caused me to defer it again after it had made me understand that this same Romish Faith was grounded neither upon the Authority of the Holy Fathers nor upon the Practice of the Ancient Christians according to the pretensions of the Roman Theologians This Pretence was the Authority of Rome which I supposed Infallible and it was that pretended Infallible Authority which kept me stil in its Communion If the Roman Church be Infallible what matter is it whether the Articles determined by it have any foundation in the Word of God or upon the Authority of the Fathers or Practice of the Primitive Church As long as we suppose it Infallible we must believe all the Articles it teaches and it signifies nothing to say that such or such an Article of Faith was not heretofore believed When the Roman Church shall declare it an Article of Faith to believe That the blessed Virgin Mary was conceived without any original sin and that we must hold as oecumenick the Council of Basil that * Sess 36. teaches us this Doctrine When this Church shall declare That all Christians are truly and really buried in Jesus Christ in Baptism That the Water used in that Sacrament is transubstantiated into Christ's own true Blood wherein our sins are purified and That it is an Heresie to believe that under the appearances of the Water of the Baptism there remains something of the substance of Water That Baptism must be worshipped When the Church shall be pleased to determine all these Articles and to declare that they are implicitly in (a) Rom. 6.3 4. Col. 2.12 Gal. 3.27 Scripture and in the (b) St. August Epist 164. ad Emerit Fathers we shall be obliged to believe them because the Church is Infallible This way of dealing to acknowledge plainly that neither the Fathers of the Church nor the first Christians believed many Articles of Faith which are now believed in the Church of Rome seemed to me a great deal more sincere than to seek in the Fathers what they never said and to make the Primitive Church believe things which it did never so much as think of This way of dealing freely was a little bold but it was just sincere and very easie According to that Method when one asks a Theologian Why do you believe Transubstantiation he presently answers that he believes Transubstantiation as an Article of Faith Because the Council of (c) Sess 13. cap. 4. Trent hath declared that it is an Article of Faith and pronounced Anathema against those who should hold the contrary Is is not better to answer thus than to break ones brain to give unto the Fathers both Greek and Latin several Explications which they would not avow if they were alive and to make the World believe that in those Passages of the Fathers wherein they use these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they have intended to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an Expression not to be found in any of those Fathers as it is observed by a late (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. Eccles tom 1. part post p. 247. Bishop of Norwich cited by Dr. Hammond in his Catechism I see very well said I that after the Examination of the Scripture and of the Fathers wherein it is impossible to find evidently the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church the shortest way is to refer all the business to the Authority of the Church Thus if the Authority of the Roman Church be Infallible to deal fairly simply justly and honestly we must say I believe the Christian People for whom Christ shed all his Blood ought not to partake of the Chalice of his Blood because the Council of (b) Sess 13. Constance and the Council of (c) Sess 21. Trent have so determined I believe that besides the Sacrifice of the Cross there is another Propitiatory Sacrifice viz. the Mass which blots out the Sins both of the Quick and the Dead because the Council of * Sess 22. chap. 1 2. can 1 2 3. Trent made that an Article of Faith And say the same honestly and in good earnest of Purgatory of Indulgences of Invocation of Saints and of other Articles and not headily drive on to find in the Primitive Church Articles of Faith whereof it had never so much as the least knowledge or Notion Thus there remains nothing but to examine if the Authority of the Roman Church be Infallible This was the indivisible Point whereupon I fixed all my Religion thither I reduced all the Controversial Questions wherefore I examined that Question of the Infalliblity of the Roman Church but whether because I was afraid to find the Infallibility of Rome as ill grounded as the Doctrine of Transubstantiation whether because the greediness I had to maintain with credit and reputation the Authority of the Church which I was ingaged at that time to sustain in Publick Disputes had distracted and blinded me whether because Grace was not pleased at that time to make an end of my Conversion but would have me grow ripe and root very profoundly in my mind the Reasons I had meditated to fasten me more and more in the Faith of the Holy Word I devised many Proofs and many Reasons both good and bad I perswaded my self first that I might perswade others more easily and I maintained in my Publick Theses That the Roman Church even that the Pope alone was Infallible when he determins something that belongs to the Faith That Perswasion kept me still in the Church of Rome wherefore I began to be asswaged and to change my Discourse and whereas I had considered the Articles of Faith of that Church as so many Errors because they were not agreeable with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and the Testimony of the Fathers I considered them at that time only as some Novelties which were not criminal since I supposed that Church being Infallible had right to produce every day and to declare new Articles of Faith In that Supposal when some Learned Man asked me my Sentiment in particular upon some Question of Divinity I soon return'd according to my Opinion and I reduced all the Questions to the Infallibility of Rome But when I was obliged to speak in publick and before the People I thought my self ingaged for fear of scandalizing and discontenting weak minds to use the Method which others use every where and to bring though against my own perswasion some Passages of the Scripture and some Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers of the Church to prove in particular every Article of the Roman Faith Such was my dealing at that time when the only Perswasion of the Infallibility of Rome fastened me in its Communion The END of the FIRST PART THE SECOND PART SECONDE PARTIE Que l'Eglise Romaine n'est poin◠la Veritable Eglise que so◠Authorité n'est point Infaillible qu'elle n'est remplie qu◠de Corruptions d'Erreurs INTRODUCTION La Providence fit naistre des
the Bridegroom and the Foundation of the Church as he is stiled (b) De Pontif. Roman lib. 2. cap. 31. by Bellarmin if they do signifie that the Pope is Infallible that he has the power to make new Articles of Faith (c) 2.2 q. 1. art 10. as Thomas Aquinas doth hold If those places of Scripture signifie all these Propositions they are very dark we must confess it is a very hard matter to follow these Consequences since they are contrary even to common Sence That place of St. Paul (d) 1 Corinth 11.24 This is my Body If these Words are to be expounded after the same manner that those other words of the same St. Paul in the same Epistle in the next Chapter (e) 1 Corinth 12.27 Ye are the Body of Christ this place is very easie but if these words signifie that the substance of Bread in the Holy Sacrament is transubstantiated into Jesus Christ his own Flesh into his own substance as it is written (a) Sess 13. cap 4. can 2. in the Councel of Trent that place is very obscure there is not in all the Scripture such another And if we are to give to all the Texts of Scripture which are alike to that so rough an explication to understand them after the same manner the Council of Trent understands that of St. Paul we must needs say that all the substance of Christ is Transubstantiated into the substance of a (b) Joh. 10.7 door that Christ is truly and really a (c) Joh. 1.29 Lamb that the spiritual Rock which followed the Children of Israel in the Wilderness had but the appearances the colour the hardness the resemblance of a Rock but truly and really it was Transubstantiated into the Body into the Blood into the Soul and the Divinity of Christ because the Scripture saith (d) 1 Cor. 10.4 That Rock was Christ And how horrid an absurdity would it be to draw such consequences Ah we must confess the Scripture is very difficult if we are to receive such Interpretations Besides that I did find in the Scripture many Insufficiencies Insufficiencies of the Scripture I thought it was an Article of Faith to believe that the Roman Church is the true Church which Christ has established and in all the Scripture I did find nothing of it I knew it was an Article of the Faith of Rom to believe that it is an Holy thing godly acceptable to the Lord and profitable to Men (a) Sess 25. To call upon the names of the Saints (b) Sess 25. decr 2. To Worship their Images Bones and Reliques according as it is decreed in the Council of Trent And I did not find in all the Scripture any Prayers directed to the Saints after their Death I did not find in all the Acts of the Apostles nor any where else that the first Christians had any Images in whose presence they said their Prayers neither do we read they had any Caskets or Shrines wherein Reliques were kept to bring them abroad in solemn Processions to set them in the middle of their Churches and to Worship them there Wherefore I said sometimes to my self Alas If We keep the same Faith as the first Christians why do We the things which the first Christians never did Why do We call upon the names of Saints Why do We Worship their Images and Bones I found not in all the Scripture Indulgencies or Purgatory in short I thought my self obliged to beieve several Articles of Faith of which there is no mention in the Scripture That made me think that the Scripture was an insufficient Book and that every thing which is necessary to believe for our Salvation is not contained in it But I did not perceive my errors nor the falshood of my discoursing and that whereas I did conclude that the Scripture was insufficient because I did not find in it all those Articles I should rather and more rightly conclude that all those Doctrines are not Articles of Faith since they are not to be found in the Word of God These first glimpses of Truth made a mighty Impression in my Mind though under pretences of Doubts Difficulties and Insufficiencies Contradictions of the Scripture to which were added even many contradictions which I found in the Places of the Scripture whereby the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is utterly subverted in that place of (a) 1 Tim. 4. St. Paul to Timothy Now the Spirit speaketh expresly that in the latter times some shall depart from the Faith giving heed to seducing Spirits and Doctrines of Devils speaking Lyes in Hypocrisie having their Consciences seared with a hot Iron forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats which God has created to be received with Thanksgivings You would say that the Apostle did see by the Spirit the Errors of the Roman Church which he condemns before-hand as Doctrines of Devils Who doth not understand that these words do utterly destroy the Doctrine of the Popes in the Decree of Gracian (a) Distinct 82. can Propos can Propos can Plurimos wherein the Marriage of Church-men is stiled a defiling and a Sacriledge Doutterly destory the Commandements of the Roman Church wherein it is commanded to abstain from Meats upon the pain of a Mortal Sin These Words of (b) 1 Cor. 10.16 17. St. Paul to the Corinthians The BREAD which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ We are all partakers of that one BREAD and in the next Chapter (c) 1 Cor. 1◠v. 26 27 28. As often as you Eat that BREAD c. Let a man examin himself and so let him Eat of that BREAD All these Testimonies of the Holy Ghost were a mighty weight to incline me to believe that the Holy Sacrament was the Bread which is broken Ch. 1. §. 3. But at last error did come again to extinguish this sparkle of Light which began to shine in my Soul and whereas it is the belief of Rome which is to be ruled modified and accommodated to the Truth of the Word of God I did perswade my self that these places of the Scripture were to be ruled modified and accommodated to the belief of Rome and so I was obliged to look upon all those Words of Scripture as so many Contradictions §. 3. Circumstances which did contribute to hasten my Conversion IN that condition I found my self divided betwixt Error and Truth betwixt the Word of God and the Belief of the Church of Rome But Error brought forth some pretences to persist stubbornly May be said I the reason wherefore I come to so many Difficulties Insufficiencies and Contradictions in the Scripture is because I have not read what the Theologians write concerning such Questions may be the Study of Divinity will make plain all these Difficulties supply all these Insufficiencies and reconcile all these Contradictions So I was like to that blind Man whom Christ
be found in the Roman Church who durst prove against them as did Tertullian against Marcion that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is the Figure of Christs Body and that consequently Christ was not a Ghost On the contrary a Protestant would be able to bring against those Heresies the same Arguments which the first Christians used and he would be warranted therein by all his Church From whence comes that difference if not from that that a Protestant believes nothing concerning the Sacrament but what they believed in the Primitive Church whereas a Divine of the Church of Rome acknowledges several articlesof Faith which were unknown among the First Christians and which consequently are the cause he cannot speak the same Language nor use the same Arguments they used These two Reasons seemed to me so much the stronger because I looked upon them not as the opinion of a single man who may be deceived or some place of a Book which may be corrupted and drawn into an ill sense but I looked upon these Reasons as the Reasons of all the Church and publick Weapons both of Learned Men and of the People to fight the Heathens and the Hereticks with all III. Third Proof drawn out of the manner whereafter the Fathers were wont to speak of this Holy Sacrament THat which confirmed me that in the Primitive Church they did not believe the Real Presence with Transubstantiation was the manner wherewith the Fathers both Greek and Latin were wont to speak of those Mysteries Theodoret (a) In 55 Quaestiosuper genesim says It is an extreme foclishness and extravagancy to Worship what one Eats 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the same in (b) Dialog 1. Intitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another place The LORD says he did the honour to the visible Signs to call them his BLOOD and his BODY not having changed their Nature but having added Grace to Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is there any appearance that the Fathers believed what the Council of Trent teaches A Divine of the Church of Rome who should say that it is an extreme extravagancy to Worship what one Eats That Christ hath not changed the Nature of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament would he not presently be sent to the Inquisition and condemned as an Heretick to be burnt a live The Eucharist say the Fathers of the Church (a) Cyprian de Caena cap. 6. is a visible Sacrament whereupon the Divine Essence imparts it self after an unutterable manner It (b) Idem cap. 2. is an Holy Nutriment capable of rendering us Immortal which is very much different from the ordinary Nutriments we are daily fed withal It keeps indeed the kind of a corporeal substance but it makes known by an invisible efficacy that it possesses the Presence of a Divine Vertue (c) Hilary de Trinit lib. 8. we are in Christ by his corporeal Birth and he is in us by the Mysteries of his Sacraments (d) August cap. 12. cont Adimant The Lord did not doubt to say this is my Body when he gave the Sign of his Body He (a) Idem in Psal 3. permitted Judas to be present at the Banquet wherein he committed and gave to his Disciples the Figure of his Body and Blood If a Roman Author should use these expressions which the Holy Fathers used would not a Bishop of the Roman Church zealous for the Interests of the Council of Trent say to him Sir 't is not enough to say with Cyprian tha tthe Divine Essence imparts it self in the Eucharist after an unutterable manner the Hereticks say all that You must say furthermore the Body and Soul of Christ are there really in the room of the substance of Bread 'T is not enough to say the Eucharist is an Holy Nutriment of a Divine Vertue the Hereticks do confess all that You must say moreover it contains the Real Presence of Christs Body and Blood 'T is not enough to say that Christ is in us by the Mysteries of his Sacraments the Hereticks do believe the same thing but you must say he is in us really his Body his Soul his Divinity In fine you must have a very great care of saying the Sacrament is the Sign and the Figure of Christ's Body and Blood as St. Austin said you must say to the contrary that it is not the Figure of Christ's Body and Blood you must say that it is Christ's own Body and Blood into which the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper is Transubstantiated Certainly this Bishop would speak well according to the belief of the new Roman Church but he would be far from the Doctrin of the holy Fathers He would forsake the Faith of the Primitive Church he would bring forth propositions of which the first Christians have been wholly ignorant he would even condemn the Belief of 330 Bishops of a general Council held at Constantinople in the year 754. for those 330 Bishops condemning as Idolatry the Worshiping of Images among the Reasons they brought did exhort the People to be contented with the Images that Christ has instituted giving in the Holy Sacrament Bread and Wine as Images and Figures of his own Body and Blood and speaking of the Bread of the Eucharist Behold there is said those Fathers the Image of his life-giving Body and a little after The Lord say they has commanded us to put upon the Table this Image especially chosen to wit the substance of Bread least Idolatry should slip in among the Christians if he had been represented under an Human Figure IV. Fourth Proof drawn out of the Novelty of the Doctrin teaching Transubstantiation ALl those Reasons perswaded me not only that the belief of the Real Presence with Transubstantiation was not the belief of the Primitive Church but furthermore that they were Articles of Faith newly devised And I knew afterwards they were no older than the beginning of the thirteenth Age when Pope Innocent the Third in the (a) Scotus in 4. Sent. dist 11. quaest 3. Council of Lateran in the year â—214 set among the Articles of Faith the Belief of Transubstantiation since we see that in the end of the Ninth Age about the Year of our Lord 870. Bertram or John Scot one of the most learned Men of that time wrote a Book by the command of Charles the Bauld King of France touching the question of the Eucharist wherein he maintains openly the Belief of the Protestant Church since we (a) Biblioteca Patr. de Div. Offi. find a letter of the Emperour Charles Magne to his Teacher Alcuinus wherein these words are to be read Jesus christ supping with his Disciples broke the Bread and gave it to them likewise the Cup in figure of his Body and Blood In fine since even in the Canon of the Mass instead of these words which are to be found there now Ut nobis Corpus Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui c. That it may become to us
Roman Church not to be grounded on the belief of the Primitive Church neither on the Authority of the Holy Fathers INTRODUCTION The Reading of the Books concerning the Perpetuity of Faith in the Eucharist was an occasion to me to examin in particular the belief of Rome about that matter THus the affairs of my Conversion depended when Providence that watched after the means to work out my safety brought forth an Occasion that did contribute very much to reduce all my Difficulties to the Question of the Authority of the Church of Rome to the end that this Authority being proved false the Doctrin of Rome which is grounded upon it might be presently destroyed It was in the Time when the Dispute of the Perpetuity of Faith concerning the Eucharist made a great Rumor in the World among learned Men. I read with as much application as I was capable of the Books and the Replies both of Mr. Claude and of Mr. Arnaud the Triumph of the Eucharist by Mr. Pavillon the Book of Father Noüet and the Book of the Testimony of our Senses in the Eucharist I do not intend to make my self an arbitrator to judge those rare men who are accounted without contradiction the most Witty and Learned of France Since I do but tell the History of my Conversion I do only rehearse the effects the Reading of those Books wrought in my Soul and I am not so unjust as to hinder the rest of the World to think what they please of those learned Mens writings and to judge them at liberty The reading of those Books brought me abundance of light in the Question of the Holy Sacrament I did consider the Argument of Perpetuity as an Argument which being not Metaphysical was to be reduced at last to a multitude of Probabilities from which one could never conclude any thing with necessity though he would suppose as true with Mr. Arnauld the Principle whereupon it is grounded to wit the Belief of all the Churches in the point of * Which in the Sence of the Roman Church is Transubstantiation reality All the Christian Churches saith Mr. Arnauld believe the real Presence therefore it was the belief of the Primitive Church for in a matter of so great Importance it is impossible there should have been made any alteration in Doctrin This Argument found I know not what repugnancy to be received in my mind for though I supposed the first Proposition to be true which since by the Study of the Histories and Relations of several Countries I acknowledge to be false yet I could not consent to the consequence because the proof of it was not true to my thinking and what endeavour soever of Rhetorick Mr. Arnauld Used to expound and sustain his Thought yet I did ever conceive that it was very likely some alteration had been made in the Doctrin of the Eucharist as well as in other Articles in which every body acknowledges there has been On the contrary I found Mr. Claude's Answer very reasonable This alteration has been made saith he therefore it is not impossible and his proof the Church of Rome doth believe the real Presence with Transubstantiation but they did not believe so in the Primitive Church therefore there has been made an alteration and afterwards he proves in his Book by the Authority of Authors who lived in that time that truly in the Primitive Church they did not believe the real Presence of Christ in the Holy Sacrament This Argument seemed to me very natural sincere and true the proof of it easie and well grounded But for that of Mr. Arnauld's it seemed to me rough uneasie intricate the proofs of it grounded upon suppositions in the Air which could not be reduced at last but to some appearances of truth proving nothing necessarily These Reasons incited me to judge in favour of Mr. Claude against Mr. Arnauld's Argument But though I was perswaded his Argument was not good yet I would not confess the Opinion he was for was not true May be said I Mr. Arnauld hath proceeded a little too far in a false proof and afterwards he hath been engaged for his honour sake to hold it earnestly But in fine Mr. Arnauld is but a private man the Church of Rome may disclaime his Argument and not hold with him So Mr. Arnauld's Reasons being false it doth not follow from thence that the belief of his Church is false since it could have other Proofs and other Reasons That was the cause why I resolved to examin the Question of the Eucharist for my own clearing and here is very near the Method I observed in it Division of the Errors of the Roman Church concerning the Matters of the Eucharist I supposed first as a principle which I received without examination that the Primitive Church was to be our Rule since that Church nearer to the Apostles and our Saviour Jesus Christ had the advantage to suck Truths out of their Source That being supposed I divided all that is to be said of the Eucharist in two parts First The Belief concerning the Sacrament Secondly The form of the Administration of it Since then said I the belief of the Council of (a) Consil Trid. sessi 33. Item sess 13. cap. 4. can 2. Trent touching the Eucharist is not to be found in the Scripture since the Form of Administrating the Sacrament in the Roman Church is so much different from that which is related by St. Paul in the First to the Corinthians chap. 11. and by the Evangelists we are to examin whether the Belief of Rome had not been the Belief of the Primitive Church and whether the Mass which is the Roman Form of Administring the Sacrament had not been instituted by the first Christians And whereas the Church of Rome believes the (b) Consil Trid. sess 33. sess 13. real Presence with (c) sess 13. cap. 4. can 2. Transubstantiation believes that the Mass is a propitiatory (d) Sess 22. cap. 1 2. can 1 2 3. Sacrifice both for the quick and for the dead believes that the Mass as it is now ordained by the Pope is the ancient Form of Celebrating the Eucharist I examined every one of those Questions Ch. 2. §. 1. and I found 1. That the Belief of Rome about Real Presence with Transubstantiation is a new Doctrin in the Church 2. That the Sacrifice of the Mass is contrary to the belief of the Primitive Church 3. That the manner of Celebrating the Eucharist is very much different and quite opposed to that which Christians were used to in the first Ages of the Church From whence I concluded that the Articles of Faith of Rome are not grounded upon the belief of the Primitive Church SECT I. The Belief of Rome about the real Presence with Transubstantiation is a new Doctrin in the Church I. First proof drawn out of the reasons wherewith the Fathers of the Church were used to dispute against the Heathens SEveral
Reasons perswaded me that in the Primitive Church they did not believe the real Presence with Transubstantiation as the Roman Church Teaches it The first of all was the Argument which the Holy Fathers used to prove the Idols of the Heathens not to be Gods The Idols you Worship so earnestly said (a) Arnobi lib. 6. Lactant. lib. 2. cap. 2. they to the Heathens are not Gods If they fall to the ground they cannot raise up again by themselves therefore they need the help of Men they can neither open their Eyes nor stir out of the place where they have been set nor give the least sign of respiration They are subject to Rustiness Worms and Corruption Mice come to gnaw them and work their holes even in the Idols themselves In fine The Doors of your Temples must be shut up with good Locks least Theives should steal those Gods of yours It is to be believed that men who spoke thus would hold the Body Soul and Divinity of Christ to be Really Present in the Holy Sacrament Would not they have had reason to fear that the Heathens who were very able men would use against them the same Argument and tell them Your Host is not a God neither you are not to Worship it for it is subject to the same conveniencies and accidents as our Gods are Would a Divine of the Church of Rome have the boldness to dispute against the Heathens with the same reasons which the first Christians used The People of Paris said about five or six years ago They have stolen to day God Almighty out of St. Sulpitius's Church out of the Parish of Boulogne out of I do not know how many other Churches could that people say by right that the reason why the Idols are not Gods is because they cannot defend themselves against the Theives who come to take them away Those who have composed the Rubricks of the Missal wherein they Teach what is to be done in case the Host is fallen upon the Ground in case that that which is in the Chalice be spilt would they say that the reason why the Idols are not Gods is because when they are fallen they cannot rise up by themselves Thomas Aquinas and other Doctors of the Roman Church who do suppose the Host may grow mouldy that Worms may breed in it should they dare say as did the first Christians that the reason why we are not to Worship Idols is because they are subject to Rustiness Worms and Corruptions A Man of the Church of Rome who knows that the Pope (a) Platina in Victori Victorinus the Third was Poisoned in Drinking that which was in the Chalice That Henry the Seventh Emperour was Murthered with a Consecrated Host and that (b) Math. Paris an 1154. Henry Arch-bishop of York was used after the same manner in taking the Sacrament Durst One who knows all these Stories say the reason why the Idols are not Gods is because some of them falling out of their places have bruised and hurt those who usually walked about them Words are the Expressions of our Thoughts if the Church of Rome hath the same belief and the same Doctrin concerning the Eucharist as the first Christians Why doth it not dare to urge the same things which were maintained by the first Christians Or if the first Christians had the same Faith as the Church of Rome now how came they to urge Arguments which the Church of Rome now dares not maintain It is easie to know how great a prejudice this Argument is against the Belief of the Roman Church so did it work a mighty effect in my Soul And because I thought it very hard to have a resolution to it I proposed it in publick Disputes at Paris and first the Professor denied that ever any of the Fathers had used such Arguments But for as much as I could not abide to take a Lye before so many People I sent for Arnobius his Book and I read therein proofs enough to maintain the Propositions I stood for then the Professor who was as much able to give Distinction to no purpose as he was ignorant in reading the Fathers brought distinctions upon distinctions till at last in denying or distinguishing propositions clearer than the Sun it self he had reduced the Dispute to some Philosophical Question to avoid Answering my Argument I proposed it again to several Learned Men I looked for some Answer and Solution in the Books of Divines and I found nothing no where that could satisfie me in that Difficulty II. Second Proof drawn out of the Reasons wherewith the same Fathers were wont to dispute against the Hereticks THe second Reason that perswaded me that in the Primitive Church they did not believe the Real Presence with Transubstantiation was the Argument the first Christians used to prove against the Hereticks of their Age that Christ had a true Body and that he was not a Ghost Jesus Christ saith Tertullian (a) Lib. 4. Cap. 40. cont Marci Took the Bread and divided to his Apostles he made his Body of it saying This is my body that is to say The Figure of my body But it could not be the Figure of his Body if he had not had a true Body since a thing in the Air such as a Ghost is not capable of any Figure And (b) Lib. 5. Cap. 1. Irenaeus disputing against the Hereticks who said Christ had not taken the Human Nature If it be so says he the Lord has not Redeemed us with his Blood the Chalice of the Eucharist is not the Communication of his Blood and the Bread we break is not the Communication of his Body for the Blood cannot proceed but from Veins Flesh and the rest of the Substance of a Man If these Fathers had believed the Real Presence with Transubstantiation they had spoken thus Had not they said the Eucharist is Christ's own Flesh his own Soul his own Divinity therefore Christ was not a meer Ghost since we have his Flesh in the Sacrament Had not this Argument been stronger than the other wherein they proved that Christ had a true Body because the Sacrament is the Figure of his Body Irenaeus ought to have supposed in the Chalice of the Eucharist Christs own Blood to be and not as he doth that the Chalice of the Eucharist is the Communication of his Blood he should have said the Bread we break is Transubstantiated into Christ Body and not that it is the Communication of the Body of Christ In a word he should have said that the Sacrament was Christs own Flesh Christs own Substance And though those Arguments of the Fathers are admirable and most cogent yet they would have betrayed the Truths if being perswaded of the Articles of the Real Presence with Transubstantiation of the Roman Church they had forgotten to speak of it I am very sure if the Ancient Heresies should come again into the Church there would be never a Divine to
we must know that the custom of the First Christians was thus Before they might participate of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ they came to present their Offerings Bread Wine Oyl Fruits and other things and those Offerings were called by the Fathers of the Church Sacrifices as it is evident by the reading of (a) Lib. 4. cap. 32.34 St. Ireny (b) Epist 34. Item Lib. de Oper. et Eleem. St. Cyprian (c) Lib. 5. cap. 17. Theodoret the second Council of (d) Can. 4. Mascon about the Year 587 as it is to be seen in (e) Lib. 1. cap. 7 8. Rebanus Maurus his Instructions of Church-men Let the Sub-Deacons says he receive the faithful Peoples Oblations in the Temple of God and give them to the Deacons to be put upon the Altar and this was the reason why they called the Table of Communion an ALTAR because of the Oblations they offered upon it Such was the belief the use and the simplicity of the Primitive Church But alas how much has error defaced this Holy Practice in the Roman Church How great alteration is happened from the belief of the first Christians 1. Instead of Bread the First Faithful offered upon the Lords Table they offer in the now Roman Church only some slender Hosts like to Wafers and it is that of which the Author of the Exposition of the Roman Order and Constitutions complains as (a) In his Comment upon the Capitular of Charlesmagne lits B. Monsieur Pithou relates In some Churches says he the Oblation of Bread which according to the Ancient Custom of the Church was offered by the Faithful People upon the Lords Table for the usage of the Sacrifice is at this time reduced to a very small and very light form to the form of a little piece of Money which has neither the Figure nor appearance of the true Bread And it is to authorize such error that in several Pictures of the Lords Supper Christ is to be seen with all his Apostles having every one upon his Plate a little Hoste of the bigness of one Farthing Is not that a mighty alteration in the Roman Church to offer to the Lord some little Hosts that have not any appearance of Bread instead of the true Bread which was offered in the Primitive Church And is it not a monstrous boldness worthy of punishment to make the World believe that Christ instituting the Holy Sacrament hath not taken ordinary Bread but some little Wafers alike to those they use in the Roman Church 2. Whereas in the Primitive Church the Oblations which were made were Sacrifices of Thanksgiving and Duty and that the Holy Sacrament was look'd upon but as a Sacrifice of Commemoration according to the belief the Church of England keeps still we have seen since altogether with the belief of Reality and Transubstantiation the belief of a Real and Propitatory Sacrifice in the Mass which has obliged the interessed to hold as they-did since in the Council of Trent That Christ was every day truly Sacrificed I do not know how many times for our Sins and that the Roman Priests were true Sacrificers and all that without any ground in the Scripture without any advowing or authority of the Primitive Church whose belief was very far from that of the Roman Church as it is proved in all this Section IV. The horrid abuse of the Roman Church to offer Sacrifice in the honour of Saints is a practice contrary to that of the Primitive Church FOr as much as Error is the Mother of Blindness as one deep calleth another Psal 42.9 and all the design of the Devil is to bring men to Impiety and to the Destruction of the Kingdom of Christ Whereas in the Primitive Church they directed their Oblations only to God Almighty they celebrated the Sacrifice of the Lords Supper only for the honour of his Divine Majesty the Church of Rome carried on Error to such excess as to hold that in the Sacrifice of the Mass which they do pretend Christ himself is Really Sacrificed that that Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ Really and Substantially present is offered Durst I rehearse such a Blasphemy that it is offered in honour of Saints and one comes boldly to say to a Priest who prepares himself to say the Mass Sir you must say the Mass of St. Peter The Mass of St. Paul Of St. James or some other that is to say You must Immolate Jesus Christ to day to the honour of St. Peter to the honour of St. Paul of St. James of St. Barnabas or of some other and that you may not think that I do impose upon the Church of Rome you are but to read upon that matter which you please of the Books of the Roman Theologians or to hear what the Priest says every day in his Mass when he reads the Canon thereof and you shall hear him saying with a low voice these words after he has recited the names of several Saints Ut illis proficiat ad honorem That it may profit them to honour he doth pray God that this Sacrifice be profitable to their honour If in the Old testament any should have offered Sacrifices to God in the honour of Abraham Isaac and Jacob would not they have stoned him in that very instant to expiate by his death the Impiety of this Blasphemy Alas in the Law of Moses there were in the Sacrifices only some Beasts whose throat were cut When Christ began to shew unto his Disciples how that he was to go unto Jerusalem and suffer many things of the Elders and Chief-Priests and be killed to appease the wrath of his Father provoked against the Sins of Men St. Peter was presently filled with Zeal and could not abide that his Master should go unto Jerusalem to be Sacrificed there (a) Math. 16.22 Be it far from thee Lord said he this shall not be unto thee Oh! should St. Peter be upon the Earth and some body should come to tell him Peter this Priest who goes to say the Mass is going for your sake to worship you to Sacrifice Christ himself his own Body and Blood Would not he hear the news with a mighty horrour Would not he say with much more reason Be it far from thee Lord this shall not be unto thee thou shall not be Sacrificed for my sake for my honour We do read in the Acts of (a) Cap. 14. the Apostles that some people of Lycaonia having seen the Miracle that St. Paul had wrought were ready to offer a Sacrifice to him and that the Priests of Jupiter brought Oxen and Garlands unto the Gates and would have done Sacrifice with the People in honour of Barnabas and Paul which when these Apostles heard of they rent their Clothes and ran in among the People crying out and saying Sirs why do ye these things we also are men of like passions with you and preach unto you that ye
should turn from these Vanities unto the living God But alass the things which they brought to do Sacrifice withal were only Oxen with Garlands And what you think would these Saints say if they were now upon the Earth and some body should come and tell them that in the Church of Rome the Priests do Sacrifice Jesus Christ to honour St. Barnabas and St. Paul Would not they be very angry with those new Sacrificers would not they rent their Cloaths would not they say to all the People of the Roman Church Sirs why do you these things we also are men like you it is not for our honour you must offer your Sacrifices it is for the honour of God's Majesty to whom only it is lawful to offer them I do believe if some of the Apostles or of the First Christians should rise again and appear in the Church of Rome they would have need to learn almost all their Catechism so great is the alteration of the Articles of Faith of the now Roman Church from those of the Primitive Sect. III. Ch. 2. §. 3. The Manner of Administring the Sacrament in the Roman Church is quite different and very much opposed to that which they used in the First Ages of the Church I. In the time of the Apostles and the First Ages of the Church they gave the Communion to all the People under Both Kinds they Worshipped not the Host nor celebrated the Holy Mysteries in an Unknown Tongue AS for the manner of celebrating the Eucharist it is easie to take notice of three great faults in that after which the Church of Rome celebrates it now The first is the Abridgement of the Cup. The second is the Adoration of the Sacrament The is the Unknown Language which they do use in the Church of Rome in the celebration of the Eucharist You may read over all the Scripture you shall never find that the Faithful were couzened of the Chalice of Christ's Blood you shall not find that the Christians are to Worship the Sacrament you shall not find that Christ or this Apostles in the celebration of the Holy Mysteries ever spoke in a Tongue Unknown to the People You may read all the Histories of the First Ages of the Church and the writings of the Fathers who lived in those Ages you shall never find the Abridgement of the Cup never the Adoration of the Eucharist never the Celebrating of the Holy Sacrament in an Unknown Tongue In the Apostles time when they Celebrated the Lord's Supper they added first nothing to the Institution of Christ but the Lord's Prayer and some time after three devout collects as it is manifest by the reading of Ancient Authors After the Apostles death the faithful People being gathered together upon a Sunday the Reader did read some Chapter out of the Scripture afterwards the Minister or the Bishop who did preside made an exhortation unto the People upon the Scripture that had been read and at the end of his exhortation he made his Prayer unto God After that the Faithful gave one to another the Kissing of Peace then they set upon the Communion Table Bread and Wine then the Pastor used the Prayers of Consecration and after the People had Answered Amen the Deacons took the Bread and Wine Sanctified through the Ministers Blessing and Prayers and divided it to all those which were present there Such was the Plainness of the first Christians in the Celebrating of this Holy Mystery and after the same manner they celebrated it 'till the year 150. that is to say about 70 years after the Apostles death as it is reported by Justin Martyr in his second Apologie near the end In this manner of celebrating the Holy Sacrament the faithful People received the Communion under both kinds the Language which was spoken was known of all the People since the answered Amen and it cannot be found that they worshipped the Sacrament We have seen afterwards in the Church several forms of Celebrating the Eucharist which have been called Liturgies We have seen the Liturgy of St. James the Liturgy of St. Clement the Liturgy of St. Matthew of St. Andrew of St. Chrysostom But alas What agreement is there betwixt those Liturgies and the Mass of Rome we do find indeed in those Liturgies some Prayers which are almost the same with them that are said in the Mass but we do not see in one of those Liturgies that it was forbidden to give the Cup to the People on the contrary we find there that all the Faithful did receive the Sacrament under both Kinds We know that the Language of those Liturgies was a Language understood among the people and we cannot see any where therein the least trace of the Adoration of the Sacrament There are some Authors who do not hold all those Liturgies as authentical neither as being written indeed by the Saints to whom they are attributed as (a) De Scrip-Ecclesi Bellarmin maintains who nevertheless is constrained to confess that an infinite multitude of Corruptions have slid into them They say that it is very likely that in the Year 325. the Fathers of the Council of Nice had not heard of that Liturgie which they say is St. Jame's or if they had heard of it they did not believe it true since in that Council there were so many Disputes and oppositions about establishing this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consubstantial which is to be found in that Liturgie They say that in the Year 431. in the Council of Ephesus the Fathers of the Church made no mention of that Liturgie neither of the Authority of the Apostle St. James to prove that the Blessed Virgin Mary was to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mother of God This word being in the Liturgie of St. James it is not likely say they that the Fathers would have forgotten to use it as a proof against the Nestorians if they had believed that Liturgie to be an Authentical Book They say that in the same Liturgie mention is made of Incense which is offered which makes them believe that that Liturgie is not St. James's since in the times of the First Christians they offered not Incense in their Churches as it is manifest by (a) Lib. 6. 7. Arnobius They say the same of almost all the other Liturgies in that of St. Matthew mention is made of the Council of Nice of its Creed of the Council of Constantinople of the Council of Ephesus of Basil of Gregory who did live many Ages after the Death of St. Matthew That in the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom who liv'd in the end of the Fourth Age St. Chrysostom himself is named among the dead that we find therein the names of Sabas of Onuphrius of Anastasius of Athos and of some others who lived a great while after the death of St. Chrysostom All these reasons make them believe that either these Liturgies are counterfeited works and not the Authors to whom they
are attributed or that they have been thereafter increased adulterated and filled with Corruptions But let it be what it could these Liturgies though corrupted are nevertheless works of Antiquity and since many of the Authors of the Roman Church hold them all authentical we may rightly urge those works against them to make them to acknowledge that in the time those Liturgies were written the manner of administring the Eucharist was entirely different from that of the Church of Rome in the abridgement of the Cup in the worshipping of the Host and in Celebrating in an unknown Tongue which is a strong Proof against the novelty of the now Roman Church II. The beginning of all the Errors of the Roman Church in the administration of the Sacrament BUt without farther insisting upon Proofs which may be said to be negative only which nevertheless are of great weight and have almost the force of a Demonstration in Questions wherein one Sect is accused of Innovation it is very easie to produce positive Proofs to shew the Novelty of those Errors since we know the time when they were brought into the World and that we know their beginning and their Authors 1. The beginning of the abridgement of the Cup. We know by (a) Consult de utraque spec pag. 1025. Cassander's report that the Eastern Church has always given the Communion under both kinds to every one of the Faithful and that even in the Roman Church the custom of distributing to every body the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament did last more than a Thousand years the erroneous custom of Abridging the Cup of Christ's Blood to all the People was born in the Council of Constance in the 13. Session wherein the Council after having acknowledge that it was the custom of the Primitive Church to communicate under both kinds established as a Law the custom of taking away from the People a part of the Sacrament and declared hereticks those who say That it is an error to withstand the custom of the Primitive Church the Example and Institution of CHrist and the Commandement to which he has boud us upon ternal Damnation viz. the Commandement of Drinking of the Chalice of his Blood This is will some say a very strange Doctrine that a Council notwithstanding the Custom of the Primitive Church Christ's Example and the Commandement he has injoyned unto all the Faithful should dare forbid all Priests to give the Communion under both kinds and would have it be an heresie to obey our Lord Jesus Christ to be conformed to his Example and to follow the practice of the Saints who lived in the primitive Church This is a very Churlish and ungentile manner of dealing But what Reasons had that Council to forbid to administer the Communion under both kinds Are ye curious to know them I have learnt them of Chancellour * Tract contr Haeres de Cons. sub utraque specie Gerson 1. The Mens Beards which grow on their Lips 2. The loathsomness which one should have to drink after others 3. The costliness and difficulty of getting Wine 4. The inconveniencie of Frosts in Winter 5. The importunity of Flies in Summer 6. The trouble that the Deacons should have to bring Wine to the Faithful 7. The danger of spilling 8. And the Peoples unworthiness to equal Priests in receiving the Sacrament if he received it under both kinds These are the Reasons of great moment which have obliged that Council to withstand so directly the Institution of Christ and the holy Custom of all the Primitive Church Truly are these Reasons sufficient to abolish so express a Commandement which Christ has injoyned to all the Faithful to drink his Blood Are there some new inconveniencies which have happened since to alter the Form in which Christ has instituted the Sacrament Had not Men their Beards in the time of Christ Was there no body to be found in the Apostles time 'till the Council of Constance who had loathsomness to drink after others Is Wine dearer now in France Italy and Spain than it was then in Syria Graecia jerusalem and Constantinople Did not Wine freeze before the Council of Constance Is it but since that time Flies have vexed the People in Summer Are the trouble of the Deacons and the danger of spilling wine such things as Christ had not foreseen And are the Priests of the Roman Church more elevated in Dignity than Christ himself was and his Apostles that there should be need to set betwixt them and the People a difference which was never set betwixt Christ and his Apostles betwixt the Apostles and the rest of the Faithful 2. The Beginning of the Worshipping of the Host As for the worshipping of the Host not only we do not find that Christ or his Apostles ever worshipped the Sacrament or that this was the use of the first Faithful not only we do not find in all these Lyturgies whereof I have spoken any footstep of that worshipping But furtheremore we do know all the degrees whereby this Errour fair and softly slid into the World We know that it was Pope Innocent III. who first commanded that some Boxes should be kept in the Church wherein the consecrated Host should be conserved That it was Peope Honorius III. about the Year 1220 who renewed that Decree with this new Addition that upon those Boxes these words should be written Hìc Deum adora Here adore God and that the same Pope ordained that the Host should be Elevated We know it was Pope Gregory IX who added to that Elevation the Sound of a little Bell about the Year 1230. And in fine we know that it was Innocent IV. who ordained that the Host should be worshipped These are the degrees whereby that Error has been established in the Roman Church And if you would know what Engins they have used to give Authority unto that Worshipping you are but to read Platina and the * Ad Evam reclusam data apud Vrb Vet. 6. Id. Sept. An. Pontif. 3. Bull of Pope Urban IV. directed to a Nun called Eve and you shall see that about the ear 1264 this Pope Instituted the Feast which is called Corpus-Christi-Day upon the Revelation and the Request of that Nun to whom he sent the Book of the Office of the Sacrament which is said to have been framed by Thomas Aquinas We know that afterwards Pope Clement V. in the Council of Vienna ordained that this Festival Day should be kept by all those of the Roman Church And that about the Year 1360 they began at Pavie to make Processions and Tabernacles which was afterwards observed in all Towns that submitted to the Popes Authority Before the time that the Roman Church had corrupted the Word of God the Christians did receive the Sacrament with devotion with zeal and an holy greediness it was with a joy which cannot be expressed that they met in the Churches to participate of the true Body and true Blood
of Christ jesus There was before the Table of the Communion a great Curtain like to that Vail which was in the old time before the (a) Exod. 26.33 Ark of the Testimony and when the Curtain was drawn to set open to the sight of the People the Holy Mysteries the Faithful imagained they saw the Heavens opened as (b) Homil. 3. sup Epist ad Ephes St. Chrysostome speaks they consider'd the Table of Communion as an Altar imbrued all over with Christ's Blood they came to the Sacred Table with an holy horrour and a trembling like to that of Moses when he came nigh to the bush out of the midst whereof God spake with him they were all penetrated throughout with the light of their Faith and they breathed nothing but Fire of Charity which consumend them And in this manner they came near our Lord J. Christ to eat his own Body and to drink his own Blood they regarded the Minister who divided to them the Bread and the Wine of the Holy Sacrament as a Seraphin who was to put upon their tongues a coal of fire to quicken them with the Love of God and the Spirit of Christ But if somebody in that time should have worshipped the Sacr ament in stead of worshipping Christ who is received in the Sacrament he would have been lookt upon as an Idolater he would have been rejected out of the Church and dealt with as an Heretick or else they would have taught him that it is a dreadful Error to worship the Sacrament as if Bread and Wine were transubstantiated into Christ's Body and Blood and that the Faith of the True Church and of all the Saints is to believe That by the means of the Holy Sacr ament we are truly and really partakers of the true Body and of the true Blood of Christ who is in Heaven settled at the Right Hand of God his Father where we worship Him in receiving the Sacrament 3. The Beginning of the Celebration of the Eucharist in an unknown Tongue Now for the third Error which is to be found in the Roman Church in the Administration of the Sacrament we know that it is but fince the Popes have made themselves Soveraigns since they have raised themselves to be Arbitrators of Crowns since they took upon them to depose Kings from their Thrones and usurped that Temporal Power which they now injoy We know that it is but since that time that they have endeavoured as by Right of Conquest to oblige all Nations to speak the Roman Language as a Mark of their Bondage to the Pope following the Example of the old Roman Emperors who after they had reduced several Provinces and Nations under their Jurisdiction constrained them to speak the Roman language That Tyranny of constraining the People to celebrate the holiest of our Mysteries in a Tongue which they understand not is a thing so evidently contrary to that which the Holy Ghost teaches us in the * 1 Cor. 14.16 Scripture that almost all the Christian Churches which have received from the Apostles their Belief and the Form of Celebrating the Eucharist do celebrate it unto this day in the Vulgar Tongue of the Countries whereof they are Inhabitants The Greeks have their Lyturgy in their own Tongue as every one knows the Christians of Moscovia who received of the Apostle St. Andrew the Faith of Christianity have their Lyturgy in the (a) Guagn de Relig. Moscov pag. 250. Slavonian tongue which is the vulgar Tongue of the Country they inhabit The Armenians converted for the most part by S. Bartholomew speak their (b) Cassander Lyturg. cap. 13. pag. 31. own Tongue in the Celebration of the Holy Mysteries The Jacobites who dwell in Syria speak 9c) Brerewood pag. 194. Syriack in celebrating the Eucharist The Abissine Christians celebrate the Divine Service and the Communion in the (d) Chytraeus pag. 28. Tongue of their Country Which makes me believe that all Christian Nations conformed themselves to the practice of the primitive Church and that they have wel perceived the Holy Ghost frobid the celebration of these holy Mysteries which consist in Blessings and Thanksgivings in an unknown Tongue to which the Unlearned could not answer Amen CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST PART The Articles of the Roman Church cannot be proved either by the Practice of the Primitive Church or by the Authority of the Ancient Fathers ALl those Reflexions which I made for my own particular Instruction and Edification brought a great Light into my Soul and overthrew in part the false principles wherewith the Errors of the Roman Church are ordinarily intricated and darkened First I began to mistrust that Church and then afterwards to draw some Consequences against the Errors thereof I thought since it is a thing very natural to mistrust one in all his Conduct after we have once surprised him in a Dault that after having discovered the Errors of the Roman Church concerning the Question of the Eucharist I might reasonably mistrust it in all the other Articles of Faith of which it makes a particular profession and so I saw nothing sure nothing fast in the Church of Rome I believed I might justly mistrust that this Church had done in the Doctrine of Indulgences Purgatory Prayer for the Dead and Invocation of Saints the same that it has done in that of Transubstantiation Reality and Sacrifice of the Mass that is to say I feared they were Articles which had been framed against the Doctrine of the Ancient Church the Testimony of the Holy Fathers and the Authority of the Word of God Moreover I thought that having remarked the Errors of Rome in the chief and most holy of all the Mysteries of Christianity I was not obliged to examine the other Articles and that that only was enough to make me suppose that it had erred in all the other Points of its Doctrine and that one must consequently forsake its Communion if he doth desire to be saved The desire of my Salvation was a desire which Grace had rooted very profoundly in my Soul but the thought of forsaking the Communion of a Church within which I had been brought up was a thought very contrary to my natural Inclinations I could not blind my self from seeing the Errors of Rome but I had not yet strength enough generously to forsake them to the peril of whatsoever could happen The Reasons which made me understand my Errors came every day to present themselves to my mind with some new Lights and Evidences The Church of Rome hereupon I look'd before as if it had been encompassed round about with the Truths of the Scripture grounded upon the Authority of the Saints of the Primitive Church appeared to me at that time bared of all those fine Testimonies But at last the same Pretence which caused me to defer my conversion when the Grace of God had made me understand that the Romish Faith was not grounded upon the Word of God
it is the most ancient of all the Churches which have been ever governed by St. Peter in antioch St. Peter executed the function of Bishop even according to Baronius seven years before he had ever been at Rome it was in Antioch that the faithful were first called Christians as it is reported in the Acts of the Apostles and it is the Church of Antioch which is called by St. Chrysosthome the chief and Capital of the whole world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In fine if the Mother is more ancient than the Daughter if the Spring is before the Brook the Greek Church is more ancient than the Roman the Greek Church was erected by St. Paul and S. Andrew and it was from that Church as from an holy Spring the name of Jesus Christ was scattered abroad afterward through the Kingdoms and Nations of the earth it was from the Greek Church the Roman received the New Testament the Apostles Creed that of Nice and St. Athanasius it was of the Greek Church that the Roman learnt the very names of Baptisme of Eucharist of Bishop of Priest of Deacon c. So that the Bishop of Bitonto (c) lib. de actis conc Trident. pag. 18. acknowledges in the Council of Trent that the Greek Church is the mother of the Roman and that it is from that Rome has received all it possesses ea igitur Graecia mater nostra cui id totum debet quod habet Latina Ecclesia You may judge now upon what are grounded those fine Titles of Eldership of the Roman Church of which they make so much noise and so much boasting §. 2. That the Multitude is not of the Roman Church's side THE vanity the Church of Rome is puffed up withal to have Multitude of its side is not better grounded than the Antiquity of it Truly if you should dwell in the middle of Paris or of Rome and without taking any notice of the things which are acted in the world should take the word of the Preachers of the Church of Rome they would make you believe that all the Christians in the world belong to the Roman Church and that there is but a very small number of those who will not submit themselves to the Pope's jurisdiction But if you will lift up your eyes and look upon that which is done in the world you shall find that of all the three great parts of the world which have been known to our Fathers ASIA is all full of Christians who have received their Faith from the very Apostles and who never have received nor receive yet the domination of the Pope you may find there the Christians of Palestine submitted to the Patriarch of Jerusalem the Syrians and the Melchites under the Patriarch of Antioch the Armenians and Georgians subjected to their own Patriarchs and Metropolitans who do not acknowledge the dominion of the Pope you may see there the Mingrelians the Circassians the Christians of the less Asia submitted to the Patriarch of Constantinople the Jacobites the Christians of St. Thomas submitted to their peculiar Patriarchs and not to the Pope of Rome If you set your eyes on AFRICA and on those in that part of the world who have received the Gospel you may find there the Egyptians and the Cophtes to be subjected to the Patriarch of Alexandria the Ethiopians or Abissins have their own Patriarch who doth not acknowledge yet unto this day the jurisdiction of Rome what relation soever the Pope's Missionaries had made of it As for that Province whereof the Jesuites make so much noise which they call the Kingdom of Congo the Governours whereof have submitted to the Popes Dominion it is very easie to know that it is nothing but a Mission of Jesuites such as those which they have erected in Goa in Jappan even in England in the very chief Town of this kingdom to root therein in spight of all the Laws of the Kingdom and all Magistracy In EVROPE the Greeks are submitted to the Patriarch of Constantinople the Moscovites have a Patriarch at Moskow who relies not on the Pope the Christian Protestants and Reformed in England in Danemark in Swedeland in Holland in Switzerland in Germany and in Hungaria are subjected to their Bishops and Metropolitans who are not subjected to the Pope and every body knows that in Bohemia in Poland even in France even in some Countrys of Italy all is full of Reformed Churches which do not acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Pope So that all that great huge multitued whereof the Roman Church boasts so much is Spain most part of Poland France and It aly some Cantons of Switzerland part of the Low-Countries and of Germany this is that great multitude of people parturiunt montes c. what is that in respect of the whole world And lest some body should think that those Churches which are not submitted to the Pope be some small Churches those who will take the pains but to read the Historians shall find that the only Patriarchat of Constantinople has contained 80 Bishopricks and 40 Archbishopricks the Church of Antioch 150 both Bishopricks and Archbishopricks that of Jerusalem more that 76 and that there have been only in Africa 420 both Bispopricks and Archbishopricks according to Myraeus's relation a Pag. 94. which have never followed the belief of the Roman Church from thence you may Judge of the rest §. 3. Other Churches as well as the Roman have their Succession from the very Apostles AS for the matter of Succession if you hearken to those of the Church of Rome you would think that only in the Church of Rome the Bishops have succeeded one another from the beginning of the Christendom Those Gentlemen would make all the world believe that the Churches which are not of their Communion have neither Vocation nor Title nor Ordination and consequently no right in the Ecclesiastical Functions in the Administration of the Sacraments or Preaching the word of God But if you will but open your eyes and read Nicephorus Cedrenus and other Historians you shall find in the Churches which have never submitted to the Pope which have ever kept the purity of the word of God several Catalogues of Bishops and Patriarchs who have succeeded one another from the Apostles time In Jerusalem Jesus Christ our Lord the Son of God the Holy one began the function of an Everlasting Bishop which he will continue to exercise during all Eternity St. James was the first Bishop afterwards next Simon Cleophas then Justus the Jew c. and so successively Bishop after Bishop Patriarch after Patriarch unto Germanus and Theophanes who in our days have ruled that Church being the Patriarchs thereof In the Church of Antioch St. Peter was the first Bishop whom succeeded Evodius then Ignatius then Hero then Cornelius and others successively who have so well conserved the doctrine of the Primitive Church with the right succession of St. Peter that he of those Bishops who lived about the
ground their Religion for when they would have excited the Jews to forsake their errors and to give over their sins they said to them that a great while ago they had entertained the word of God contumeliously I spake unto thee in thy prosperity (c) Jerem. 22.21 saith the Lord but thou saidst I will not hear this has been thy manner from thy youth that thou obeyedst not my voice (d) Jerem. 32.30 31 32. The Children of Israel and the Children of Judah have only done evil before me from their youth for this City hath been to me as a provocation of mine anger and of my fury even unto this day that I should remove it from before my face because of all the evil of the Children of Israel and of the Children of Judah which they have done to provoke me to anger they their Kings their Princes their Priests and their Prophets and the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem c. Whereby it is very easie to see that the Prophet believed not that the people of Israel had any right to deal wrongfully with the word of God because they had done so during I do not know how many ages neither that the Kings the Princes the Priests the Prophets and the People could pretend to stay still in their blindness because in all ages before there had been found many of the Kings of the Priests the Prophets and the People who had gone astray from the Law of God to prostitute themselves to errors In fine jesus Christ himself knew not that fine maxime of Rome that antiquity is a true mark of Infallibility for when the Scribes and the Pharisees said (e) Joh. 8. that they were Children of Abraham he answered them that their Genealogie was a great deal more Ancient since they were Children of the Devil himself but he thought not all that fair Antiquity could render them Infallible could give them right to reject his holy word and the truths he came to preach to them §. 2. Multitude is not an infallible mark of the true Church IF the Multitude be a mark of the true Church we must need say that there was no true Church in the time of Enoch in the time of Noah in the time of Abraham that there was no true Church neither whilst Christ Jesus lived upon the earth nor in the time of the Apostles nor in the time of the Arians if the accounts we have received of their numbers be true When the Antichrist shall appear in the world the Church and the true worshipping of God shall be almost destroyed or what would be yet more horrible to imagine we must say that the Church of Antichrist shall be the true Church that in the time of the Arians those who denied Christ our Lords Divinity were the true Church that in the time of the Apostles and the Martyrs the Heathens had the true manner of worshipping God that Christ and his Apostles were not the true Church but that it was those who Crucified him who had reason on their side and who doth not see that all these propositions are so many Blasphemies which yet are good consequences from this principle urged by the Romanists but are horrible impieties and falsehoods How far be these propositions from the thoughts of the Fathers and from truth St. Augustin (a) In Psal 128. faith that the true Church was for a while inclosed in the single person of Abel a while in the single person of Enoch a while it did consist all in the family of Noah and since in that of Abraham I should be ashamed to prove here among reasonable people that it was among that people of God before Christ his coming and among the faithful in the Primitive Church that the true Religion was to be sought after not among the Idolaters and the Heathens and you would look upon me as a man who thinks all the Christians very little zealous for the love of Christ if speaking to those who profess to follow him I would engage my self to prove what all the world ought to suppose as a principle not to be contested that whilest Christ lived upon the Earth with his Apostles it was in that holy Colledge of Christ the true Church was to be found not in the Synagogue of the Jews which was all compacted of men who gasped but for the blood of the righteous who sought but to oppress the truth As for the time of the Arians it is true as Theodoret witnesses (b) Lib. 2. Hist Ecclesiast cap. 16. that the Emperour Constantius spake of Athanasius as of a naughty fellow whom all the world looked upon with detestation because he held Christ's Divinity Who art thou said that Emperour to Liberius what part of the world art thou to come all alone to trouble the quiet of all the Earth It is true as Hilary (c) In lib. de Synod witnesses that in all the ten Provinces of Asia there was but the bishop Eleusius and a very small number of people with him who persisted in the true knowledge of God it is true as St. Hierome (d) Contra error Joan. Jerosolim witnesses that in all the East there was but Athanasius and Paulinus who followed not the errours of Arius nevertheless the true Church was not destroyed it was not in the Communion of the Arians though they were the Multitude it was in the single Bishop Eleusius it was in Athanasius it was in Paulinus because as Liberius answered to the Emperour Constantius the word of Faith is not lessened by the small number of those who profess that Holy word neither by their loneliness non diminuitur solitudine mea verbum fidei and according to the witness of Tertullian (e) De pudicitia it is not the great number of Bishops that makes the Church the Church may consist in one or two saith (f) De poenit cap. 10. the same and Gregory of Nazianze where are those saith he (g) Orat. cont Arian who describe the Church by the Multitude they have the People for them and we have the Faith they have abundance of Gold and Silver but we have the true doctrine of Faith whereby you may see that in that time the true Church did not consist in the Multitude Neither shall it be in the Multitude that the true Church shall be found in the time of Antichrist the Church shall be reduced to a very little number according to the testimony of Christ (a) Luke 18.8 when the Son of man cometh shall he find Faith on the Earth St. Hierome (b) In Sophron. 2. saith that in that time the Church shall be reduced to a Wilderness shall be deivered to the wild Beasts and shall suffer all the evils whereof the Prophet gives a description and St. Chrysostome (c) In Mathaeum homil 49. saith that when the ungodly Heresie which is the Army of the Antichrist will come to lay
hands on all the Churches there will be no other proof of Christianity no other shelter for the Christians who shall desire to know the truth than the Holy Scriptures than the word of God and truly in that time as well as in all those which I have marked heretofore the Multitude will follow the part of error and the true Church shall be reduced to a little flock which shall be strengthened only with the word of God against all the Stratagems and the persecutions of Antichrist To make an end of that proof I will rehearse what happened in the Council of Nice according to that which Sophronius (d) lib. 1. cap. 8. relates all the Bishops thought to introduce into the Church a new Law which was that those who would be in the Sacred Orders should lead a single life the good Priest Paphnutius a venerable old man of a holiness and purity free from all slanders rose in the middle of that multitude of Bishops You must not saith he to them lay so heavy a burthen upon the shoulders of those who are in the Sacred Orders you are to consider what St. Paul (e) ad Hebr. 13.9 saith that Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled to that voice a numerous multitude of Bishops Priests and Deacons who were present there vouchsafing their attention considered that Holy old man as an Apostle who came to declare to them the word of God and changed their resolution so knowing by the Doctrine of St. Paul that Marriage is honourable in all they left all the Church-men free to live in the state of Marriage as they had us'd to do before Do but judge now if in that time the Multitude got the advantage over truth and if the Fathers of that Council were of the opinion of the Roman Church that the Multitude of those who hold one and the same Doctrine is a mark of the truth of that belief §. 3. Succession is not an Infallible mark of the true Church IF Succession could give the right of being Infallible there is no Church in the world which had more right to be esteemed such than the Church of Jerusalem it is of Jerusalem that it is said (f) 2 Chron. 33.4 7. in Jerusalem shall my name be for ever In this house and in Jerusalem which I have chosen before all the Tribes of Israel will I put my name for ever (g) 2 Chron. 7.16 I have chosen and sanctified this house that my name may be there for ever and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually (h) Psal 132.13 14. The Lord hath chosen Zion he hath desired it for his habitation this is my rest for ever here will I dwell for I have desired it c. and I will also clothe her Priests with Salvation it was upon all those fair promises the Priests proceeded in withstanding the truth which was preached to them by the Prophets it was for that reason they exclaimed so often upon all occasions (i) Jerem. 7.4 The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord are these But hear what the Lord answers (k) v. 8 11 12 c. Behold ye trust in lying words that cannot profit Is this house which is called by my name become a Den of Robbers in your eyes behold even I have seen it saith the Lord but go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh where I set my name at the first and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel And now because you have done all these works saith the Lord Therefore will I do unto this house which is called by my name wherein ye trust and unto the place which I gave to you and to your Fathers as I have done to Shiloh and I will cast you out of my sight c. The same is to be seen in the other Prophets where Jerusalem after it had been established by the Lord as a Tabernacle which should never be removed it is said afterwards that for its abominations it is transported into Babylon If Shiloh hath ceased to be the house of God if Jerusalem be reduced into a Wilderness where nothing grows but Briers and Thorns where (a) Isaiah 5.6 God will command the Clouds that they rain no rain upon it hath the Church of Rome any reason to brag so much because it hath been in times past the Nurse of Martyrs the Seed-plot of Saints doth it follow from thence that it is still at this time in the same condition it was in the first Ages of the Church Hath not the present Church of Rome a great deal of reason to fear that after all the abominations it hath been filled withal by those who have had the government thereof it may be dealt with like Jerusalem that it may be made a Den of Robbers an horrible Babylon a dreadful Wilderness where grows nothing but Briers and Thorns and where God hath permitted that the Heaven of the Holy Scripture should be shut up and that there should not fall a drop of his word upon those who stubbornly persist in its abominations In fine could the Church of Rome be in hope of having more priviledges than many other Churches which have been built by the Apostles in the Eastern part which have conserved during long space of years their right succession preserved from Bishop to Bishop from Pastor to Pastor and which notwithstanding all that have been since by the Turks turned into several Mosquées where those Infidels have the exercise of their Religion If the Church of Rome would say that the Doctrine it teaches is to be followed because the Popes who do govern at this time have succeeded one another from Bishop to Bishop in St. Peter's Chair I answer that for the same reason in the time of Paul Samosatenus it was necessary for every body to be an Heretick because Paul of Samosate was right Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch that he had succeeded lawfully Demetrius Demetrius Fabius Fabius Babilas who succeeded Zebinus he Philetus he Asclepiades he Serapion he maximinus he Theophilus he Cornelius he Hero he Ignatius he Evodius who succeeded lawfully St. Peter I answer that in the Age wherein lived Nestorius every body was engaged to be a Nestorian because Nestorius was rightful Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople right successor to Sisinius to Atticus to Arsatius to John Chrysostomus to Nectarius to Gregory of Nazianze and so from Bishop to bishop the 36th according to the Chronicles of Nicephorus who had lawfully succeeded in that Chair the Apostle St. Andrew In fine to follow without partiality that principle of Rome and to give it the extent such a proposition ought to have which is always false if it is not universal and capable to be the first proposition of a Syllogism I answer the Popes are to revoke the Thunderbolts they have thrown against the Church of England