guide it into all Truth surely it will not be wanting to it in this Point which is the most material of all others But I suppose the Dr. grounds his Argument upon this Axiom no Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause If he shou'd hence conclude that the supreme Judge cannot decide a Controversie concerning his own Prerogative he must certainly be a great Stranger to all Civil Laws and Constitutions in the World The King and Parliament together are the Supreme Judge of all Causes in England Now if we suppose the Rest of the people of England shou'd Dispute that Prerogative this Controversie according to the Doctor 's Principles can never be ended Not by the King and Parliament for it is their Own Cause nor yet by the Rest of the People of England for it is not Reasonable they shou'd be Judge and Party Who must judge it then No Body So that if we stretch that Axiom thus far we must leave undecided that without which nothing can be lawfully decided The true Sense of it then is this No Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause that is no Private Man who lives under Laws and Government ought to Judge for himself or be his own Carver but must have Recourse to the ordinary Judges whose Sentence he and his Adverse Party are bound to obey But this is by no means to be extended to the Supreme Legislative Power whose very Essence is to Judge all others and to be Judg'd by None As to what he says that a Controversie Who this Infallible Judge is cou'd never yet be decided in the Church of Rome I answer there never was any Controversie in the Church of Rome concerning what is of Faith in this Point namely that the Church is this Infallible Judge and what the Church is surely no Roman Catholic ever disputed Vol. 3. Edit post obit pag. 32. Object 4. If God had thought it necessary That there shou'd be an Infallible Church he wou'd have reveal'd this very thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever but this he has not done therefore he did not think it necessary Answ Let the Socinians for once answer or rather Retort this Argument upon the Doctor Had God say they thought the Knowledge of Three Persons really distinct each of them perfect God and yet but One God necessary to be believ'd by the Faithful he wou'd have reveal'd this very Thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever because it is look'd upon to be the Chiefest Mystery of Christianity but this He has not done Therefore he did not think it necessary to be believ'd Will the Doctor allow this Argument to be good If not I hope he will give me leave to have the same Thoughts of his Argument For I am certain there is no Text in Scripture that proves a Real Distinction of Three Persons whereof each is Perfect God and all but One God so plainly as it proves many other things which are not so necessary to Salvation But has not God plainly reveal'd that the Church is Infallible Tell the Church and if he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and Publican When the Spirit of Truth cometh He shall guide you into all Truth Go teach all Nations And lo I am with you alway even unto the End of the World The Church is the Ground and Pillar of Truth Are not all these clear and plain Has not Christ's own Mouth and his Apostle's reveal'd all These concerning the Church Surely then he judg'd the Infallibility of the Church necessary to be believ'd And this is to a Reasonable Man instead of a Thousand Arguments that He thought it not only necessary but even laid it down as the Chief Fundamental Point of our Belief because this once firmly establish'd wou'd easily clear the Obscurity of any other Object 5. pag. 77. We have as great need of Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice as against Errors in matters of Faith but we have no Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice consequently nor against Errors in matters of Faith Answ This Comparison is in one sense Just and Reasonable and in that sense I will be content to stand or fall by it viz. That as the assistance of the Holy Ghost infallibly secures the Church from Error so the assistance of God's Grace together with the cooperation of our Wills which is always in our power is an infallible security against Sin if put in ure For is not every Sin voluntary And if voluntary surely we may abstain from it it wou'd not be voluntary else For if we cannot abstain from it it is no more voluntary but necessary and therefore no Sin and have not we in several places of the Scripture a promise of the Assistance of God's Grace which is never wanting to our sincere Endeavours and if we have God's Grace and are able at least by this assistance to abstain from sin certainly we have an infallible Security against Sin and Vice or if we have it not how can it stand with the infinit goodness of God to condemn us eternally for that which we cannot avoid In short as it is most agreeable to his infinit goodness and mercy to condemn no Man for what he cannot help so it is but reasonable we shou'd believe he has given us such means as will infallibly secure us if it be not our own fault both from Errors in matters of Faith and from Sin and Vice in matters of Practice But with this difference that Free-will without which there can be no reward or punishment by not cooperating with Grace falls into Sin and Vice whereas the assistance of the holy Ghost depending of no such condition as to its effect infallibly attains its end and preserves the Church from Error in matters of Faith Object 6. All things necessary to be known either in Faith or Practice are clear and plain in Scripture therefore there is no need of an Infallible Church Answ This is a Fundamental Principle I think I may truly say with all Protestants The Dr. I am sure repeats it several Times and lays great Stress upon it But in establishing this Principle he does two things which I suppose he wou'd not willingly allow of had he but well consider'd them 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scripture as infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be 2. He justifies in a great measure all the Heretics that ever denied any Points of Faith on pretence that they are not plain in Scripture 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scriptures as Infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be For the Catholic Church pretends only to be Infallible in necessary Articles of Faith Now if all things necessary to be known in Faith and Practice be clear and plain in Scripture there is no Man of sense that
very hard if not impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as may make a Separation excusable impossible according to St. Austin that there should be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic Thus far the Dr. and indeed very right only where the Fathers condemn him and his party he is so much a Friend to his Cause as to alter the Phrase a little For instance whereas St. Ireneus says absolutely It is impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as to make a Separation excusable he saw very well that if no kind of Injury or Provocation cou'd justifie a Separation himself and his Party stood condemned in that Holy Fathers Opinion and therefore he changed the word Impossible into very hard if not impossible tho' in the Greek which some will have to be the original or Latin Translation there is not the least colour for it So where St. Austin saith That it is impossible there should be any just Cause for any to separate from the Catholic Church He softens the Expression changing Catholic Church into the Church truly Catholic pretending if I may presume to spell his meaning that they did not separate from the Church truly Catholic tho' they had separated from all other Societies and Congregations in the World upon a ridiculous Pretence as if the Catholic Church and the Church truly Catholic were two different things or where the Expression seems too harsh he thinks himself sufficiently entituled to moderate it as where the Holy Father St. Austin says There is no Crime so great as Schism he makes bold with his Words rendring them thus there is scarce any Crime so great as Schism Mr. Serjeant to whose great Wit and indefatigable Labour we are obliged for several other Learned and Ingenious Works in these two excellent Treatises presses his Antagonist to purge himself and his party of the guilt of Schism since he owns they had made a separation from that Church in whose communion they and their Ancestors were since they imbraced the Christian Faith But among other pressing Arguments he urges this which in my opinion is enough to open any man's eyes that has not sworn never to see the Sun Dr. Hammond gathers from Fathers and Scripture that Schism is so horrid a sin that there is scarce any crime I give you his own words so great not Sacriledg Idolatry parricide not expiable by Martyrdom very hard if not impossible to receive such an injury or provocation from the Church as may make a separation excuseable Impossible according to St. Augustin that there shou'd be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic whence Mr. Serjeant reasons thus No Man in his Wits much less any body of Learned Men ought to separate from the Church or withdraw themselves from its Authority unless they had a clear and evident Conviction both that this Separation waâ— absolutely necessary and that the Authority pretended by the Church was a manifest usurpation because they would else incur that horrid guilt of Schism But Dr. Hammond and his Party are so far from having any such Evidence or Conviction for either the one or the other that nothing is pretended but bare probabilities and conjectures Consequently it is the last of madness and folly in Dr. Hammond and his Party to persist in their Separation Now Dr. Tillotson who was a very acute Man foreseeing what effect so plain a Demostration was like to have upon such as tendered the Salvation of their Souls being however resolved to maintain the Cause at any rate cou'd bethink himself of nothing sufficient to justifie so dangerous a Separation less than a clear and evident Demonstration of the necessity of it And this in my opinion was the Reason why he undertook to demonstrate that in regard of the aforesaid controverted Points the common sense of Man-kind natural Reason and the Scripture were as clear and evident on the Protestant's side as that twice two make four But what if I shew that he is so far from having any such Evidence on his side that there is not one of all these Points in which he instances but what is destitute of even the least probable Argument to support it Nay I go farther what if I demonstrate that the R. Catholics have all the Evidence and Reason that the nature of such things will bear for what they hold concerning these Points Then surely I may reasonably hope that Rational Men who ought to tender the welfare of their Immortal Souls will be so just to themselves as seriously to consider into what horrible and dangerous crimes they are drawn by the wilfulness of Men who are resolved to maintain a Separation which all the world knows was begun for no other end than to countenance Things that I am unwilling to name but are too well known to be concealed This I shall endeavour by the assistance of God's Grace to perform in the following Chapters when I have first laid down that chief and fundamental Point of all Controversies namely the Infallibility of the Church CHAP. I. Of the Infallibility of the Church THE R. Catholics hold that the Church is infallible that is cannot err in delivering the Doctrine she received from Jesus Christ nor mistake in her Explanation thereof when by Heretics wrested and perverted to a wrong sense The ground of which Tenet I conceive to be this that Christ has provided such efficacious means for the conveyance of Truth to all succeding Ages as will infallibly secure the Church from error in her Decrees concerning Articles of Faith This Point is to be managed with so much the more perspicuity and clearness by how much it is of greater importance than any other It will be therefore requisite to take some pains to satisfie Mens Reasons and if it be possible to make this Truth so clear and evident that those whose Interest and Prejudices make them unwilling to own it may at least be ashamed to deny it And methinks I have this peculiar advantage in this undertaking that every Pious Christian who tenders the welfare of his Soul cannot chuse but wish me success because I undertake the Proof of that which it is every Man's Interest it shou'd be true for if I can shew that there is an Infallible Church and that such a Congregation of Faithful is that Church then all Christians who are Solicitous about the true Church and the means of Salvation and agitated with various Scruples and Difficulties and which is more dreadful threatned with Hell and Damnation by the furious Zeal of different Parties may sit still and hear what the Infallible Church says to them In the handling then of this important Truth I shall do these three Things First I will endeavour to shew that there is a Church or Congregation of Faithful which is Infallible in her Decisions and Declarations
Rome did exercise Jurisdiction by way of Excommunication over the Eastern Bishops of which alone there remains any difficulty We have besides Innumerable Examples from the Fourth to the Tenth Century as that for instance Innocent the First excommunicated â—â—eâ—phiâ—us Bishop of Alexandria Celestinus the First Nestorius of Constantinople Agapâ—tus Anthimius another Bishop of Constantinople Nicholas the First Pâ—otius the intruded Bish p of Constantinople besides these I say we have two memorable Facts to this purpose in the begining of the Second and about the midle of the Third Century The first is related by two Eminent Witnesses St. Irenaeus Eusebius Casariensis by St. Ireâ—aeus in a Letter to Pope Victor and by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History lib. 5. cap. 25. This Historian tells us that Victor Bishop of Rome excommunicated Polycrates and the Rest of the Asiatic Bishops because they wou'd not be induc'd to celebrate Easter after the Roman Custom And St. Irenaeus in his Leter to this Pope complains most grievously of his Severity in cutting off so many Members from the Body of the Church for a matter of Discipline which no way respected the Faith 'T is true St. Irenaeus and Eusebius do not approve of Victor's Proceedings in this Bus'ness because they look'd upon his Sentence to be too severe yet neither the one nor the other did ever say that Victor had no power to do so And as St. Irenaeus took the liberty to reprehend the Pope for his too great Severity as he thought in this matter so no doubt he wou'd have told him that he exceeded his Commission by such a Procedure if he had not been convinc'd that the like Power had been vested in him And most certainly Eusebius who was an Asiatic Bishop himself wou'd never have complemented the Bishop of Rome but wou'd have plainly here inserted that the Pope had no power to Excommunicate the Bishops of Asia had there been the least question of his Authority in that particular The Second is that famous Controversie between Pope Stephen and St. Cyprian touching the Baptism confer'd by Hereties Many learned Writers are of opinion that St. Stephen Excommunicated St. Cyprian and his Adherents and all do agree that he threatn'd at last to Excommunicate Them Yet we do not find that St. Cyprian or any other Ecclesiastical Writer did ever say that the Bishop of Rome exceeded his Power in so doing 'T is true St. Cyprian and his Adherents as well as the Asiatic Bishops persisted in their Error notwithstanding the Pope's Excommunication as it usually falls out Men being hardly ever diswaded from the Opinions they once undertake to maintain but the Council of Nice has Justifi'd the Pope's Conduct in both these particulars branding with Heresie such as maintain'd the said Errors That there were Appeals made to the Bishop of Rome by the Eastern Bishops is no less manifest St. Athanasius and Paul Bishop of Constantinople appeal'd to Pope Julius for redress of the Violence offer'd them by the Arians St. Chrys stom to Innocent the First Theodoretus to Leo besides many more which I shall at present omit Socrates a famous Ecclesiastical Writer of the Primitive Times tells us lib. 2. cap. 15. How St. Athanasius and Paul with several other Bishops came to Rome and complain'd to Julius of the Violence offer'd them by the Arians and how he had undertaken their Patronage Among other things he adds this concerning the Pope's Authority in this particular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But he the Pope because the Church of Rome had that Priviledge warranted them with his Letters wherein he freely spoke his mind and sent them back to the East restoring Each to his own Place and severely reprehending those who rashly turn'd them out The Learned Theodoretus informs us Hist Eccles lib. 2. cap. 4. that St. Athanasius being a second Time turn'd out by the Arians appeal'd again to Rome And that Pope Julius following the Canon of the Church commanded the Arians to come to Rome and cited Athanasius to appear at his Consistory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us now put both these Testimonies together Here are two of the greatest Bishops of the East violently thrust out of their Bishopricks and flying to the Bishop of Rome for Redress Here are two of the most famous and most Eminent Historians of Antiquity who tell us that the Church of Rome had a peculiar Priviledge to protect and restore Bishops that the Bishop of Rome did but act according to or follow the Canon or Law of the Church as Thedoretus words it when he commanded the Aâ—ians to appear before him and summon'd Athanasius to answer their Charge If these be not Aâ—ts of Legal Jurisdiction if this be not the formal and proper Process of an Appeal we are as yet to Learn the meaning of these Terms Palladius Bishop of Helenopolis in the Life of St. Chrysostom tells us that this great Patriach sent four Bishops to Rome to plead his Cause and we have two Letters of Theodoretus setting forth his Appeal to the Bishop of Rome the first to the Pope and the second to Renatus Dean or Arch-Deacon of the Church of Rome in which he has these Words They have spoil'd me of my Bishoprick they did not reverence my Age consum'd in Religion nor my Gray Hairs Wherefore I beseech you to perswade the most Holy Arch-bishop to use his Apostâ—lic Authority and to command us to come to your Consistory for that Holy See sitteth at the Helm and hath the Government of the whole World Besides all these we have an express Canon of the General Council of Sardica held in or about the Year 347. wherein it is manifestly Decreed That if any Bishop be accus'd or condemn'd or depriv'd of his Bishoprick by the Bishops of his Province and that the Bishop thus depriv'd will Appeal or fly to the Bishop of Rome and desire to be heard the Bishop of Rome may either commit the Cognizance of his Cause to the Bishops of the Neighbouring Province or send Legats clâ—ath'd with his own Authority to be present at the Judgement or do whatever shall seem best in that behalf to his own most prudent Counsel Now let any Impartial Man judge if the single Authority of this Council be not sufficient to establish the Pope's Authority in Point of Appeals tho' there were nothing else to prove it That the Bishop of Rome exercis'd Jurisdiction over the Eastern Bishops by way of Confirmation and Deposition is too well known to need much Proof St. Leo tells us Epist 13. That he was earnestly desir'd by Theodosius the Emperor to confirm Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople which yet he refus'd to do unless Anatolius had first profess'd the same Doctrine with Cyrillus and the Rest of the Catholic Bishops in Opposition to the Heresie of Nestorius The same Pope gives us to understand in his Epist 82. That he had constituted the Bishop of Thessalonica as his Vicegerent in that part of
Ordinary Rule the Council of Trent does not in the least favour their Pretension I shall subjoin the very Words of that Council and leave it to speak for it self Since Experience sheweth that Cum experimento manifestumsit si Sacra Biblia vulgari lingua passim sine discrimne permittantur plus inde ob Hominum temeritatem detrimenti quam utilitatis oriri hac in parte Judicio Episcopi aut Inquisitoris stetur ut cum consilio Patochi vel Confessarij Bibliorum a Catholicis authoribus verlorum lectionem in vulgari lingua eis concedere possint quos intellexerint ex hujusmodi lectione non damnum sed fidei atque pietatis augmentum capere posse quam facultatem in scriptis habeant De lib. proh Reg. 4. if the Sacred Bible were permitted Indifferently and without Distinction in vulgar Language such a Liberty by reason of Men's Rashness wou'd occasion more hurt than good Be it left to the Bishop's or Inquisitor's Judgment by and with the Advice of the Parish priest or Confessor to give leave to read the Versions of Catholic Authors in vulgar Language to such as may in their Opinion receive not a Loss but an Increase of Faith and Piety thereby Which Leave they are to have in Writing De lib. prob Reg. 4. Hence I think it is plain the Council is so far from locking up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue that it gives free Leave to every one whom the Bishop or Inquisitor with the Advice of the Parish priest or Confessor shall judge meet to read it in vulgar Language And since there is nothing so proper nor so powerful to increase Faith and Piety in a Meek and Humble Soul as the Sacred Scripture 't is plain that no sincere Christian is barr'd by this Decree from the use of it in vulgar Language And if any such shou'd happen to be refus'd leave to read it which we have no Reason to suppose 't is contrary to the Spirit and Intention of the Council who orders that Persons so dispos'd may have the free use of them And however this no great Restraint was necessary in those Days when Mens minds were in a Ferment and the Itch of Novelty had seiz'd them as it commonly happens when any new Opinions are broach'd yet when they began to see with their own Eyes and became more Still and Calm the Governors of the Church were so far from hindring them the use of the Scripture or putting this Decree in execution that they exhort all Persons to Read and Meditate upon them as the most effectual means to bring them acquainted with the Will of God and their Duty to Him And now methinks Dr. Tillotson and his Party are of all Others the unfittest to reproach us this Conduct considering that most of the Learned Men of his Church do ingenuously own that the promiscuous use of the Scripture allow'd to all sorts of Persons and their private Interpretations thereof was in a great measure the cause of all the Different Sects that sprung up and divided themselves from their Communion As to what he says that Christ exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures that St. Luke commends the Berâ—ans for so doing and that the Holy Fathers do earnestly recommend the Reading and Study of the Scriptures I acknowledge the truth of this saying I will add to it that all the Art and Industry all the Rhetoric and Eloquence in the World have not that Force and Efficacy upon Pious and Virtuous Souls that the serious Reading and Meditating upon the Holy Scriptures hath yet this notwithstanding since Experience hath taught us that as the Spider extracts Poison out of the same Flower whence the Bee gathers Honey so I believe no Man can doubt considering all the Schism and horrid Impieties now maintain'd but that the rankest Soul-killing Poison has been often extracted out of the sacred Scriptures not out of any Defect in them but thro' the deprav'd Disposition and Supercilious Pride of the Readers And therefore I think it is the least the Church cou'd do in a time of confutation and disorder such as was that of the Council of Trent when so many were gapeing after Novelty and setting up for Heads of new Sects to moderate the Use and Reading of those Sacred Writings But still so as not to shut up the Fountain of Life nor hinder all Good and Virtuous Christians to drink of that Living-Water which tho' little Restraint was yet by Degrees abated as Men began to entertain Thoughts of Peace and Quiet and in a few Years after was insensibly taken away in many Countries by a Tacit Admission of the Reading of Scripture in vulgar Languages to all sorts of people And this I am sure no Body can justly deny to be the Case of the R. Catholic Church in regard of the present Debate which how agreeable to Sense and Reason and to the Piety and Care of a Tender Mother let even the most Inveterate of our Adversaries judge Touching the fourth viz. It cannot be imagin'd how people shou'd square or measure their Faith by this Rule unless they were allow'd to Read and Understand it Answ The Answer to this Objection is sufficiently imply'd in what I spoke to the former I shall therefore add these few Words only That the Word of God is the Rule of our Faith but whether it be convey'd to us by Writing or by Word of Mouth methinks the Scripture it self declares in favour of the latter For Christ our Lord as the Evangelists say commanded his Disciples to go and preach the Gospel but we do not find that He gave any Injunction about giving his Word in Writing to the people in order to learn their Faith However since it is confess'd that the Sacred Scriptures are excellent Means to edifie our Faith and compose our Manners we do earnestly and heartily recommend them to the Study and Meditation of the People Concerning the last viz. That we therefore lock up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue because it is certain that if the common people were once brought to understand the Scripture they wou'd soon quit us and go over to them Answ This Proposition is false in all its Circumstances 1. That we do not lock up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue is already prov'd 2. That the common People wou'd not quit our Religion c. will easily appear if we consider that by the same Rule our Scholars and Men of Letters who understand the Scripture in that Language which they call unknown shou'd have quitted us which he well knew they do not Men of Breeding and Sense are less apt to be pleas'd with Superstition and Error than the common ordinary People and we cannot suppose they shou'd have less Regard for the good of their Souls than ordinary people and yet since those Men from whom we cannot if we wou'd conceal any thing in our Faith or Practice do not go over to them but persist in our Communion
the Martyrs with a Religious Solemnity to excite us to their Imitation to be Partakers of their Merits and to be assisted by their Prayers Yet so as that we erect no Altars to the Martyrs but to the God of Martyrs tho' in Remembrance of the Martyrs For who of the Prelates standing at the Altar where the Bodies of the Saints are ever said I offer to you Peter Paul or Cyprian But that which is offer'd is offer'd to God who crown'd the Martyrs at the Memorial * Altars where the Relicks of Martyrs were kept of those whom he crown'd to the End that from the Remembrance of those places greater Affection may rise in us to whet our Love towards those we may imitate and towards Him God by whose Help we shall be able to imitate We worship then the Martyrs with that Worship of Love and Fellowship wherewith Holy Men in this Life are worship'd whose Hearts we perceive prepar'd for the like Passion in defence of the Truth of the Gospel but the Martyrs we worship so much the more devoutly by how much the more securely when the Fight is over and by how much the more confidently we may praise the Conquerors now in a happy State than those who as yet are fighting in â—his Life But with that worship which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Latin cannot be render'd in one word since it is a certain Service properly due to God alone we do not worship nor teach to be worship'd but one God And since the offering Sacrifice pertains to this Worship whence Idolatry is imputed to those who give it to Idols we do by no means offer any such thing nor command to be offer'd either to any Martyr or any Holy Soul or Angel And whosoever falls into any such Error he is reprehended by wholesom Doctrine to the End he may amend or be shun'd Lib. 20. Cap. 22. contra Faust Manich. As to his last Consideration viz. That in the public Offices of their Church they do not only pray to the Saints to pray for them but they direct their Prayers and Thanksgivings immediately to them for all those Blessings and Benefits which they ask of God and thank him for I answer 5. That this is a notorious Imposition upon us and as great a Mark of Insincerity as it is a sign of a sinking Cause which needs such foul play to support it In short there is nothing more common than the Roman Missal and Breviary which contain all the public Offices of the Church and I challenge any Man to find as much as one single Prayer in either of these Books read in the public Offices of the Church which is directed immediately to either Angel or Saint for all those Benefits and Blessings which we ask of God and thank Him for As for that Example which he gives us out of the Office of the B. Virgin as he says namely that we pray to the Angels thus Deliver us we beseech you by your Command from all our Sins If it were true that there is such a Prayer in it 't is not to the Doctor 's purpose for that Office is no part of the public Offices of the Church nor was it ever publickly read in the Church But that it is not True I am an Eye Witness for I have upon this very occasion read every Word of that Office I mean the Office of the B. Virgin annex'd to the Breviary and I can in Truth aver that I found no such Prayer or Anthem or Versicle in it As to any other Offices of the B. Virgin made and publish'd by private Men whether there be any such prayer in them 't is more than I can tell for I have not read them all This I am certain that if there be 't is more than any Man is warranted by the Church to do However since none of these Offices of the Virgin Mary make any part of the public Offices Service of the Church nor are ever publickly read in it The Doctor had no Reason to charge such Prayers upon the public Offices of the Church tho' they were found in those private Offices of the B. Virgin Vol. 2. pag. 70. His fourth Objection is to this purpose To pray to Saints in all places and at all times and for all sorts of Blessings does suppose them to have the Incommunicable Perfections of the Divine Nature imparted to them or inherent in them namely Omnipotence and Omniscience and Immense-presence Answ This is the great popular Argument that takes so much with the weaker sort of People who measure all things by their own capacity and do not conceive how Saints and Angels shou'd hear at so great a distance because they cannot do so themselves It will be therefore requisite to take some pains to clear this difficulty and if it be possible to disabuse these simple but well-meaning People concerning these gross and carnal thoughts which that I may the more plainly do I shall lay down these known and evident Grounds 1. That Angels and Saints in Heaven have naturally a faculty of understanding and communicating their Thoughts that is a power connatural to their being of perceiving the thoughts of others that are directed to them and of imparting their own thoughts to others for these are essential Properties of Intelligent Beings 2. That Angels and Saints in Heaven do neither see nor hear in the sense we commonly take these Words For seeing they neither have Eyes nor Ears which are the Organs of Seeing and Hearing they cannot be said properly to See or Hear but only to Vnderstard which is what we mean when we say the Saints do hear us 3. Hence follows that Saints and Angels may Hear that is Vnderstand us when we direct our thoughts to them at any distance even at Ten Millions of Miles as well as if they had been in the same Room with us For since our Words or Thoughts are not convey'd to them by means of any Organs nor by the motion or impulse of the Air as it happens with us 't is evident that distance or neerness of place can have no part in their way of understanding 4. That God-Almighty is able to reveal in an Instant all our Prayers to the Angels and Saints be they never so far distant from us tho' Angels and Saints are not properly speaking distant from us distance in propriety of Speech being that space which is between two Bodies Now whether we conceive that the Angels and Saints when we direct our thoughts to them do hear or rather understand us by that natural faculty which is essential to all Intelligent Beings or that God reveals our thoughts to them we do not ascribe any of the incommunicable perfections of the Divine Nature to them namely Omnipotence Omniscience Immense-Presence c. Not if we conceive that they understand our prayers by that natural faculty which is essential to their Being 1. We do not