will conclude this with Dr. Iz. Barrow's Theses p. 255. 1. Patriarchs are an Humane Institution 2. As they were erected by the Power and Prudence of Men so they may be dissolved by the same 3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes and by the same they may be dejected if great reason do appear 4. The Patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own Province or Diocess doth not subsist upon any Canon of a general Synod 5. He can therefore claim no such Power otherwise than upon his Invasion or Assumption 6. The Primates and Metropolitans of the Western Church cannot be supposed otherwise than by force or one of fear to have submitted to such an Authority as he doth Vsurp 7. It is not really a Patriarchal Power like that granted by the Canons and Princes but another sort of Power which the Pope doth Exercise 8. The most rightful Patriarch holding false Doctrine or imposing unjust Laws or Tyrannically abusing his Power may and ought to be rejected from Communion 9. Such a Patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod if it may be had 10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of Princes each Church may free it self from the mischiefs induced by his perverse Doctrine and Practice 11. No Ecclesiastical Power can interpose in the management of any Affairs within the Territory of any Prince without his Concession 12. By the Laws of God and according to ancient Practice Princes may model the Bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction erect Bishopricks enlarge diminish or transfer them as they please 13. Wherefore each Prince having Supream Power in his own Dominion and equal to the Emperors in his may exclude any Foreign Prelate from Jurisdiction in his Territories 14. It is expedient for the publick peace and good that he should do thus 15. Such Prelate according to the Rules of Christianity ought to be content with his doing so 16. Any Prelate Exercising Power in the Dominion of any Prince is eatenus his Subject as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman Emperor 17. Those Joints of Ecclesiastical Discipline Established in the Roman Empire by the Confirmation of Emperors were as to necessary continuance dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman Empire 18. The Power of the Pope in the Territories of any Prince did subsist by his Authority and Favour 19. By the same Power as Princes have curbed the Exorbitancy of Papal Power in some Cases of entertaining Legates making Appeals disposing of Benefices c. by the same they might exclude it 20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend on the subsistence of such a form instituted by man As to Mr. Dodwell's fundamental Opinion that the Minister can have no Power which the Ordainer intended not to give him He overthroweth by it all the Reformation and all the English reforming Ministry as derived from the Roman Ordination For it 's certain that the Roman Bishops intended not to give them Power to reform or to Worship God as they have done And the Protestants are against him Saith Dr. Challoner in his Credo Eccles. Cath. p. 95. However the Priest at the Baptizing or the Bishop at the Ordination had another meaning yet the words wherewith they Baptized and Ordained being the words of Christ are to be taken in Christs meaning in as much as he which receiveth from another is to receive it according to the intention of the Principal Giver and not the Instrumental Giver He which confers Baptism and Orders as the Principal Donor
is Christ the Bishop or Pastor confers them only as his Instruments So others As all Power is of God and must be obeyed so Usurpation is of Satan and the higher the worse and the word Antichrist is supposed by many to signifie one that is a Vsurping Christ that is a Usurper of Vniversal Soveraignty which none but Christ is capable of Mr. Jos. Glanviles Character of Devils or Evil Spirits in his Sadduc●ismus Triumphatus is considerable p. 33. and 42. Edit 2. The meanest and basest in the Kingdom of darkness having none to Rule and Tyrannize over within the Circle of their own Nature and Government they affect a proud Empire over us the desire of Dominion and Authority being largely spread through the whole circumference of degenerated Nature especially among those whose Pride was their Original Transgression Every one of these desireth to get him Vassals to pay him Homage The good Angels have no such ends to prosecute as the gaining any Vassals to serve them they being Ministring Spirits for our good and no self-designers for a proud and insolent Dominion over us But I think no Devil but Beelzebub the Prince aspireth so high as to be Ruler of all the World or Church And when Cardinal Bertrand told Philip King of France that God had not been Wise if he had not set up one as his Vicegerent visibly to Rule all the World I do not find that he set up that Vice-god so far above God himself as to forbid obeying him before his Viceroy or to deny Gods Universal Laws to be above Mans and to deny all Appeals to God and his Word or to say that the President of Counsels must be obeyed without excepting If Gods Laws and his be inconsistent Since the Writing of all foregoing Mr. Dodwell hath Published the Second Part of his Leviathan called A Discourse of one Altar and one Priesthood as against us whom he calleth Schismaticks and me in particular It is much of the Complexion of the First Part His Schismatical Book being a Chain of many linked Propositions of which many are false and many falsly shaped and applied But put off with a confident Affirmation that he hath proved them true And his former Method is defended by as confident an Affirmation that all that is said against them invalidates not his proof The shortest way I confess of defending himself and answering others and saveth the labour of much Writing and Reading And I think if the tedious Discourses of his two Volumes had been just so abbreviated it had been a Kindness to his Readers § 2. Whether he reserve his Answer to my last Book against him to another Treatise or mean to overpass it by saying it is contemptible I know not nor much desire to know I find him here in his Preface doing that which may serve his turn much better than an answer viz. 1. Many angry Charges that I slander him 2. An attempt to prove it agreeable to his Method 3. Confident Affirmation that I write not accurately nor answer his Proofs And to those that read his Books and not mine this is enough § 3. His Proof of my Slander is mostly by way of question Where did I say this or that Where 1. Those things that I spake of others he feigneth me to say of him Joyning divers late Writers together I mention what is said among them some one part and some another and he takes all to himself 2. When I mention the clear Consequences of his Doctrine 3. And when in my Letters I recite his Verbal Discourse with me he asks Where have I said it Did I not find him a designed Hider I would not suspect designed Fraud but should be very glad that he so much as intimateth in his Questions a denial of so many Errors But who can choose but suspect his Sincerity in such seeming Denials who findeth some of them unsincere E. g. He asketh Pref. Where did I once call Thomas Aquinas a Saint This startleth me Many times have my Ears heard him call him Saint Thomas and never once heard him call him otherwise And doth he now seem to deny it I never said that he so wrote but so called him Had I not reason to believe that when he oft calls the Church of Christ in the singular Number One Political Body under One humane Government which all must obey and not question whether it's Laws be agreeable to the Law of God that he meant the Church Catholick and not a Diocess There are Thousands of Diocesses but the Church that he spake of is but One. Had I any reason to believe that when he talkt of the sole right of the President to call Councils or Assemblies to make Church Canons that he meant only Diocesans When as a Diocesane hath no Bishops under him to Convocate And whether it be not Convocate Bishops to whom he appropriateth this Legislation let the Reader judge as he seeth cause § 4. But I abhor making any Man thought to own what he disowneth And I gladly receive his intimated Denyals in these Questions and tender them to the Consideration of all that are for a foreign Jurisdiction 1. Mr. Dodwell denieth by intimation all humane Vniversal Church Supremacy and consequently all humane Power of Legislation or Judgment over the whole Church He denieth the Government of the Catholick Church Collectively ought to be either Monarchical or Aristocratical in Pope or Council 2. He denieth the Pope to have any Primacy or Presidentship in General Councils or that it belongs to him to call them It was but a Diocesans Power to Convocate his Presbyters that he meant 3. He taketh the French Church for Papists while they own the Popish Communion though many are not so in their Principles But it is Mens Principles that I spake of and not their Communion 4. He denieth Communion with any part of the Roman Church Doth Dr. Saywell do so 5. He taketh the Councils of Constance and Basil for Papists and hath no Communion with those that own them as being Papists 6. He proveth the French Church guilty of the Hildebrandine Doctrine of deposing Princes and Aquinas too 7. He disowneth the terms of Cassander and Grotius as not sufficient to a lasting Peace 8. He odly dreamed that when I deny a Governing College of Bishops I thought the Lord Bishop of Ely had meant such as our University Colleges cohabiting this is no Slander in him yet he declareth that by such a College he means but Bishops ejusdem Speciei governing the Church by parts and not any One Numerical Soveraign Company But that they should hold all due Communion which he may see I still grant And he falsly fancies that I am against Cyprian's naming of Colleagues or his sence § 5. But if Mr. Dodwell be sincere he makes himself one of the greatest Separatists in the World Consider how narrow his Communion is and the Church which he owneth 1. He hath no Communion with the rigid
and then I said May it Please Your Majesty This reverend Dr. Guning just now accused us as if we would let in Socinians and Papists We suppose that this is not intended as our deed The King answered There be many Laws against the Papists I replyed We understand this to be for a dispensation with those Laws There was no more said and that was the Conclusion of the day III. In 1662. came out a Declaration for Liberty of Religion naming the Papists to have their part in it but not a Toleration I was desired to get the City Ministers to Subscribe a Thanksgiving for it I told them that it was the King's Work and not to be done by us But I knew it was the Bishops design to cast the Odium of a Toleration of Popery on the Nonconformists while they would gratifie the King by forcing us to Consent But they should never do it They should do it themselves or it should not be done And it presently died IV. The Lord Bridgman called Dr. Wilkins and his Chaplain Dr. Hez Burton and Dr. Manton and me and Dr. Bates after as by the King's Order to attempt an Agreement for a Comprehension to the Presbyterians and a Toleration for the Independents We agreed of the Comprehension in terminis and Judge Hale drew it up into the form of an Act But when we came to the other part the form proposed was for a Toleration of all not excepting the Papists I told the Lord Keeper that we could not meddle in measuring out all other mens Liberty but only to declare what we desired our selves Others must be consulted about their own concerns we were not for severity against any But it was the King's Work and we unmeet to be his Counsellors in it And so all was cast off by the Parliament by that means and the Act forbidden to be offered § 8. At last the King himself broke the Ice and Published a Declaration for Licensing a Toleration The Cruelty of the Prosecution of the Nonconformists being still the seeming Necessity for all But the Parliament broke it and it did the Papists much more harm than good for the Nonconformists continued to Preach though Persecuted § 9. The Clergy now would lay all the Severities on the Parliament and wash their own hands as guiltless of all But 1. It was they even their chief Bishops and Drs. that when the King Commissioned them to Agree on such Alterations as were necessary to tender Consciences after all importunity concluded that no Alteration was so necessary 2. And it was the Bishops and Convocation that altered the Book for the worse and put in new matter harder than before 3. And the Bishops in Parliament were the Chief Agents in all the Laws by which we are undone 4. And it is known that it was the Interest of the Bishops and their Church way that engaged the Long Parliament in all their terrible Acts against us Viz. The Act of Uniformity the Acts for Banishment the Five mile Act the Corporation Act the Militia Act the Vestry Act and others 5. And who knoweth not that it is they and their Disciples that make the great stir against our Healing in jealousie of their Interests which nothing but their own over-doing is like to overthrow 6. And when did they ever once Petition any Parliament to reverse the dividing wicked Laws or to restore the Silenced Ministers or to free them from dying with Rogues in Jails or to prefer the Ministers of Jesus before Barabbas or to request that the Eminent Ministers of Christ might have no greater Punishment for Preaching Christ than debaucht Whoremongers Drunkards Swearers and Blasphemers usually have in England 7. Yea if a Godly Conformist do but write against their Cruelty to the Nonconformists such as are Mr. Pierce Mr. Jones Mr. Bold they have for it Persecuted him as if he were a Nonconformist himself And that you may know that it is not the old Church-men nor yet a few single Persons when Dr. Whitby Prebend of Salisbury who had wrote against Popery did write an excellent Treatise for Peace and Reconciliation the Oxford University Decreed the Publick burning of it together with my Holy Common-wealth The Lord Convert and Pardon them that they prove not the burned fewel when Reconciliation and a Holy Common-wealth are prosperous c. God shall judge at last § 10. All this time from Laud till now it is a hard Controversie which of the two Parties is to be called The Church of England Both Parties pretend to it and some call both of them the same Church But the Infamous Roger L'Estrange set the Name of Trimmers on the old and reconciling Party pretending that the other were the Genuine Members of the Church And was imployed by his Genius and the Court and the Papists and the New Clergy-men to do a work so truly Diabolical as I never read of the like in History even for many Years together to Write and Publish twice a Week a Dialogue called Observations mainly levelled against Love Peace and Piety to perswade all men to hate their Brethren and to provoke men to destroy them whom he Nick-named Whigs and to render odious all save the Wolves whom he called Tories as if he owned the Irish Robbers so that a Trimmer with him was the same as a Peace-maker Blessed by Christ and Cursed by L'Estrange § 11. But whether the New Clergy or the Old be the Church of England and whether both be of one Church remaineth still doubtful But whoever hath the Name that one Name is equivocal when applied to Parties contrary and inconsistent 1. That Church which owneth a Foreign Government and Jurisdiction cannot be one and the same with that Church which renounceth and abhorreth it and owneth only Christ's Universal Government and a Foreign Concord and Communion But this is the difference between the Old Reformed Church of England and the New that call themselves the Church Two Kings make two Kingdoms For the Form denominateth And the Relative Vnion of the pars Imperans and Subdita is the Form That Church which hath a Human Head above National must have a Form and Name above National that is Above a Church of England which makes them all talk so much of The Universal Church in this false humane Form An Universal Church hath an Universal Soveraign Power which is only Christ. If the Pope be Antichrist it is his claim of this that maketh him so because it is Christ's Prerogative which no mortal Man or Council or College is capable of And if so is it not a Papal or Antichristian Church that these Foreign Subjects own and are of whether it be of the French or Italian Form if one be Antichristian both are so when the Claim of Universal Jurisdiction is the Cause I have voluminously detected the mistake of these deceived Men who are deluded by the Name Oecumenical Catholick and Universal which they find in the Councils and Fathers and
fully proved to them that it signified no Councils above the Imperial or National But distinguished those that were Universal in that one Empire from the Provincial 2. The Reformed Church of England taketh the Parish Communicants to be true Churches and the Pastors to have as much of the Oversight as is necessary to the Constitution of a true Political Church Though their Canons sinfully fetter them in the Exercise But the Foreigners hold the Diocesses to be the least or lowest Churches and the Parishes to be no true Churches for want of Bishops in them but only Parts of a Church that hath a Bishop over them all 3. The Old Church of England owned the Foreign Protestant Churches as true Churches and their Ministers as true Pastors and own Communion with them But the Innovators say that they have no true Bishops because they have not Diocesans and are no true Pastors if they have not an uninterrupted Succession of Diocesane Ordination from the Apostles whereas for some Hundred Years after the Apostles there was no such Bishops known in the World as were not either Congregational Parochial Bishops or Apostolick Overseers of such and no Diocesans over many Hundred or Score Parish Churches that had no Bishops under them § 12. When you consider what Power the New Foreigners had at Court and with the Parliament that made the Act of Uniformity and required Re-ordination and that made all the other persecuting Acts and with the Justices that executed them And when we see how they promoted the Roman Interest and when we see how potently and obstinately they frustrated all attempts of the Protestant Union here and read how they reviled the old Reforming Bishops from Parker to Abbots and the Parliaments as going too far from Rome And when we consider that we have not one Bishop but who was chosen by K. Charles II. and K. James and what Men they may be supposed to choose we Contradict not these Men when they call themselves the Church of England But when we consider that the old Homilies Apology Articles Liturgy Canons c. were never yet repealed and that they are all Sworn to Endeavour no Alteration of Government of Church or State we have cause to think that the old Party have more right to be called The Church the altering Endeavours having not changed its Essentials By this much the Reader may Expound whom I speak of in my Treatise of Episcopacy § 13. The Church is nothing but the Men that constitute the Church If 1. It be denominated by their Numbers no man can tell which Party hath the greater Number till they are further put upon the tryal 2. If they are denominated by Laws the better part are rather to be called the Church because the Old Laws against Popery are not yet Repealed Though yet some late Laws are to the Old as poyson to a living Man So if they be Denominated by Power the Innovators have been the Church at least these 31 Years For that Party Ruled and had the Countenance of the Kings who chose them And indeed in the Days of the differing Emperors Constantine Constantinus Valens Theodosius Arcadius Marcian Leo Zeno and the rest that usually went for the Church or Orthodox party which the Emperor owned The uppermost will have the Name § 14. Though the French and English aforesaid designed a Coalition the long possession of their different ways unavoidably hindered them from an immediate Union But they were forced to approach by leisurely Degrees England would not suddenly turn the Liturgy to a Mass-Book nor France suddenly turn the Mass-Book Corrected into French But what fair Approaches were made and what further intended Grotius his Counsel Magnified by both Churches and the present practices of the French declare The Council of Grotius was to bring down the Pope to Moderation that he might Rule but by the Canons and not be above Councils nor deprive Kings nor Bishops of their Rights and that the Lives of the Clergy be Reformed and School Niceties left indifferent and the Lutheranes as Reconcileable Courted to a Concord and the unreconcileable Calvinists brought down by force But the Lutheranes are not so Reconcileable as they imagined Princes that are once free are loth to become Subjects to a Foreign Priesthood § 15. And how much the French meant to bring down the Pope their late Transactions shew a little but their Doctrines much more Mr. Jurieu himself in his Posteral Letters Engl. p. 216.217 thus Describeth them 1. That the Church of Rome is no more than a Particular Church as other Churches are 2. That St. Peter had nothing but a Primacy of Order and Presidence above the Apostles 3. That St. Peter could give to his Successor over other Bishops no more but that Primacy which he had over the Apostles 4. That the Bishop of Rome Originally and by Divine Right had no Power over the Universal Church 5. That he did not receive Appeals in the first Age of the Church 6. That he had no Right to Assemble General Councils 7. That he could take Cognizance of the Affairs of no other Provinces but his own no not by Appeals 8. That he had no Right to take Knowledge of Matters of Faith to make Decisions therein which should oblige the whole Church 9. That before the Council of Nice and after he had no inspection over other Churches but those which were in the Neighbourhood of Rome 10. That he could not Excommunicate other Bishops otherwise than the other Bishops could Excommunicate him 11. That a Man might separate himself from the Bishop of Rome without being a Schismatick and out of the Church 12. That the Pope had no Right over other Bishops 13. That the Council of Sardica is the Fountain of that Right of receiving Appeals which the Pope claimeth 14. That the Rights which the Pope hath at this Day excepting his Primacy are by Human Laws and because he hath assumed them to himself and because they have bin conceded to him 15. To which they add he is not Infallible nor Superior to Councils nor Master to the Temporalities of Kings This is the French Religion and who would think that this is Popery No wonder if the Pope be more hearty for other Friends than for France § 15. Lay all this together and it 's Notorious that though Whetgift and some other Calvinists were too much guilty of the Persecutions to keep up the Dominion and Preferments which they were jealous of yet it was the French Reconcilers that have set and to this Day kept on foot our present increased Divisions and Dangers Since Le Strange new-named them the old Church Protestants are called Trimmers and are Men that love not Division or Persecution and would fain see a Coalition of Protestants though they have not zeal enough save too few to put it on openly lest they provoke the opposites But the Laudians called Tories are still as much against the Removal of the Dividing
to be the authoriser of the Majority for Government For they will think that they have more of the Holy Ghost than you and therefore must Govern you I would all Rulers had the Holy Ghost but it 's somewhat else that must give them Authority XV. Your instance of the Easter Controversie is against you The difference undecided for 300 Years and Apostolical Tradition urged on both sides tells us that it was no Apostolick Law And Socrates and Sozomen tell us that in that and many such like things 〈◊〉 Churches had freely differed in Peace 〈◊〉 you seem to intimate contrary to them and to Iren●●us that the Asians were Schismaticks till they Conformed And why name you Asia alone Were our Brittish Churches and the Scottish no Churches Or do you also Condemn them as Schismaticks for about 300 Years after the Nicene Council What could the Papists say more against them XVI How impossible a thing do you make Church Union to be while the Essentials or great Integrals of Religion are made insufficient to it and so many Ceremonies and Church Laws are feigned necessary which no man ever comes to the true knowledge of that he hath the right ones and all XVII If the Patriarchs must be the Soveraign College I beseech you give us some proof in a Case so weighty 1. How many there must be 2. Where seated 3. Who must choose and make them 4. And quo jure 5. And whether we have now such a College or is there no Church XVIII What Place will you give the Pope in the College I suppose with your Brethren you will call him 1. Principium Vnitatis But that 's a Name of Comparative Order what is his work as such a Principium How is he the Principium if he have no more Power than the rest Must not he call the Councils Though our Articles say General Councils may not be gathered without the Will of Princes Shall he not choose the Place and Time Tell us then who shall Must he not be President Must he not be Patriarch of the West And so Govern England as our Patriarch and Principium unitatis Vniversalis also XIX I pray tell us whether the French be Papists And how their Church-Government as Described from themselves by Mr. Jurieu differeth from that which you are for Tell me not of their Mass and other Corruptions It is Government that is the Form of Popery And they will abate you many other things And must we be Frenchified If the French restore those that we called Papists will disowning the Name and calling them the Church of England chosen by Papist Princes make us sound and safe And when we find Arch-Bishop Laud Arch-Bishop Bromhall Bishop Guning Bishop Sparrow Dr. Saywell Dr. Heylin Mr. Thorndike Bishop S. Parker and many more were for a Foreign Jurisdiction can we think if the French bring in the late Governours that such Churchmen would not embrace the French Church Government and call it the Church of England when since Lauds days they have endeavoured a Coalition If they be Defeated we may thank King James who could not bear delays and would have all or none when Grotius way would have been a surer Game XX. You tell us of Penalties made by Church Laws Deposing Ministers and Anathematizing the Laity But while the Clergy hath no power of the Sword who will feel such Penalties When Rome Excommunicates the Greeks the Greeks will Excommunicate them again What Penalty is it to Protestants to be Excommunicated by the Pope or his Council How commonly did they that were for and against the Chalcedon Council Excommunicate each other And those that were for and against Images And for Photius and for Ignatius Cheat not Magistrates to be your Lictors and Cursing will go round as Scolding at Billingsgate Who is hurt by a causeless curse but the Curser I confess that Dr. Saywell sayeth well If single persons must be punished shall not Nations also Yes But by whom By God the Universal King and not by an Universal Human Soveraign whether a King or Pope or a Senate of Foreign Subjects XXI We are promised by a trifling Pamphleteer that some of you are answering Mr. Clerksons two Books about the Primitive Episcopacy and Liturgies I pray you procure them also to answer my Treatise of Episcopacy and my English Non-conformity and not with the Impudent Railing Lyars to say it is answered already while we can hear of no such thing And see that they prove that all these things following are Traditions of the Vniversal Church received from the Apostles and used ab omnibus ubique semper 1. That most particular Churches for two Hundred or three Hundred years and so down consisted of many Congregations that had no personal presential Communion 2. That Churches infimi ordinis were Diocesan having many Hundred or Score Parishes under them 3. That these Diocesans undertook the sole Pastoral Care of all these Parishes as to Confirmation Censure Absolution and the rest 4. That all these Parishes were no true Churches as having no Bishops but the Diocesans and were but Chappels or parts of a Church 5. That the Incumbents were no true Pastors or Bishops but one Bishops Curates And that there were not then besides Diocesan Arch-Bishops in each single Church Episcopi Gregis and Episcopi praesides 6. That Bishops Names were used by Lay-men that had the Decretive Power of Excommunication and Absolution 7. That such Secular Judicatories far from the Parishes rather than the particular Pastors Tryed and Judged the unknown people 8. That Parish Ministers Swear Obedience to the Diocesans and they to Metropolitans 9. That all People that would have Licenses to keep Ale-houses or Taverns or that would not lye in Jail were Commanded to receive the Sacrament as a Sealed Pardon of their Sins 10. That from the beginning all Churches were forced to use the same form of Liturgy and not every Church or Bishop to choose as he saw Cause 11. That Kings chose Bishops and Deans without the Consent of the Clergy and People 12. That all Ministers were to be Ejected and forbidden to Preach the Gospel that durst not Subscribe that there is nothing contrary to Gods Word in such as our three imposed Books 13. That all Lords Magistrates Priests and People that affirm the contrary be ipso facto Excommunicate 14. That Lay-Patrons that are but Rich enough to buy an Advowson how Vicious soever did choose all the Incumbent Ministers to whom the People must commit the Ministerial Care of their Souls 15. That they that dare not trust such Pastors as are chosen by Kings though Papists and such Patrons and dare not Conform to every imposition like ours must live like Atheists in forbearance of all publick Worship and Church Communion 16. That all may Swear that an Oath or Vow of Lawful and Necessary things bindeth not our selves or any others if it be but unlawfully imposed and taken and had any unlawful part
their bloody Fangs and Jaws § 13. XII They saw that the same Clergymen who were for this Union with Rome were the chief Defenders of the King 's absolute Power of raising Money without Parliaments as the known History of Abbot's Dejection and Laud's Sibthorp's and Mainwaring's Cases shew And this made them the lother to draw nearer Popery § 14. XIII They found the Power of the Clergy in the High Commission and their Courts and Councils so uneasie to them that they greatly feared so great an increase of it as the Coalition with Rome would cause § 15. XIV They found that the Papists and reconciling Prelates were the greatest Enemies to them whom they accounted the most Godly serious Christians Ministers and Lay-men not only Nonconformists but such as they devised to call conformable Puritans And they were not for Uniting their strength against serious practical Piety § 16. XV. They found that the prophane Drunkards and ignorant Rabble greatly rejoyced in the Bishops prosecuting such Puritans And were loth to see them much more so animated by the Coalition with Rome § 17. XVI They found so great a number of the Clergy that were for the Coalition and Enemies to the Puritans to gape so greedily after Preferment and live such indifferent lives and Preach so unprofitably and do so little to cure the ignorance of the People as made them fear much worse if we came nearer the Roman Clergy who are so much for blind obedience and cherishing ignorance that they may Rule § 18. XVII They did not perceive that the Case of any Popish Country Italy Spain Portugal Austria Bavaria Poland no nor France was so much better than ours as might tempt us to be liker to them than we are Yea that the best of them both in Civil and Religious Respects are so much worse as may well deter us from such desires § 19. XVIII And it 's not to be doubted but they made some Conscience of their Obligations to the King and were loth he should be tempted to give away half the Government of his Kingdom yea of himself to Foreigners under the Name of Ecclesiastical Government by such Courts as theirs § 20. XIX And no doubt they remembred what Doctrine against Kings and States are subject to the Church and Pope their Councils and Drs. do assert and what they have done to their disturbance and destruction And therefore were loth to give any more strength and advantage to men of such Principles and Pretensions If the Pope will give a Protestant King fair quarter and promise him freedom from his Tyranny while the same man according to his Canons layeth claim to more and exerciseth Tyranny in other Lands he may soon break his Promise here § 21. XX. And no doubt but they saw how loth other Princes and States were to return nearer Rome that had once escaped and to subject themselves to such a Usurper And they thought it unwise and unsafe for England to stand alone in a singular odd condition neither Papists nor such Reformers as any of the rest and so to be strengthened by a Concord and hearty Friendship with neither § 22. XXI And it is not to be doubted but the Lords and Gentlemen of England were unwilling to give up all their Abby Lands as long as they thought a sufficient Ministry competently provided for And unwilling to take the Pope or Clergies promises for security for the continuance of their Possessions yea and to save them from being burnt as Hereticks § 23. XXII And no doubt but common reason told them how great a part of England not the unwisest nor the worst would refuse consent to the Coalition with Rome and the nearer approaches when imposed and therefore what a doleful encrease it would make of our Divisions If we are so sadly divided already by a few Oaths and Promises and New Covenants and Formalities and Church Judicatures how many hundred thousand more would dissent if all were imposed which the new Church-men judge necessary to the Union with Rome § 24. And these would unavoidably draw on a grievous Persecution For when all this stir loss cost and hazard had been made to bring on such a general Concord Dissenters would not have been endured by the Clergy when yet they would be multiplied § 25. And how much such a Division and Persecution would weaken the Kingdom they that did not believe Christ that a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand might easily know by reason and the Worlds experience § 26. On such accounts as these the two sorts of Episcopal Conformists differed and the old Tribe called then the Church of England resisted the endeavours made by Bishop Laud and such as A. Bishop Bromhall and the rest that were for a Coalition with Rome Till the latter got into the chiefest Chairs and then they called their side The Church And thus Church and Church here began our strife And the difference twisted with the Civil differences between King and Parliament widened and utterly exasperated by War the A. Bishop of Canterbury beheaded and the A. Bishop of York being in Arms for the Parliament each Party claimeth the name of the Church of England And the Party that is uppermost doth it with advantage while sober men know that denominating à Formâ as existent in Materiâ capaci seu dispositâ the Church of England is nothing but a Protestant Soveraign and a Protestant Kingdom of Subjects guided by Protestant Ministers of the Word Sacraments and Keys So that in the Reign of King James and of any Papist King there was and can be no Protestant Kingdom or National Church deficiente formâ denominante in the Judgment of those Royalists that think Parliaments have no part in the Legislation and Soveraignty And according to them that think otherwise it is but a National Church secundum quid in respect to the Power of Parliaments and Laws But Particular Churches Parochial and Confederate and Diocesan may yet continue their Constitutive causes continuing But not an informed National Church Chap. III. They are deceived who are for the foresaid Papal or Council-Jurisdiction as if it were the way of Vnity or Catholicism § 1. I Doubt not but the desireableness of Universal Concord is it which draweth many honest well-meaning men into the esteem of the Papal or Conciliar-Jurisdiction All things have a tendency to Aggregation or Unity as Perfection and nothing more than Christian Love This held such good men of old as Bernard Gerson c. from favouring the Reformers thinking that the Papacy was necessary to Unity This kept such as Erasmus and Cassander from forsaking them And this turned Wicelius Grotius and others to them And no doubt but this inclineth many in England to the French kind of Church-Government and to approve and follow Grotius But they quite cross their own desires § 2. Catholicism or Vniversal Concord consisteth in that which all the Christian Church is constituted by and in which
Religion who value it most Dogs will fight for Bones and Carrion and Swine for Draff But Men will sooner fight for Gold and Pearls while Dogs and Swine like peaceable Creatures pass them by or tread them in the Dirt. All true Christians are agreed in all that God hath made necessary to Christianity and Salvation And no men on Earth were ever so wise as to be agreed of the meaning of every word besides in the Bible Much less in all that Usurping Universal Legislators will obtrude What a dismal noise and dangerous rupture doth the Controversie make now about Conformity in Brittain And what is our difference We are all agreed 1. That there is only one God the Governour of all the World and of his Attributes 2. That Man's Soul is immortal and that he hath another life after this to live and Heaven or Hell must be his end 3. That Jesus Christ God and Man is the only Saviour and Lord of all 4. That the Law of God is the chief indispensible Rule of our Faith and Life by which we must be judged 5. That we must live soberly righteously and godly loving God above all and our neighbours as our selves and doing as we would be done by superiours Ruling for God and inferiours obeying them under God but none having power above him or against him 6. That God only is the final Infallible Universal Judge of Controversies That Magistrates are Judges who shall be punished or protected by the Sword And Pastors are Judges who is fit for Communion in the Churches under their over-sight And every man a discerning rational Judge of his own duty 7. That without holiness righteousness and temperance or mortifying the lusts of the flesh by the Spirit no man can be saved 8. That no man should sin wilfully for any price or to avoid any danger even of death 9. That the Soul should be more cared for than the Body 10. That no man can love God and Holiness too much nor obey him too faithfully 11. That we should delight in the Law of the Lord and his Gospel and meditate in it day and night 12. That serious servent and faithful prayer is our daily ordinary duty 13. That we should live as we would be judged and daily prepare for death that we may be found ready 14. That we should use all worldly temporal things for spiritual everlasting ends knowing that else they are but vanity vexation and dangerous snares 15. That we should fetch our joy from the hopes of Heaven more than from all the possessions pleasures and hopes on Earth These and abundance more we are commonly as to Profession agreed on And though this in sincerity will serve for our acceptance with God and our Salvation it will not serve for our acceptance or toleration with some men nor to avoid the cry of scandalous intolerable Schism Disobedience Obstinacy and what men mind to charge upon us Yea though we are agreed that Rulers in their several places must be obeyed in all things that are not against the Law of God in Nature or Scripture But what now is the difference I will add that if every Conformist and Nonconformist in England were of so unattainable perfect knowledge as to be agreed of the sence of every Syllable in the Bible it would not serve to end our Differences nor keep us from Prisons Silencing and the present heavy Accusations Wonder not at it It 's an evident Truth Our Difference is 1. About the meaning of some Oaths Declarations and subscribed Professions and Promises imposed by Acts of Parliament 2. About the meaning of several Rubricks and other Words in the Liturgy and Book of Ordination 3. About the meaning and practice of several Canons Gods Law hath agreed us all that Lying deliberately is a sin and so is Perjury especially of thousands and so is the wilful depraving of Baptism and other Ordinances of God and so is the unjust Excommunicating of the Faithful and denying them Baptism and the Lords Supper and so is Sacriledge and Renouncing the Sacred Ministry when we are Vowed to it and so is Schismatical Dividing Christs Church by needless and unlawful Snares and Engines All these we are agreed are heinous sins not to be done for any Price But we are utterly disagreed whether to Conform would make us guilty of these sins But what Are Learned men such miserable Casuists as not to know what Lying Perjury Sacriledge Profaning Baptism Sinful Excommunicating c. are We differ about the sence of the Words Imposed and of the Law and Canons And then how should we know who is the Sinner But Qu. Who is it that wresteth them from their usual signification And who is it that dare not do it But the Sacred part of the Imposers cry up the necessity of a Judge of Controversies yea an Universal Judge some of them to Expound the Scriptures when men differ about the sence and will not they procure you an Exposition of a few controverted sentences in the Laws or endeavour it if that be necessary to understand or end your Differences Ans. No whatever cometh of it to Bodies or Souls to Church or Kingdom these Expositors of Scripture and Enders of Controversies will not so much as Petition the Law-makers to explain their words Yea though the Conformists are much disagreed about it among themselves Judges will decide particular Causes by the Law But to know the sence of the Law antecedently as our Rule which is required in one that Sweareth and Subscribeth to it can be by no ones Exposition but the makers of the Law Else the Judges were the only Law-makers For the sence is the Law And he maketh the Law that maketh the sence and not they that make the words alone which other men must put the sence on And if Popes or Councils Prelates or Priests could on pretence of a Judicial Expository Authority be Judges to all the Earth in what sence every word of Scripture must be understood it is they and not God that make the Law For God made but the words if this be true and the Bishops make the sence by pretence of judging of it To give an Universal Antecedent Obligatory Exposition is an Act of Legislation and none but the Law-maker himself can do it But to judge by this Law who shall be received and who shut out of their several Churches the Pastors must do that X. Another great deceit is by confounding Communion and Concord with Government and Subjection And arguing that because all Christians must have Concord and Communion therefore they must be under one Supreme Humane Government As if Christian Princes were not as much bound to Concord as any men on Earth Or as if that Concord must be kept by one Supreme Universal Senate or Monarch and mutual Consultation and voluntary Agreement would not serve Obj. But if God bind us to do all things in Concord and General Councils and Patriarchs determine the matter of
for such when divers Churches and Countries may have divers such Accidentals and the same Churches may change them as they see cause Q. 80. If it be not Legislation but Judicature that we must have an Universal Judge or Power for what are the Cases that they must Judge Sure it is not whether John or Thomas shall be judged capable of Baptism or of the Lord's Supper or whether he be an Adulterer a Drunkard and impenitent therein and so to be Excommunicate Must all the World come before all the World Shall Millions of Sinners be unjudged till all the Bishops of the World Judge them If it be Persons accused of Heresie Schism or any Sin that must be judged must they not be heard and their witness heard before they can be judged justly But if they Judge not of Persons but of Doctrines whether they be Heresie or not this will make no Alteration or Reformation till it be judged what persons are guilty of such Errors or Heresies And if particular Pastors on the place must judge all such persons is not the Scripture the Rule of Faith a sufficient Rule to judge of Heresie by Q. 81. If it be whole Churches that are to be judged will not a brotherly power of disowning their Communion serve without a Governing Power Had every one a Governing Power to whom the Apostles commanded with such not to eat nor bid them good speed May not Princes renounce Communion with Neighbour Princes and Nations without being their Governour Q. 82. In conclusion doth it not remain that this pretended Universal Soveraignty Monarchical or Aristocratical is the device of the Prince of Pride a Treasonable Usurpation over all Princes disobedience to Christ Luke 22. and Antichristian Usurpation of his Prerogative and a base Captivating of the Souls and Reason of Mankind to a pretended Power which common sense reason and experience fully proveth to be a natural impossibility or that which in practice no Mortal Man or College is capable of Chap. XI A Breviate of the Papists Faith and Church Doctrine both the Monarchical and Aristocratical sort § 1. WE must believe that Christ hath a Church before we believe that he is Christ the Redeemer § 2. VVe must believe that this Church is Infallible or our Governour before we can believe that Jesus is Christ and our Governour § 3. We must believe that Christ Promised Infallibility or Governing Authority to this Church before we can believe that he is Christ. § 4. We must believe that this Promise is true and shall be fulfilled before we believe the Gospel Promise of Pardon and Salvation that is before we are Christians or believe the Scripture § 5. We must believe that the Pope is Christ's Vicegerent or Vicar General or General Councils at least before we can believe that Christ is Christ. § 6. We must believe that the Words of the Apostles were Intelligible else why did they speak but their Writings are not till a General Council make them so by an Exposition § 7. We must believe that it is intelligible which be true Bishops and Councils and what is the meaning of their Voluminous Decrees but it is not intelligible what is the sense of the Scripture till Councils tell us § 8. We must believe that God is the great Deceiver of the World by sense and things sensible e. g. by sense which takes Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine § 9. We must believe that all men are Hereticks who deny not their senses and all that believe sense even of all the sound men in the World shall be Damned That is All that believe God speaking by things sensible § 10. We must believe that God who is the great Deceiver of the World even to and by the senses yet hath given a Spirit of Infallibility to those Popes and Prelates in Council who live in worldliness and wickedness § 11. We must believe that an unlearned Pope and Prelates who never understood the Original Tongue but are ignorant men are by Miracle in Council inspired with the gift of right expounding the Scriptures which they never studied or understood before § 12. We must believe that every Priest how ignorant or wicked soever doth by pronouncing the bare words of Consecration work many Miracles turning Bread into no Bread Wine into no Wine making quantity and other Accidents to exist without Substance c. And that he can work such Miracles every hour of the day and if he can but get into a Bakers Shop or Vintners Celler to say Mass may in malice undo the poor men when he will by turning all their Bread and Wine into none § 13. We must believe that the Roman Empire was all the Christian VVorld or that a Council General as to that Empire was General as to all the VVorld And that the Roman Emperor or the Pope called the Bishops of all the VVorld together And that the humane Primate of one Empire was Governour of all the VVorld § 14. VVe must believe that now that Empire is dissolved the Laws then made bind all the Princes and Churches on Earth viz. that a defunct power still ruleth even those that never owed them obedience § 15. VVe must believe that we in England are rightfully under a Foreign Church Jurisdiction contrary to the Oath of Supremacy § 16. VVe must believe that all Temporal Lords must be sworn to extirpate all Protestants and to perform it if able on pain of Excommunication Deposition and Damnation And that if they do not the Pope may execute this penalty of Excommunicating and Deposing them and giving their Dominion to others and may Absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance Concil Later sub Innoc. 3. Can. 1 2 3. § 17. VVe must Swear never to expound the Scripture but according to the Concordant sense of the Ancient Fathers who never expounded much at all much less ever agreed in any Exposition of them all § 18. VVe must believe that God hath given the Church that is the Pope and Councils a Power to Expound hard Scriptures and to end Controversies and that this is a great Blessing to us VVhen yet neither Pope nor Councils will give us a Commentary on the Bible or exposition of hard Texts nor will determine most of the Controversies that now trouble us § 19. VVe must believe that the Governing part of the Church is to be obeyed and Gods VVord received but by their Proposal when yet it is not known who is the Governing part Pope or Council nor which Councils be true and which but false Conventions nor can they assure us how we may ever come to know it § 20. VVe must believe those Councils to be true and credible which contradict and condemn each other and that both are in the right § 21. VVe must believe both that all Gods VVord in the Sacred Scripture is true and that Councils and Popes say Truth when they contradict it § 22. VVe must believe
that Popery called Antichristianity is no worse a thing than these and so honour Popery and deride its Accusers I would these named were all the wrongs that Protestants have done to the Protestant Cause of Reformation and all that they have ignorantly done for Popery But we hope our great Intercessor will procure forgiveness for them that know not what they do But must the Church still suffer so much by its zealous Friends Chap. XIII What is the Duty of all other Christians towards the Papists in order to the Promoting of the Common Interest of Christianity THough I have distinctly answered this Question in the Second Part of my Key for Catholicks I will here answer it again lest I be thought to run into Extreams or encourage the Extreams of others by all that I have here and elsewhere said And as to the chat of Ignorant Faction that will say I contradict my self I will answer it with Contempt and Pity § I. First we must lay deep in our Minds and inculcate on our Hearers the common Fundamental Truths and Duty That Love is the Second great Commandment like to the First That it is the fulfilling of the Law That he that dwells in Love dwells in God and God in him That he that loveth not his Brother whom he hath seen loveth not God whom he never saw That some love belongs to Enemies and much more to Brethren That as much as in us lyeth we must live peaceably with all Men Yea and follow Peace with all men And that these are Duties that nothing can dispense with § II. We must acknowledge and commend all that is good among them and must truly understand in what we are agreed That is They acknowledge all the same Books of Scripture to be the true Word of God which we acknowledge They own all the Articles of the Creed which we own and of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed They own all the Lord's Prayer and all the Ten Commandments saving that they take the Second to be but part of the First and divide the Tenth into two They teach in their Catechisms all the Beatitudes Math. 5. and the Moral Virtues and the Graces of Faith Hope and Love c. And he that practically and sincerely doth all this hath many Promises of Salvation in the Scripture § III. We must not untruly fasten on them any Errour which they hold not nor put a false sence on their words though we may find many Protestants that so charge them nor may we charge that on the Party which is held but by some whom others contradict How far many Protestants herein mistake and rashly wrong them In the Doctrine of Predestination Free-will Grace Merits Justification Redemption Perseverance c. I have freely shewed in my Catholick Theology and End of Doctrinal Controversies And Ludovicus le Blank after others hath excellently opened § IV. We must not take all the Laity to own all that the disputing Clergy write for when they neither understand it nor consent to it § V. As we must distinguish between the Essentials of Popery and their Integrals or other Corruptions so we must not charge any with the first meerly for being guilty of many of the other Else we must call all the Greeks Moscovites Abassines Armenians c. Papists § VI. We must still distinguish between Christs Catholick Church unifyed by his own Headship only and the Papal Church unifyed by a pretended Universal Humane Head Monarchical or Aristocratical And so we must distinguish between a Christian as such and a Papist as such And we must hold Communion with Papists in Christianity though not in Popery And must grant that those that hold Christs Headship and Christianity more firmly and practically than the Pope's Headship and Popery and seeing not the Contradiction would renounce the Papacy if they saw it may be saved § VII To profess utter averseness to all Reconciliation with them and to declare them no Christians but Antichristians that must be the Objects only of our Hostility is to be Adversaries to the first mentioned Fundamentals and to the common interest of Peace and Christianity § VIII We must disclaim their opinion that say that the Church became Antichristian in 300 or 400 or 600 or any time before the Popes claimed Universal Jurisdiction over the Christian World as well as in the Roman Empire And then the Papal revolt did not reach one half the Church § IX We must not impute the Papal or Patriarchal Vices and Pride to the generality of the inferior Bishops though in Councils too many were very Factious For even a Heathen Amm. Marcellinus tells us the great difference by Papal Pride and lower Bishops Humility and Virtue § X. We must not take the Question whether the Pope be Antichrist as more necessary than it is Nor make the Decision an Article of Faith nor lay more of the stress of our difference on it than we ought For we have many far clearer Arguments against them from plainer Scriptures § XI Therefore we must not force the vulgar to Disputes with Papists without cause on forced Expositions and Suppositions that turn the Revelations against Rome Papal as the Babylon and Antichrist there meant when so much may be said and is by some Protestants to make it likely that it is but Rome Pagan that is there meant We must not give their Disputers the advantage of Challenging us before the Vulgar to name one Man for a Thousand Years and more after Christ that expounded the Revelation as we do or that took the Pope to be Antichrist § XII We must not imitate the great Novel Expositors of the Revelation that make the seven Churches to be seven States and Ages of the Universal Church and two of them to be in the World to come after the Conflagration and consequently that if by the Angel of each Church be meant the Bishop either alone or with his Elders as most think old and new Expositors then an Universal Humane Head is of Gods Institution And if that be true then P●pery will be right in its Essentials and we in the wrong We must take heed therefore of the ignorant factious Zeal of over-doers that make men Papists by false opposing them § XIII We must take heed lest we make any one falshood a part of the Protestant Religion and Reformation much less many plain falshoods as too many do For when Papists find any such Untruths they will judge of our Religion in the main by those § XIV We must see that in the Form of our Government and Worship we own not Principles of Confusion and set not up our selves our devised terms of Church Admittance and Communion and thereby seem to justifie such Additions among Papists and others § XV. We must live in Love and Peace and Concord among our selves that our Fractions Sects and Errours and envious Oppositions make us not a scorn and make not Papists think that we are mad and
Preach meer desperation to all that have not more knowledge than I have who cannot possibly find out a Governing Universal Church nor its Laws though I would willingly find it and obey it Q. 53. Do they not Preach common desperation who say that Schism is a damnable Sin and he is in that guilt who suffers himself to be Excommunicated by Prelates for not obeying them in any unsinful condition of Communion as H. Dodwell speaketh Do not such Carnifices animarum make it necessary to Salvation to know all the unsinful things in the World which a Prelate may impose to be unsinful And is any man on Earth so Skilful How many indifferent things are there which the wisest man may doubt whether they be indifferent Of old it was thought enough to know the few things which God made necessary and now these Tormenting Uniters make it necessary to know the multitude of things indifferent to be such Q. 54. Must we needs know what sense perceiveth by the credit of a General Council or all the Bishops of the World As whether I see the Light or Colours What taste my Meat hath c If not why may I not take Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine on the credit of my senses though the Bishops or Council say the contrary Q. 55. Must I have the Authority of a Council or College of Bishops to believe that there is a God and that he is most Great and Wise and Good most Holy Merciful True and Just or to know that there is a Life to come and the Soul Immortal or that men must not hate the Good and love the Evil as such nor live in Murther Theft Adultery Perjury c. Doth not the Law of Nature bind men without a Council of Prelates And can they null that Law by their pretended Soveraignty Q. 56. Must every man have the Sentence of a General Council or College as wide as the Christian World to satisfie him of the truth of Christianity before he is Baptized and made a Christian Q. 57. Must we know what the Council or spacious College saith before we believe the Creed Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments or did the ancient Christians receive them only on such Authority Did not every Baptizer expect a Profession of the Creed Q. 58. Was not the Bible received before there was a General Council Q. 59. Have not Councils differed about the Canonical Books of Scripture See Bishop Cousins of the Canon Compared with the Council of Trent Q. 60. Must we have new Councils to deliver us again the same Creed and Bible Q. 61. Is it not a reproaching of Christianity to tell the World that after 1691 Years it is not yet fully known what it is but we must have new Councils to tell it us and to make it up Q. 62. Did Councils only receive the old Apostles Creed when they made so many new ones or added so many Articles Q. 63. Was the Primitive Church of the same Species with the present Romish and Imposing Church when he was then a Christian who profest belief of the Creed as the Christian Symbol and to desire according to the Lord's Prayer and Practise according to Christ's Commands And now so many other things are made necessary hereto Q. 64. Do not those men deal falsely who subscribe the 39 Articles of the sufficiency of the Scripture as to all things necessary to Salvation and yet say that it 's necessary to Salvation to obey the Bishop of the place in all unsinful things and consequently to Believe them all to be unsinful Q. 65. Is it by the Divine Authority of a Council or Mundane College of Prelates that we know which are the true Writings of Ignatius Irenaeus Clemens R. Alex. Tertullian Cyprian Hierom Augustin c Or do their Critical Writers send us to the College or Council to know If not why may not the Canon of Scripture be known yea much better by meer Historical Tradition and inherent Evidence Q. 66. Is it not by History and not Church Power that we know what Popes have been at Rome what Councils have been called and what they decreed And may not the same way secure us of the Matter of Fact about the Scripture Q. 67. Hath any Council or College yet Decreed which are the true and current Copies of the Original of the Scripture and which of the various Lections are true If they had agreed but of the vulgar Latin would Sixtus 5th and Clemens 8th have Published Editions so vastly different If they never did it yet when will they do it Q. 68. Did ever Council or College determine which is the truest Translation Q. 69. Did ever Council or College give the Church a Commentary on the Bible Q. 70. Did they ever write a Decision of the multitudes of Controversies about the meaning of several Texts and the multitudes of Doctrines which are yet controverted among Papists themselves and all the World Q. 71. Is it a Satisfaction or a gross Cheat to tell us of a necessary Church Power to Expound Scripture and Judge of Controversies who yet will not do it but leave all unexpounded and undecided Q. 72. Was Gregory Nazianzen a Fool that spake so much of the hurt that Councils do and resolved never to go to more Q. 73. Can I know that Pope or Council have Authority given them by Christ before I believe that Christ is Christ and had Authority himself Q. 74. Can I know that Christ's Promise to Pope Council or Prelate is true before I know that the Promise of Justification Adoption and Salvation are true that is Before I am a Christian Q. 75. Can I believe the Promise of Pardon and Salvation or the Promise made to General Councils or Prelates without knowing the meaning of those Promises And can I believe the Churches Power from God without believing the Promise of it And if I can understand all these Promises without a Council why may I not understand more And how then do I receive all Scripture from a Council Q. 76. Do those that Preach to convert Infidels in Congo China Japan Mexico among Turks c. Preach first the Authority of General Councils or a Mundane College as the Primum credendum upon whose credit Christianity is to be received Hath this been the way to Convert the World Q. 77. If Paul curse an Angel from Heaven if he bring another Gospel and Paul charge Timothy to see that men Preach no other or new Doctrine must there be Councils or a College to make either a new Gospel or a new Doctrine or Universal Law Q. 78. If men were saved without believing the Canons and Decrees of Councils before they were made even by simple Christianity is it not necessary Mercy to let men be so saved still Q. 79. If it be not a new Gospel but mutable Accidents which the Church Laws do determine of what need there an Universal Power or Soveraignty or an Universal Law