animautibus mutis vias rationis accipite c. Arnob. l. 6. p. 202. for Swallows and other Birds cast forth their dung upon them bearing no reverence towards either their Jupiter or Aesculapius their Minerva or Serapis Blush at the last saith Arnobius and learn the ways of reason from these mute creatures and let them teach you there is no Divinity in these Images which they do not avoid nor fear to dung upon following the Laws and instinct of their nature this is another sensible demonstration from which he tells them they may learn the vanity of all that service which they pay unto them How many things do these mute creatures saith Minutius judg touching your Gods p. 26. The Mice the Swallows and the Kites perceive they have no sense they gnaw them they tread they sit upon them and if you do not drive them thence will nest within the very mouths of your supposed Deities Are thieves so foolish as to fear Priapus saith Lactantius L. 2. p. 153. In Ps 11◠Con. 2. when even the birds do sit and dung upon him Better it were saith Austin to worship Mice and Serpents and such like Creatures for they after a sort do judg of Heathen Idols in which because they see no life they do not fear the human shape Now that these things may happen to the Romish Host is evident from their own Canons which speak thus Si Hostia consecrata dispareat ab aliquo animali accepta Missal de defect Miss C. 3. S. 7. Ibid. C. 10. S. 5. vide supra If any Consecrated Host be snatched up by some beast and cannot afterwards be found another shall be Consecrated If a Fly or such like Creature fall into the Chalice he shall be taken out and burnt or swallowed by the Priest and reason good because whole Christ being contained in every particle of the blood the little insect if he drink any thing must have him wholly in his Guts Gages New Survey of the West-Indies p. 447. T was this occasioned the Conversion of Mr. Gage a Romish Priest viz. his seeing a bold Mouse come from behind the Altar and snatch a way his Wafer-God and eat half of him up before he could be rescued from his teeth This also is evident from reason for will not any Mouse or Rat Dog or Cat following the laws or instinct of their nature gnaw eat devour the Roman Host provided that the Mass-Priest do not drive them from it And if it be so horrid to conceive according to St. Austin and Arnobius that birds should nest even in the mouth of God must it not be more horrid to conceive that God should be received and drawn into the mouth and stomach of a beast Would any of them scruple think you if they had occasion and convenience to dung upon the Host or in the Chalice And is it not then evident according to St. Clemens that these beasts do bear no reverence toward the Roman God Do they not perceive according to Minutius and St. Austin that it hath no sense May we not wonder with St. Clemens that Romanists have not yet learned from these birds their Host is an insensate being May not this sensible demonstration teach them according to Arnobius that there is no Divinity in any Host and that their worship of it is a vain and fruitless service Once was the time when Aegypt was made ashamed of their chief God Theodoret Hist Eccl. l. 5. cap. 22. when they saw Mice creeping out of his belly what would they have said if they had seen their God creeping down as the Mass-God doth into the belly of those Mice or Flys CHAP. II. The Contents 8. The Scriptures and Fathers deride the Heathen Deities and say that we may knew they are no Gods because they have no use of their outward senses § I. 9. Because they are made Gods by Consecration and by the will of the Artificer part of that matter which is Consecrated into a God being exposed to common uses § II. 10. Because they were imprisoned in their Images or shut up in obscure habitations § III. 11. Because they lighted Candles to them § IV. 12. Because they clothed their Gods in costly Raiments § V. 13. Because they might be metamorphosed § VI. All this may truly be affirmed of the Roman Host from § I. to § VI. The Roman God being eaten may be vomited up again and voided at the draught § VII An expostulation with the Worshippers of the Host in the words of Arnobius § VIII All that the Fathers say against the Heathen Gods is in the person of a Heathen retorted on the Adorers of the Host § IX Corollaries from what hath been already praved 1. That the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or of the Aderation of the Host as God was not acknowledged by the Antient Fathers § X. A confirmation of this Corollary from three Considerations 1. That the Heathens could not be ignorant of this supposed Article of Christian Faith or of this practice of the Church provided that they Antiently believed and practised as doth the present Church of Rome § XI 2. That the Jews and Heathens left nothing unobjected which could with any shew of reason be offered from any other Doctrine or Practice of Christianity against the Deity and Worship of our Lord and yet say nothing against this Doctrine or this Practice § XII 3. That the Fathers of the Church do largely answer all other scruples of Hereticks and Heathens which made them to suspect the Deity of Christ but never say one word of this § XIII This never was objected by Heretick or Heathen as an absurdity till the Eleventh or Twelfth Century ibid. 2. Corol. That the Host cannot be truly God and consequently that Church by which it is Worshipped as God is guilty of Idolatry § XIV The proof of this Corollary is a sufficient vindication of the Church of England in the point of Schism and a sufficient confutation of the whole Mass of the Roman errors § I 8. THE Psalmist smartly doth deride the the Heathen Gods Psal exv 5 6 7. because they have no use of any of their outward senses They have mouths saith he but they speak not eyes have they but they see not they have ears but they hear not noses have they but they smell not they have hands but handle not feet have they but they walk not Ch. xv 14 15. The worshippers of Idols saith the Book of Wisdom are most foolish and are more miscrable than very Babes for they counted all the Idols of the Heathen to be Gods which neither have the use of eyes to see nor noses to draw breath nor cars to bear nor fingers of hands to handle and as for their feet they are slow to go They are upright as a Palm-Tree but speak not saith the Prophet Jeremy Chap. x. 5. Baruch vi 7. As for their tongue it is polished by the
Gods the practising that worship which they received from the Tradition of their Fathers And can it reasonably be imagined that they who thus condemned others did the same things themselves and only did invite them to exchange their Heathen for a Christian Deity subject to all that infamy contempt and drollery which they cast upon the Heathen Gods and way of worship Can it be reasonably thought that all those Fathers if they had practised and believed as now the Papists do would speak such plain and frequent contradictions both to their practice and their Doctrine and talk as if they equally intended to confute and render infamous the worship of the Christian and the Heathen Deities Let any reasonable person judg whether these apprehensions and assertions that to worship as a God what we do eat is an abominable and repugnant worship a certain indication of the highest folly stupidity and the extremity of madness could proceed from men who dayly worshipped as the Highest God what they themselves did eat or whether they who worshipped as God that very Host which they did sacrifice unto God could solemnly declare as the forementioned Fathers often do that to adore as God what we or others Sacrifice is to be Sacrilegious against God and ignorant of the true knowledg of God to be guilty of folly and Atheism and to do that action which will justly render us a laughing stock to all our neighbors If this was the deportment of all those Holy Fathers we have just reason to cry out Vbi fides ubi pudor and to conclude that they had not one Grain of honesty or shame or prudence in them Since that this Wafer-worship hath obtained amongst the Latins what Romanist will say with Origen the Sacrament that is the God he worships according to our Saviours words is voided at the draught with Pseudo Justin that what we eat or sacrifice cannot be worthy of the name or honor of a God With Cyril that they are rude and stupid who carry up and down their God upon their shoulders or with St. Chrysostom that it is an hyperbole of madness to own that for a God which may be stoln Since then the Fathers without distinction or exception do frequently assert these things and many more of the like nature it is extremely evident that they were not worshippers of the Host as is the present Church of Rome for if no man would thus speak who doth as the Papists do surely these Fathers were far enough from Popish practices in this particular Moreover let it be considered 1. Whether the Fathers would afford the Heathens this great advantage to retort all that they argued against the worship of their Gods and to assert that that which they condemned in them was only what they dayly practised themselves and taught all Christians to observe which certainly they did if they believed and practised as doth the present Church of Rome And 2. Whether the Heathens if this occasion had been offered would have been wholly silent and negligent of this advantage Put case I say these Pagans knew that all which by the Christians was objected against their worship and their Gods was of an equal force against the worship of the Christian Host that this Host was owned by them as the Highest God and yet was carried in their hands because it could not go was kept by Sextons under Lock and Key was sometimes burnt and sometimes buried in the carth that it was clothed with costly Raiment void of all apparent sense and life as any of the heathen Idols how could the Heathens being acquainted with these things and many others of like nature abstain from saying Thou art inexcusable O Christian whosoever thou art that judgest us on these accounts for thou that judgest dost the same things For further confirmation of this Argument consider § XI 1. That the Heathens could not be ignorant of this supposed Article of Christian Faith and this supoosed practice of the Church of Christ provided that the Christians really believed and practised always as doth the present Church of Rome For 1. The Fathers do themselves declare that 't was impossible they should conceal from Pagans what was done in their assemblies thus to that false suggestion that Christians did eat the blood of infants that they were guilty of cating human flesh it is replyed by Athenagoras Legat. p. 38. B. that if the Christians did so it was impossible that having servants more or less they ould conceal this from them We increase dayly Proficiente multitudine reorum quid ita non proficit multitudo nuntiatorum Nationes C. 7. Apol. 7 8. saith Tertullian and the more we do so the more we must be hated now the number of the guilty thus increasing how is it that the number of informers is not greather Our conversation is more known you know the days on which the Christians meet you oft beset detain oppress us in our private meetings but yet who ever came upon us whilst we were eating of an Infant were we guilty of these things when any persons came to profess the Christian Faith the Priest must first inform him that such things were to be done or Postea cognoscant necesse est being once admitted into their Communion he must behold them done and how could such a one saith he abstain from the divulging of them And if the Priest did first inform him that if he would become a Christian he must worship that which to all his senses would seen Bread and Wine as the Great God of Heaven or if being once admitted to the Holy Sacrament he was instructed so to do and beheld all other Christians doing so how could this Proselyte abstain from the divulging of this worship for this by Infidels and Heathens was always judged saith Bellarmine L. 2. de Euch. c. 12. §. 2. Ex illis a very foolish Paradox this was to worship a new God obnoxious to almost all those follies and infirmities which had engaged them to renounce their Heathen Gods 2. That Christians could not conceal this practice from the Jew and Gentile will be extremely evident from this consideration that many myriads who embraced the Christian Faith were by the heat of persecution driven back to Paganism and therefore were concerned to save their credit by divulging what they esteemed most lyable to exception in the Christian Faith or practice and therefore to divulge this foolish Paradox as by the Gentiles this plain impossibility as by the Jews it was esteemed For not to mention the Apostacy of all the Asiaticks 2 Tim. i. 15. and of Phygellus and Hermogens when Nero raged against the Christians Euseb Hist Ecc. l. 4. c. 15. p. 129. Epist ad Trajan l. 10. Ep. 97. Euseb H. Eccles l. 5. c. 1. p. 156 160. c. 2. p. 167. The Apostacy of Quintus the Phrygian with many others under the persecution of Trajanus when many who had
formerly been Christians declared to Pliny they had ceased to be so some three some more some twenty years ago Nor the revolt of tose ten Gauls under the Persecution of Aurelius Verus who fell with many others from the Christian Faith nor those who under the sixth Persecution were forced by the severity of torments which Scapula inflicted on them to desert that Faith I say not to insist on these less notable defections St. Cyprian complains that by the furty of the eighth Persecution Ep. 8. §. 6. Christianity did suffer very much that they were very few who then stood firm but they who languished were very numerous Ep 9. §. 4. that the Church then with tears lamented the fall and funerals of very many De lapsis §. 2. that there was then a manifold decay of that once numerous people which professed the Chrian Faith Ibid. §. 5. that even at the first onset of the threatning enemy the greatest number of the Brethren betrayed their Faith The like we find recorded by Dionysius of Alexandria even of the chiefest of the Christians Apud Euseb Hist Ecc. l. 6. c. 40. p. 238. B. C. Hist Eccl. l. 8. C. 2. p. 294. at the first conflict in the tenth Persecution many thousands even of the Rulers of the Church apostatised saith Eusebius Lastly who knows not that the Apostate Julian was once a Reader in the Church and also that he received Christian Baptism and as a consequent of that the Blessed Sacrament That in the time of his Apostacy he prevailed on very many Hist Ecll. l. 3. C. 13. Partly by flatteries partly by bribes and partly by torments to fly back to heathenism and to renounce the Christian Faith as Socrates relates Now it is absolutely impossible that these Apostates should be ignorant of such a constant and notorious practice of the Christians as the adoration of the Host must be provided that it was then worshipped by them as their God and Saviour § XII 2. It may deserve to be considered in confirmation of this argument that both the Jews and heathens left nothing unobjected which could with any shew of reason be offered frm any other doctrine or practice of Christianity or any fame concerning it though never so ill grounded against the Deity and Worship of our Lord Vel impossibile esse vel incongruens ut Deus in uterum se mulieris includeret Lact. l. 4. c. 29. Arnob. l. 7. p. 249. Tatian p. 159. Lact. l. 4. c. 22. 29. Ceisus apud Orig. l. 1. p. 51 54. l. 2. p. 62. Minut. p. 25. or the profession of the Christian Faith They scoffed at all that any way was lyable to an exception from the Conception of our Lord to his Ascension They very frequently declare that 't was impossible or at least incongruous that God should be included in a Virgins Womb and that it is unworthy of a God to be made man or to appear unto us in the form of man or to descend unto these lower Regions that it did not become the son of God to fly to Aegypt to escape the wrath of Herod that a body so born and nourished with meat as our Lords body was could not be deemed the body of a God Lact. Ibid. they confidently say that Divine Majesty could not subject it self to those infirmities which might expose him to the derision and contempt of men Were Christ a God say they why did he make himself so weak and so contemptible as to become obnoxious to punishment from men Why did he suffer violence from mortal men Why did he not repel their force by his Superior power Why did he not shew forth his Majesty before his death Why was he haled as impotent to the judgment Seat condemned as a criminal or slain as mortal Why lastly was he not able to roul away the stone from his own Sepulchre Celsus apud Orig. l. 5. p. 269. but needed an Angel to perform that work Now they who say these things and offer these as they supposed convincing arguments that our Messiah could not be the Son of God or a fit object of Religious Worship could not have waved those more plausible pretences to except against his Deity which this supposed adoration of him in the Host afforded For is it not more incongruous that God should be included in the Stomach not only of the vilest wretch but of the meanest brute than that he should be for a time included in the hallowed womb of the most Blessed Virgin Is it not less ridiculous to say God once appeared in the form and fashion of a Man than that he constantly doth lie concealed under the form of Bread and Wine Is it unworthy of a God to fly to Aegypt and must it not be more unworthy of him to be carried Captive thither Is it beneath his Majesty to take upon him the infirmities of living flesh and is it not much more beneath him to take upon him the infirmities of dead insensate flesh and even after his Ascension to come down among us as inactive as Aesops God of Frogs Is it absurd to say that God descendeth to the Earth and is it not much more absurd to say that he descends into the Stomach or the Draught Can not that be the body of a God which feeds on ordinary meat and must that be his body which it self is eaten Doth not this Sacramental Jesus make himself as weak and as contemtible and doth he not as much expose himself to the derision both of Jew and Gentile by this conversion into a little Wafer as ever he was subject to in his infirmest state on Earth Is he not as unable in the Sacrament to scare away the Mouse that gnaws upon him as in the Sepulcher he seemed to be to roul away the stone Doth he not shew less power there for the repelling of the Thief the Wizard the Fly the Vermin than whilst he was on Earth he shewed for the repelling of his Murtherers Can it rationally be supposed that they who did so constantly object all the fore-mentioned particulars to the reproch of Christ and those that owned and worshipped him as God from the beginning of Christianity till the full triumph of it over Heathenism should never once object what in all these respects is more ridiculous had they then known what if it had been true they must have known viz. that this was then the faith and practice of the whole Christian World that every Christian believed the Sacrament was truly God and worshipped it as God In the declining Ages of the Church when this Idolatry obtained among Christians the Jew Mahometan and Heathens did constantly deride and pour contempt on Christians upon this account Now the reproach of Christians is not that they are Galileans or worshippers of him that hanged on the three but that they are God-Eaters Si hostia Deus eâ— â—â—â—r situ obductus corrumpiâ—â— Cur
persona Episcoporum principum nostrorum Regi Francorum attulit Hoveden Annal. Part. 1. ad A. D. 792. Simeon Dunelm ad A. D. 793. M. Weslmonast A. D. 793. Alcuinus Tutor to Charles the Great and Scholar of Venerable Bede who wrote an Epistle against the Synodal Book of the Second Nicene Council wherein it was asserted that Images ought to be worshipped which Epistle being marvelously confirmed by the Authority of the Holy Scriptures he carried to the French King in the name of the English Bishops and Princes This Image-worship was condemned also by the Church of England in the XII and XIII Centuries For Simon Dunelmensis an Oxonian Doctor and Roger Hoveden their chief Professor and Matthew Westmonasteriensis do all concurr in this assertion that in the Second Nicene Synod are many things contained which are inconvenient and contrary to the true faith and that in that Council was established a Decree that Images should be worshipped which thing the Church of God wholly abhors Where note that in these Writers we find not the least hint of a distinction betwixt due and undue worship of an holy Image or betwixt worship which the Church of Christ allows and worship which the Church abhors nor do they say the Nicene Council doth assert eam adorationem Imaginibus deberi quam Ecclesia Dei execratur P. 146. as T. G. in his translation of these words doth very fraudulently insinuate but they say only that the second Nicene Council had declared Imagines adorari debere quod Ecclesia Dei execratur that Images were to be worshipped and that this was the Doctrine which Gods Church abhorred It was condemned in the XIV Century by Robert Holcot one of our Country men and Professor in Oxford Com. in lib. Sap. Cap. 13. voce Infelices who plainly doth assert That no adoration is to be given to any Image nor is it lawful for any man to worship Images It was condemned in the XV. Century by Gabriel Biel In canone Missae lect 49. an Oxonian Doctor who determines that to be the truest Sentence which holds That any Image is not to be worshipped either for it self considered as it is wood or stone or metal nor yet considered as a sign er Image And that the Christian faith permits them to be reserved in the Church non ut ipsae adorentur not that they should be worshipped but that the minds of faithful men might be excited to give reverence to them whose Images they are It was condemned in the same Century by Cornelius Agrippa De vanit scientiarum cap. de Imagin who saith That the corrupt custom and false Religion of the Heathens hath infected our Religion and hath introduced into our Church Images and Idols and many barren pompous Cereonies none of which were found or practised among the primitive professors of Christianity It was condemned by Polydore Virgil De invent rerum l. 6. c. 13. who doth acknowledge that it is testified St. Jerom that almost all the antient Fathers did condemn Image-worship for fear of Idolatry It was condemned in the XVI Century by the excellent Cassander who saith Consult cap. de Imagin P. 205. It was to be desired that our predecessors had stood firm in the opinion of their Forefathers viz. that I mages were neither to be worshipped nor to be broken down And page 210 It seemeth fit saith he to be advised if matters could be thus contrived that things should be reduced to that moderation which they obtained in the more antient Church of Rome and Germany and France ut rerum gerendarum monumenta non cultus instrumenta habeantur that is that Images be used or retained as monuments of things past but not as instruments of worship It was condemned in the same Century Com. in Act. Apost cap. 7. by Ferus a very Learned Person who Preached at Mentz for the expresly saith that Images are to lerated in the Church that they may admonish not that they may be worshipped for otherwise they can admit of no excuse And to assure us that his private judgment was very sutable to the prevailing judgment of those times we find the same determination made by a Council held at Mentz A.D. C. 14. 1549. during the Session of the Trent Council which speaks thus Let our Pastors accurately teach the people that Images are not propouuded to be worshipped or adored but that we may by them be brought to the remembrance of those things which we ought profitably to call to mind It was condemned also by the Church of Cologn In Antididag Colon. cap. de Imag. which saith thus We Christians when we bend our knees before the Image of the Holy Cross do not adore the very wood but him who died upon it for our sins and doth conclude with Gregory the Great that it is not lawful in any wise to worship any thing that is the work of our own hand Moreover from the XII Century to the Reformation it was condemned by the Waldenses the Albigenses and the Hussites who spread themselves throughout the greatest part of Europe and propagated their Doctrine through France Spain England Scotland Italy Germany Bohemia Saxony Polonia Lithuanid and other Nations Lastly Dr. Still defence p. 837.838 This Image-worship was condemned by the Armenians from the VI. Century to this present time For they having begun their Schism before this practice found any countenance in the Church of Christ not only do refuse to worship Images but roundly do pronounce Anathema on them that do so § IV 2. We say the Roman Church is guilty of Idolatry in worshipping the Saints departed because they worship them with mental prayer believing that they understand the secrets or inward motions of the hearts of them who put up to them mental prayers Now this we say was never any Article of Faith Sess 25. p. 527 528. even in the Latine Church till the Trent Council had determined that they who said it was a foolish thing to put up mental prayers to Saints departed were guilty of impiety and did pronounce Anathema On all that held or thought the contrary till then I say it was no Article of Faith even in the Western Church For in the XII Century this Question was moved by the Master of the Sentences whether the Saints do hear the prayers of suppliants and the desire of petitioners do come unto their notice and this Answer is returned to it that it is not incredible that the souls of the Saints Lomb. Sent. l. 4. Dist 45. which in the secret of Gods presence are joyed with the illustration of the true light do in the contemplation of it understand the thing that we done abroad as much as appertaineth either to them for jay or to us for help Anselmus Landunensis who lived in the same Century notes this that Ausim saith Glass inter◠i◠Esa lxiii that the dead even the Saints do
l. 6. c. 3. 24. Contr. Don. l. 3. c. 18. Orig. in Matt. Hom. 1. not as visible for as the Fathers say it concerns those only which are built upon the Rock and such are only they who hear the words of Christ and do them Now as in the defection of the Church of Israel to Idol Worship 7000 souls remained who had not bowed the knee to Baal so may it be in the defection of the Church visible into the like sin § II Ob. 4 But saith R. H. of the Catholick Chuch Disc p. 75. we say in our Creed I believe one Holy Catholick Church but how is it Holy if it may fall into and teach so gross and so manifold Idolatry Answ Even as the Church of Israel and Judah was Holy notwithstanding their Idolatry and wickedness and the City of Jerusalem was Holy notwithstanding the wickedness of the people that lived in it the Church is therefore always Holy Expos on the Creed p. 343. saith the Reverend and Learned Bishop Pearson 1. In reference to the vocation by which all the members of it are called and separated from the rest of the world to God which separation in the Language of the Scriptures is a sanctification and so the calling being Holy 2 Tim. i. 9. for God hath called as with an holy calling the body which is separated by it may well be called Holy 2. In relation to the Offices appoined and the powers exercised in the Church which by their institution and operation are holy and so that Church for which they were appointed and in which they are exercised may be called Holy 3. Because whosoever is called to profess Faith in Christ is thereby engaged to Holiness of life according to the words of the Apostle let every man that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity 4. The Church is stiled Holy because the end of constituting a Church in God was for the purchasing a Holy people and the great design of it was for the begetting and increasing Holyness that as God is originally Holy in himself so he might communicate his sanctity of the Sons of men whom he intended to bring to the fruition of himself to which without a previous Sanctification they cannot approach because without Holiness no man shall see the Lord. But as for real inward Holiness either it is necessary to constitute a member of the visible Church or it is not if it be not then can it not be necessary to constitute any part of the whole Church visible and consequently it is not necessary to constitute the whole and so it is not necessary to believe that the Catholick visible Church is thus Holy if it be said that this inward Holiness is necessary to make a member of the visible Church then are none to be reckoned or approved of as members of the Chuch visible who are not inwardly Holy nor is a wicked Bishop or Church-Governor to be obeyed because such are not members of the Church and are without the Church and therefore have no right to Govern these within 2. Seeing I can have no assurance that any members of a Council are inwardly Sanctified it follows that I can have no assurance of the truth of their definitions because I can have no assurance that they are members of the Church to which the promise of Divine assistance is confined Disc 3. ch 10. §. 115. unless perhaps R. H. will say that the acceptation of their definitions is an evidence of the Sanctification of the Major part of the Council which he may say with as much reason as that it is an evidence that they were truly Ordained and Baptized Ob. 5 § III Moreover it is objected that Protestants confess that Papists may be saved from which confession it will follow that they are not Idolaters because the Scriptures frequently declare that no Idolater can be saved P. 75. Idolatry saith R. H. is an error which excludes from salvation for it must needs be a mortal sin and so unacknowledged and unrepented of it must not only hazard but destroy salvation Answ To this objection we answer 1. By retortion thus it is confessed by Papists that Proestants may be saved from which confession it will follow that they are not guilty either of Heresie or Schism because the Scripture hath declared concerning these offences Gal. v. 21. that they who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God that Protestants may be saved is confessed implicitely and consequentially 1. By those who do assert that even an Heretick Vide St. Clar. Problem 15. whilst he conceiveth his own Sect more credible is not obliged to believe because the Faith is not sufficiently propounded to him for if he be not obliged to believe he cannot sure be damned for not believing what the Church proposeth 2. That they are to be excused who labor under the want of Teachers 3. That they do many of them labor under that ignorance which is invincible and therefore doth excuse from sin it is confessed more expresly by many sober Papists Exomol p. 546. Ed. Par. 1647. for Mr. Cressy hath declared in behalf of all his Brethren that Catholicks will not doubt to say that to many thousands of our Religion neither their Heresie nor their Schism shall prove de facto damnable but that supposing they die with an intention to renounce whatsoever of their opinions should appear to them to have been erroneous their invincible ignorance N. B. caused by Education misinformation of Catholick Doctrines c. may probably find pardon from our merciful judg The incomparable Chillingworth concludes from the Concessions of Mr. Knot Ch. 1. Part. 1. S. 4. that whatsoever Protestant wanteth capacity or having it wanteth sufficient means of instruction to convince his Conscience of the falshood of his own and the truth of the Roman Religion may be saved notwithstanding any error in his Religion which is indeed the conclusion of Mr. Knots discourse in these words thus we allow Protestants as much Charity as Dr. Potter spares us for whom he makes ignorance the best hopes of salvation 2. That nothing hinders but that a Protestant dying a Protestant may die with contrition for his Schism and Heresie and doing so may be saved for saith Mr. Knot when the man that is esteemed a Protestant dyeth we do not instantly conclude him in Hell because we know not what light might have cleared his errors or what contrition retracted his sins And this is sutable to the determination of many Roman Catholicks that Christians may be absolved who are ignorant of that which under pain of mortal sin they are obliged to know because they may be contrite for their ignorance and be desirous to learn Prob. 15. p. 97. Sancta Clara speaking of our English Protestants saith thus I wholly judg many of them free from all crime and that if after Baptism received they exert acts of
up whatsoever they are able to produce and plead for their excuse And therefore whatsoever of this nature I have met with in their writings I will impartially consider and then shall leave it to the judgment of the discerning Reader to determine whether that which they offer in their own defence doth carry in it any weight proportionable to what we have discoursed here and other treatises have offered to justifie this accusation of the Church of England Object 1 And 1. It is objected that the Scripture doth inform us and the Prophets have foretold us that all Idolatry should be extirpated by the preaching of Christ and his Apostles and that his Kingdom was always to continue and therefore that the Church of Christ could not apostatize so far as to enjoyn and allow the belief and practice of Idolatry If Doctor Stilling fleet will not deny saith T. G. what God hath promised by the Prophet Zachary Behold P. 125. the days come and I will destroy the names of Idols from off the earth and the memory of them shall be no more and this not for four or five hundred years but to the end of the world for the Kingdom of Christ is to continue always let him give glory to God and acknowledge his charge of Idolatry to be false and that Christ hath done what he promised to do that is to deliver us from all Idolatry Answer 1 Now to this slender Argument I answer that the same Prophets have informed us that God did promise to put his laws into the hearts of Christians Jer. xxxi 33. Esa xi 9. Esa lx 21. that they should never depart from him that the knowledge of the Lord should cover the earth as the waters cover the Sea that the people of Zion should be all righteous Let then T. G. give glory to God acknowledge that the Church of Rome which by their own confessions and upon evident proof from all the writers of these Ages was over-run by ignorance and barbarity and overwhelmed with wickedness during the 10 11 12 13. Centuries was not the Church of Christ or else confess the vanity of his own inference Moreover the same Prophets have informed us that the preaching of the Gospel should have this influence upon the world that they should beat their swords into plow-shares Mich. iv 3. Hos xi 18. Esa xi 9. and their spears into pruning books that Nation shall not lift up a sword against Nation neither shall they learn war any more that he would remove the bow the sword and the battle out of the earth and would make them to lye down in safety and that they should not hurt or destroy in all his holy mountain Let then T. G. give glory to God and acknowledg that Rome Christian which hath been the cause of more wars and shed more blood than even Rome Heathen did is very unlike to be Christs holy mountain or else confess the weakness of what he thus infers from this passage of the Prophet Zachary Let him charge God with the failure of his promise or confess that all these places do only shew that the Doctrine of the Gospel doth naturally tend to work these blessed effects in all that cordially embrace it though through the perverseness lusts the superstition and corrupt interests of men it be far otherwise and then he hath an answer to this slender scruple viz. that what he cites from Zachary doth not affirm that after the coming of our Saviour there should be no Idolatry amongst professors of Christianity but only that his Doctrine had a signal tendence to the extirpation of it did not the wickedness and superstition of men deserted by God and given up to the delusions of the Devil incline them to the practice of it 3. The words of Zachary do only say that God would cot off Idols out of the Land of Judah not out of the whole earth he doth not say that God would cut off all Idols but only the names of those Idols which they formerly had worshipped in which sense in was admirably true for after their return from Babylon they superstitiously abstained from that Idolatry which they had formerly committed And 4. This objection may be as speciously urged by the Arian Idolaters and the whole Heathen world as by the Roman Church for since the words of Zachary as they are rendred by T. G. contain a promise that God would cut off the names of Idols from the earth it doth as much assure us that after the coming of our Saviour and after the promulgation of his Gospel through the world there should remain no Idols nor any worship of Idols in the whole surface of the earth as that there should remain no Idols amongst those who do profess the Christian Faith § II If the Church of of Rom. R. H. disc p. 75. say they be guilty of Idolatry in worshipping the Host or Images or praying to departed Saints then the whole Church of Christ for many Ages before Luther must have been guilty of Idolatry for the same practices say they for which we do affirm the Church of Rome to be Idolatrous are and for many Ages were used in the Eastern Church Answ That the same practices on the account of which we do affirm the Church of Rome is guilty of Idolatry are and for many Ages before Luther were used in the whole Church of Christ can never be made good by Roman Catholicks in answer therefore to this whole Argument it is sufficient barely to deny what they precariously do assert in this particular and call upon them to prove that which they do with so much confidence affirm by some more cogent and effectual medium than the pretended silence of Historians touching such persons as did not comply with this Idolatry For 1. There is no necessity that all who did not inwardly believe these Doctrines should outwardly declare so much when they considered that they were likely to do themselves the greatest mischief by a free declaration of their minds and the Church but little good by reason of the prevalency of these errors Multa hujusmodi propter nonnullarum vel sanctarum vel turbulentarum personarumscandala liberius improbare non audeo Epist ad Januar. p. 372. Dementie est tibi pernitiem accersere si nulli prosis Apud Hotting Hist Eccl. Sect. 16. Part. 2. p. 29. Vid. etiam p. 24 25. and the blind Zeal of many for them For if St. Austin in his days found reason to complain that some corruptions had so generally obtained that though he judged they ought to be redressed yet as he tells us he durst not freely disapprove them it is no wonder that in these latter times of wretched ignorance and looseness men should be more shy of reprehending those corruptions which in their judgments they disliked concluding with Erasmus that it was madness though they were convinced as he saith he was that it was very good that some
not know what the living do no not their own sons L. 2. de animd Hago de Sancto Victore saith that the spirits of the dead be there where they do neither hear nor see the things that are done or fall out to men in this life and again the dead indeed to not know what is done here whilst it is here in doing Decr. p. 2. Caus 13. qu. 2. cap. 29. and Gratian resolveth the same question by the Authority of Esaiah In Sun Part. 4. l. 3. Tr. 7. qu 6. cap. de Orat. In the XIII Century we are informed by Altissiodorensis that many did affirm that we do only pray improperly unto Saints because we pray to God that by the merits of the Saints we may be helped N. B. And Alexander Halensis determines that God alone is simply to be invoked Qu. 92. M. 1. Art 4. and that the Saints rather pray with us than are prayed to by us In the XIV Century Gabriel Biel having set down the reasons which in his time were urged against this opinion that the Saints departed knew the desires of men on earth In Can. Misslect 30. confesseth that they moved not only Hereticks but other Christians to deny it and at the last concludes no more than this that it is probably said that God reveals all things which are offered to them by men whether in magnifying and praising them or in praying to them Ibid. iect 31. In 4. Sent. dist 45. qu. 4. and imploring their help And the determination of Scotus is in effect the same viz. That it is probable that God doth specially reveal to him that is in bliss such of our prayers as are offered to him Prâ—oeâ— in quest de orat sanctorum c. Missin Bibl. Câ—ll Mert. Oxon. And John Sharp in the University of Oxford did publickly dispute these questions of praying to the Saints and praying for the dead because saith he it was esteemed by some famous men and not without probability N. B. that such suffrages and prayers were superfluous in the Church of God although some wise men thought the contrary whence it appears that what is now de fide if indeed it be so was then only probable and might as freely have been denyed by Orthodox and Pious Christians and persons famous in their times as by reputed Hereticks Aen. Snlv. de Orig. Eohem c. 35. Ep. 19. ad Joh. Molin p 1 109. Edit Paris 16 16. In Cant Serm. 6. Hist Bohem. cap. 35. In the XV. Century the Thaborites maintained that the Saints Triumphant were not to be prayed to And in the XVI Century Cassander freely doth confess that it was not necessary to hold that the Saints did understand our prayers And of this judgment were the Waldenses from the XII Century to the Reformation of whom St. Bernard doth confess that they derided them who prayed to Saints Aeneas Sylvius that they judged in vain to ask the suffrages of Saints departed seeing they could not help us Adv. Sectam Valdens p. 68. and Seysel adds that they affirmed that the petitions which were put up unto the Blessed Virgin or any other Saints were vain Now these Waldenses had such multitudes of followers as caused Bernard to complain Bern. Ep. 240. That by reason of them the Churches were left without people and the people without Priests 2. Although some of the Eastern Churches do put up their petitions to Saints departed yet they ingenuously confess they do it not upon an apprehension that the Saints do hear them but only because they judg this service acceptable to God whether they hear or not they therefore may be rationally charged with superstition in this case but not with that Idolatry which is now taught and practised or at the least allowed of by the Church of Rome because they do not pray to Saints departed upon such principles as do ascribe unto them the knowledg of the heart or do require or suppose in them any farther knowledg than is consistent with a creature this will be evident from the confession of the Greek Patriarch 1 Resp Patriarch Hierem. ad Theol. wirtâ—â—b cap. 21. who saith in the behalf of his whole Church We do not invocate properly the Sai is but God for neither Peter nor Paul hear any of those that invocate them but the grace and gift that they have according to the promise I will be with you to the end of the world 2. This will be still more probable from that opinion which is generally received among them viz. that the Saints before the day of judgment do net enjoy the beatifick Vision this is the judgment of the 2 Sacraâ—â—s p. 24. Russians the b 〈◊〉 p. 13. Moscovites the c Scarga l. 2. c. 12. Greek Church of the d Bricrw p. 154. Armenians and d Bricrw p. 174 179. Marenites and more especially of the e Brierw p. 154. Jacobites who believe that the souls of just men do remain on the earth till the day of judgment Now in the judgment of the most famous Doctors of the Church of Rome our prayers are only to be directed to such Saints as do enjoy the Beatifick Vision § V That practice which we now insist on as the most clear and undeniable conviction of the Idolatry committed in the Roman Church viz. the adoration of the Host as God was not in any Age before the Reformation nor at the Reformation nor is it yet the practice of the whole Church of Christ For 1. The Doctrine of Transubstantiation on which it depends was V. Dr. whithy Idol of the R. ch p. 87 99 100. by the confession of some learned Romanists no Doctrine of Faith before the Council of Lateran and if it had not been for that Council it might say they even now be lawful to oppugne it It was say others not very antient it was determined of late the truth of which confessions hath been irrefragably made good by Mr. Aubertin 2. About the time of the Reformation this Doctrine was not owned by all Christian Churches Albertin p. 965.977 978 982 986 987. for 't was rejected by the Lollards in England the Waldenses in the Confines of France and Italy by the Thaborites and Hussites in Bohemia Brierw p. 173. V. Joh. Lasic de Rel. Arm. Lit Aethrop Alphons Jes Edit A. 1626. It was then and is still rejected by the Armenians as is apparent from the testimony of Nicephorus and their own Liturgy and by the Habissines or midland Aethiopians whose Liturgy as even the Jesuites confess is stuffed with errors and among others with this that they affirm the bread to be Christs body which as Bellarmine and others do confess can be true only in a Figurative and Metaphorick sense 2. Although we should admit that all the Eastern Churches do at present hold that Christs body is corporeally present in the Holy Sacrament yet hence it will
2. saith that the Apostle seems to speak of a departure from the Catholick Faith not that all shall recede from it but that the major part shall do so Bellarmin adds that it is certain that it will be so L. 13. Doct. Prin. c. 2. L. 2. de temp nov c. 15. To the same purpose speak Stapleton Acosta with divers others And all this they ground upon those passages of the Revelation which seem very concluding to this sense and clearly to intend it as the slaughter of the two witnesses by whom the Orthodex members of the Church is understood the flight of the woman that is the Church into the Desert and the worship which the whole world will then pay to the Beast Where note that these Witnesses which represent the Church are but two and they at last are slain Rev. xiii 7 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aret. in locum and that the Dominion of Antichrist is over all Kingdoms Tongues and Nations and he is said to cause the earth and him that dwelleth therein to worship him and both small and great rich and poor free and bond to receive his mark All which seemeth to signifie as much as the testiinonies forecited Now seeing it is Prophesied concerning Antichrist that he should exalt himself above all that is called God Rev. ix 20. and of the people of those Antichristian times that they should worship Devils and Idols of Gold and Silver and of Brass and Stone and of Wood which can neither see nor hear nor walk Rev. xiii 12. and that the earth and they that dwell therein should become worshippers of the Beast and of his Image therefore it must be also Prophesied that Idolatry should reign and spread it self over the Christian World CHAP. IV. The Contents Ob. 3. That if the Church be guilty of Idolatry the Gates of Hell would have prevailed against her Answered by shewing that by this phrase the Gates of Hell errors in Doctrine or Corruption in manners cannot be understood but only the state of death § I. Ob. 4. That if the Church be Idolatrous she cannot be Holy Answered by shewing what is the Holiness of the Church visible § II. Ob. 5. We grant the Papists may be saved and consequently must grant they are not guilty of Idolatry Answered I. by shewing that moderate Papists grant that Protestants may be saved whom yet they charge with Heresie and Schism and such like damning sins § III. 2. That their Repentance for their unknown sins and consequently their unknown Idolatries may obtain mercy for those who wanted means of better information § IV. 3. That in the same circumstances we believe that Idolaters may be saved ibid. Ob. 6. The Church of Rome cannot be guilty of Idolatry because we do acknowledg her to be a true Church Answered I. By shewing that true Church may still continue so to be when it is guilty of Idolatry § V. 2. That the Church of Rome may be a true Church in that large sense in which the Protestants confess she is so and yet be guilty of Idolatry they only saying that she is a true visible Church in that sensein which Heretical and Idolatrous Churches may be so § VI. To admit the Church of Rome to be in this sense a true visible Church is sufficient to justifie the Ordination and Succession of our Clergy I. Because the Ordination of Hereticks is valid § VII And so is also the Ordination of Idolaters § VIII Some of our Divines acknowledg that in the Church of Rome when Luther first begun his Reformation there was a saving profession of the truth of Christ § IX This acknowledgment is explained and the inference thence made that the Church of Rome was not then Idolatrous though Idolatry prevailed much in it ibid. Ob. 7. That if the Church of Rome be truly charged with this crime she must be guilty of Heathenish Idolatry answered by shewing that she is so only in that sense in which all Idolatry may be stiled Heathenish § X. And 2. by divers instances of such Idolatry which in the judgment of the Romanists themselves is not exclusive of salvation ibid. § I Ob. 3 AND this is all that is needful to be said in answer to this Argument p. 125. But yet ex abundanti I will add some remarks upon those Arguments which T. G. and R. H. do further offer to demonstrate 1. That the whole Church of Christ cannot be guilty of Idolatry which is the minor proposition of this objection And first T. G. thus Argues that if the Church which is Christs Kingdom could Apostatize so far as to enjoyn and allow the belief and practice of Idolatry the Gates of Hell would have prevailed against it but the Gates of Hell cannot prevail against it Ergo. Answ These words the Gates of Hell do not contain a promise of preservation of the Church from sin or error of what kind soever but only signifie that all true Christians who die in the Lord shall be delivered from death and shall obtain a joyful Resurrection For the Gates of Hell in Scripture phrase do never signifie the power of Heresie or Satan sin or error but both in the Old Testament the Jewish writers and the Antient Heathens it constantly is used to signifie the state of death as will be evident to any person who consults the places cited in the Synopsis and doth with them compare the passages in which this phrase is used in the Old Testament and in the Jewish writers I said Es xxxviii 10. saith Hazekiah in the cutting off of my days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall go to the Gates of Hell I am deprived of the residue of my years and what is in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gates of death is by the Septuagint Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gates of Hell Chap. xvi 13. Mac. v. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praepar Ev. l. 1. c. 3. p. 7. D. Job xxxviii 17. Thou hast the power of life and death saith the Author of the Book of Wisdom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou bringest down to the Gates of Hell and raisest up again They cryed to the Lord to have mercy on them now being even at the point of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the Gates of Hell Nor did Eusebius doubt the truth of this exposition of the words for he declares that God had hereby promised that the Church should not be overcome by death and that by virtue of this one voice Vpon this rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against her the Church continues not subdued by her enemies nor yielding to the Gates of death 2 This Scripture may concern the Church considered as invisible Ecclesia in iis est qui aedificant supra petram i. e. qui audiunt verba Christi faciunt Aug. de unit Eccl. c. 16. c. 18. De Bapt.
unhappy circumstances he hardly could discover to be errors 3. I answer that if the defect of a particular Repentance for or an acknowledgment of every mortal sin committed by a Christian will certainly obstruct the possibility of his Salvation then the Salvation of a Papist must be exceeding hazardous upon their own avowed Principles for it is evident beyond denial and proved by a late Author that Roman Casuists do teach The Practical Divinity of Papists c. that Murther Fornication Uncleanness Adultery Theft Lying Anger Revenge Reviling Drunkenness and Covetousness which is Idolatry and all those sins which by the Scriptures are pronounced mortal and so exclusive of the soul from Heaven are either in some cases which may often happen none at all or only venial sins 't is also certain that these Casuists are often subject to very gross mistakes in passing this determination when a sin is venial and when 't is mortal and very often contradict each the other nay some of them confess they are not able 〈…〉 â—um 〈…〉 ialia 〈◊〉 à Gra 〈…〉 i non exâ—â—â—imur taceâ—â—â—citra culpam â—â—ssunt Sess 14. c. 5. after all their study to lay down any certain rules in this particular If then the Lay-man being deceived by his Priest judge that to be only a venial sin which in reality is mortal he being also taught by the trent Council and his Roman Doctors that he may without fault conceal a venial sin and not at all confess it he according to the Doctrine of R. H. must be condemned to eternal misery for following the judgment of his blind mistaken Priest Ob. 6 § V It is objected that a true Church R. H. Disc 78. whilst it continues so to be cannot be guilty of Idolatry since therefore we acknowledg the Church of Rome to be and to continue a true Church we cannot truly say that she is guilty of Idolatry Answ It is already truly answered by the Reverend and Learned Dr. Stilling fleet Answ to Sev. Treat Part. 1. p. 20. that this objection is very disingenuous because it doth not answer any of those Arguments which we have used to prove the Church of Rome Idolatrous but only doth oppose the judgment of Charity to that of Reason which doth engage us to conclude they are Idolatrous and therefore to believe that if Idolatry be not consistent with the true being of a Church we err in this our Charitable judgment and therefore stand obliged to reverse it For instance suppose one of the Church of Judah should have called the Chuch of Israel in the time of Jeroboam a true Church because they did acknowledg the true God and did admit the Law of Moses in all other matters and did believe the acknowledgment of those truths to be sufficient to preserve the essentials of a Chuch among them and afterwards the same person should endeavour to convince the Ten Tribes of their Idolatry in worshipping God by the Calves of Dan and Bethel would this be thought a sufficient way of answering him to say that he contradicted himself by granting them a true Church and yet charging them with Idolatry No the true consequence would be that he thought some kind of Idolatry consistent with the being of a Church and if this were not so his Charity must be mistaken provided that his reason could not be gainsayed 2. That a true Church may yet continue so to be when it is guilty of Idolatry may be made evident from the consideration of the Jewish Church For first that the whole Church ws guilty of Idolatry in worshipping the golden Calf the Romanists do not deny the Scriptures having clearly said that by so doing they changed the image of the incorruptible God into the Similitude of a Calf Ps cvi 19 20. That they who worshipped the Calf did offer Sacrifice to an Idol Acts vii 41. and more expresly that they were Idolatrous 1 Cor. 10.7 2. That notwithstanding this Idolatry they still continued to be Gods Church and People if he had then a Church on earth is evident and therefore Verse 14. it is said that God repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his peoples Moreover that the worship of the Calves which Jeroboam had set up in Dan and Bethel was Idolatry is evident from these considerations 1. That it was a worship like to that of the Golden Calf which we have proved to be Idolatrous 2. God so esteemed this action for thus he speaks to Jeroboam 1 King xiv 9. Thou hast done evil above all that were before thee for thou hast gone and made thee other Gods and molten Images to provoke me to anger 3. These Calves are by the Scripture called Idols Hos viii 4 5. 2. That even from the time of Jeroboam to the Captivity of Israel the worship of the Calves was the Established Religion of the Ten Tribes For from the time of Jeroboam even to the days of Hosea that is the time when Israel was carried away into Assyria we find not any King of Israel who Reigned above one Month of whom it is not said expresly that he walked in all the ways of Jeroboam the son of Nebat and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin Moreover it is said expresly that when once Jeroboam had prevailed with Israel to commit that great sin of worshipping the Calves of Dan and Bethel the Children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did they departed not from them till the Lord removed Israel out of his sight Whence it must necessarily follow that from the days of Jeroboam to the Reign of Hosea the Church of Israel continued in her Idolatry 3. That God during that time or at the least some portion of it did still esteem and own them as his Church and people for Jehu was by a Prophet of the Lord Anointed King over the people of the Lord N. B. even over Israel 2 Kings ix 6. Israel was therefore then the people of the Lord though they continued in the sins of Jeroboam as also Jehu did 2 Kings x. 29. 2 King xiii 6. 2. In the days of Jehoahaz it is Recorded that the Children of Israel departed not from the sins of Jeroboam who made Israel to sin but walked in them 2 King xiii 23. and yet it is Recoded also that then the Lord was gracious to them and had compassion on them and respect to his Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob and would not destroy them nor cast them from his preence as yet Now his Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob was this that he would be their God and the God of their seed after them to have respect to this Covenant must therefore be to continue still to be their God and own them for his people 3. They with whom God was present amongst whom he walked in the midâ—â— of whom he dwelt and with whom he was God in Covenant were still
are told by Zanchy De Nat. dei Praefat. p. that in spight of Satan the Church of Rome retained still the chief foundations of the Faith though weakned with the Doctrines of men it retained the publick Preaching of the word of God though in many places misunderstood and misconstrued the Invocation of the name of Christ though joyned also with the Invocation of dead men the administration of Baptism instituted by Christ himself howsoever defiled with the addition of many superstitions so as together with the Symbol of the Covenant the Covenant it self remained still in her the Church of Rome therefore is yet the Church of Christ Apud Bishop Hall To. 2. p. 94. In the Roman Church saith Dr. Primrose God doth still keep his word in the Old and New Tetament as the contract of his Marriage with her in her is the true Creed the true Decalog the true Lords Prayer in her Christ is Preached though corruptly in her the Trinity and Incarnation of Christ are believed in her the Father Son and Holy Ghost are prayed to though in an unknown tongue to the most part in her the little Children are Baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and no man will deny that their Baptism is a true Sacrament whereby their children are born to God seeing we do not rebaptise them when leaving them they join to us Who then can deny that she is a true Church seeing out of the true Chuch there is no Baptism and the Church alone beareth Children to God Now the belief of all these things here mentioned by Dr. Primrose and Mr. Zanchy are well consistent with the practice and allowance of Idolatry and therefore in their judgments the truth of the visible Church may be consistent with it also 2. They also add that a true visible Church may still continue so to be even when she most deserves to be Divorced provided God doth not give her a Bil of Divorce remove her Candlestick or take away the Kingdom of God from her Two things are requisite Lect. in Apoc. p. 430 431. saith Episcopius to Vnchurch a people 1. That she merit a Divorce by reason of some deadly or fundamental error 2. That God doth deal with her accordng to her merit by sending her a Bill of Divorce both these are necessary to cause a Church to be so for as a wife by being an Adulteress doth not yet cease to be a wife whilst her own husband will acknowledg her and not Divorce her from him so is it with the Church of God The Church of Sardis is by Christ owned as a Church though as himself pronounceth Ibid. p. 521. V. Hall To. 2. Tr. of the Old Religion p. 76. she only had a name to live but really was dead The being of a Church saith Bishop Davenant doth principally stand upon the action of God calling men out of darkness and death to the participation of light and life in Christ Jesus so long as God continues this calling to a people though they as much as in them lies darken this light and corrupt the means which should bring them to Life and Salvation in Christ yet where God calls men to the participation of life in Christ by the Word and by the Sacraments there is the true being of a Church let men be never so false in the exposition of Gods word or never so untrusty in mingling their own Traditions with Gods Ordinances Thus the Church of the Jews lost not the being of a Church when she became an Idolatrous Church Thus to gran that the Roman was and is a true visible Church though in Doctrine a false and in practice an Idolatrous Church is a true assertion and of greater use and necessity in our Controversie with Papists about the perpetuity of the Christian Church than is understood by those that gainsay it 3. They say that a true visible Church ceaseth not to be so though she doth add to the profession of those essentials which constitute her a true visible Church such tenets as by unseen consequence do overthrow some of them The Church of Rome saith Bishop Hall Advertis p. 51. professing to hold those things diectly which by inferences she closely overthrows she is a truly visible Church but an unsound one Again the Church of Rome saith he under a Christian face hath an Unchristian heart overturning that foundation by necessary inferences which by open profession it avows that face that profession those avowed principles are enough to give it claim to the true outward visibility of a Christian Church nor can those inferences Dischurch it whilest those main principles are kept alive in that crazy and corrupted body And again p. 63. if we measure the true being of a visible Church by the direct maintaining of Fundamental Principles though by consequences indirectly overturned and by the possession of the word of God and his Sacraments though not without foul adulteration what judicious Christian can deny that the Church of Rome hath yet the true visibility of a Church of Christ In respect of the common truths yet professed among the Papists they may Apud Bishop Hall To. 2. Part 2. p. 82. saith Dr. Prideaux and ought to be termed a true visible Church in opposition to Jews Turks and Pagans who directly deny the foundation howsoever their Antichristian additions make them no better than the Synagogue of Satan 4. They whilst they do allow her to be a true visible Church do also say she is Heretical and do allow Heretical Churches to be true visible Churches Advertisement p. 51. also that which Rome holds with us makes it a Church saith Bishop Hall that which it obtrudes upon us makes it Heretical and elsewhere to this question is the Church of Rome still a part of the truly existent visible Church of Christ Reconciler p. 61. He answers Surely no otherwise than an Heretical and Apostatical Church is or may be Their Roman Church saith Dr. Crakenthorp is Heretical yet must she be accounted both to be in the Church and be a Church not simply not according to the integrity of Faith not according to any inward virtue Defens Eccl. Angl. adv Spalat c. 16. not so effectually that it should avail to Salvation for a man to be in it but yet a Church it is in some respects according to the external profession of Faith and of the word of God accordin gto the Administration of the Sacraments according to some Doctrines of true belief by which as by so many outward ligaments she is yet knit to the Orthodox and Catholick Church And to this Question Is the Roman Church at this day no part of the Church of God Appen part 3. p. 883. our learned Dr. Field thus answers Surely as Austin noteth that the societies of Hereticks in that they retain the profession of many parts of heavenly truth and the ministration of the Sacrament
all honour dignity function and power ecclesiastical as was the case of Anthimus the intruder into the See of Constantinople and may be censued as unfit to be accunted Christians which was the censure that Felix the Third and a Roman Synod past upon Acacius but when the Church by proscribing and condemning them hath taken from them all it can it cannot ake away the power of Baptism and Ordination and therefore the Church Catholick hath judged that they who were Baptised and Ordained by Hereticks and Schismaticks have both true Baptism and true Orders and hath rejected those that think otherwise as Hereticks which both innumerable Synods and Orthodox Fathers among whom Austin doth excel have proved against the Luciferians the Donatists the Arians and other Pests of the Church § IX There be some eminent Divines among us who are I hope not without reason more candid in their apprehensions of the Roman Church before the Reformation admitting it to have continued when Luther and his friends began their Reformation to have been a Church in which Salvation might be had not only for the ignorant but also for many others who did not openly renounce Communion with her That we yield no more to our Adversaries now than formerly we did Appendix part 3. p. 880. saith Dr. Field in that we acknowledge the Latine or Western Churches subject to Roman Tyranny before God raised up Luther to have been the true Churches of God in which a saving profession of the truth of Christ was found and wherein Luther himself received his Christianity Ordination and power of Ministry I will first shew that all our best and most renowned Divines did ever acknowledg as much as I have written Now that which doth induce them thus to judg was the consideration of these things 1. That notwithstanding those very many and very grievous errors which then obtained too generally and which were too much countenanced by the most powerful members of the Roman Church there still remained a profession and acknowledgment of so much truth as being joyned with Piety might be sufficient to bring her members to eternal life If at this day saith Bishop Vsher Sermon before his Majesty at Wansled p. 28. we should take a survey of the several professions of Christianity that have any large spread in any part of the world as of the Religion of the Roman and the Resormed Churches in our quarters of the Aegyptians and Aethiopians in the South of the Graecians and other Churches in the Eastern parts and should put by the points wherein they differ one from another and gather into one body the rest of the Articles wherein they all do generally agree we should find that in those propositions which without all controversie are universally received in the whole Christian world so much truth is conteined as being joyned with holy obedience may be sufficient to bring a man to everlasting Savlation neither have we cause to doubt but that as many as do walk according to this rule neither overthrowing that which they have builded up by super-inducing any damnable Heresies thereupon nor otherwise vitiating their holy Faith with a lewd and wicked conversation peace shall be upon them and mercy Which doctrine he confirms 1. from the constant practice of the Apostles in their first receiving men into the society of the Church For saith he in one of the Apostles ordinary Sermons we see there was so much matter delivered as was sufficient to convert men to the Faith and make them capable of Baptism and yet these Sermons treated only of the first principles of the Doctrine of Christ in these first principles therefore must the foundation be contained and that common unity of Faith Ibid. p. 20. which is required in all the members of the Church Again p. 16. As there is a common Salvation so is there a common Faith which is alike precious in the highest Apostle and the meanest believer for we may not think that Heaven was prepared for deep Clerks only and therefore besides that larger measure of knowledge whereof all are not capable there must be a rule of Faith common to small and great which as it must consist but of few propositions for simple men cannot bear away many so is it also requisite that these Articles should be of so much weight and moment that they may be sufficient to make a man wise unto salvation If then Salvation by believing these common principles may be had and to Salvation none can come who is not first a member of the Catholick Church of Christ it followeth that the unity of Faith generally requisite for the incorporating of Christians into that blessed Society P. 17. is not to be extended beyond these common principles Which may farther be made manifest unto us by the continual practice of the Catholick Church herself in the matriculation of her Children and first admittance of them into her Communion For when she prepared her Catechumeni for Baptism and by that door received them into the cougregation of Christs Flock we may not think her judgment to have been so weak as to omit any thing herein that was essentially necessary for the making of one a member of the Church Now the profession which she required of all that were to receive baptisin was for the Agenda or practical part an abrenuntiation of the Devil the World and the Flesh with all their sinful lusts and works and for the things to be believed an acknowledgment of of the Articles of the Creed which being performed solemnly she then baptized them in this faith intimating thereby sufficiently that this was that one faith commended to her by the Apostles Ibid. p. 17. as the other that one Baptisin which was appointed to be the Sacrament of it And that the creed of the Apostles as it is explained in the latter Creeds of the Catholick Church was esteemed by the general suffrage of the Greek and Latine Fathers and the whole Antient Church See P tters answer to Charity Mistaken § 7. from p. 216. to 233. Mr. Chill c. 4. § 83 8â— Bishop Tayor diss part 2. l. 1. § 4. a sufficient Summary or Catalogue of fundamentals that even by the Trent Council the Trent Catechism and the best learned Romanists it is acknowledged so to be is very largely and convincingly demonstrated by many eminent Writers of our Church 2. They add that those prevailing doctrinâ—s which thwarted the great fundamentals of our faith and made salvation more difficult were indeed docrines strongly then prevailing in but not received and owned as Articles of Faith by all themembers of the Church of Rome Answ to Charity Mistaken § 3. p. 64 65. In the latter Ages before the Reformation saith Dr. Potter though the Court of Rome by cunning and violence had subdued many noble parts of Christendom under her yoke yet the servitude of that Church and her misery was somewhat more supportable
because these base and pernicious adjections were not yet the publick decisions or tenets of any Church but only the private conceits of the domineering Faction Of the Church l. 3. chap. 8. p. 85. We most firmly believe saith Dr. Field all the Churches of the world wherein our Fathers lived and dyed to have been the true Churches of God in which undoutedly Salvation was to be found and that they which taught embraced and believed those damnable errors which the Romanists now defend against us were a faction only in the Church as were they that denyed the Resurrection urged Circumcision and despised the Apostles of Christ in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia So Bishop Brambal frequently Dr. Potter § 3. p. 76. Others do charge these things not on the Church but Court of Rome betwixt which two there might be some considerable distinction then though now there is no difference betwixt them in any of those Doctrines which concern the objects of their worship 3. Dr. Field Append part 3. p. 881. They add that the Roman Church that then was though it had in it all the abuses and superftitious observations it now hath yet it had also others who desired the removal of all those abuses and superstitious observations which we have removed the Roman Church which then was was the whole number of Christians subject to Papal Tyranny whereof a great part desired nothing more than to shake off that yoke which as soon as he began to oppose himself they presently did but the Roman Church that now is is the multitude of such only as do magnifie admire and adore the plenitude of Papal power or at least are contented to be under the yoke of it still The gross corruption of the service of the Church was then complained of by all good men Idem Append. to his third Book of the Church p. 190. and amongst other Articles of Reformation they desired that the Breviaries and Missals might be purged Now in respect of those persons who were the prevailing faction of the Church maintaining these corrupt Doctrines as Articles of Christian Faith and upholding these superstitious abuses and pertinaciously persisting in their errors the Roman Church saith Dr. Field was verè Ecclesia truly a Church Append. 3. part p. 882. that is a multitude of men professing Christ and Baptized but not vera Ecclesia a true Church that is a multitude of men holding a saving profession of the truth in Christ But in respect of those who groaned under the yoke who secretly disliked and disowned her corrupt Doctrines and earnestly desired and wished the Reformation of her superstitious abuses and of those also who submitted to them only for want of better information in those obscure times the Roman Church was vera Ecelesia a true Church that is a multitude of men holding a saving profession of the truth in Christ So the Church of the Jews at the coming of Christ had in it the Scribes Pharisees and Saduces as well as Zachary Elizabeth Simeon and Anna in respect of the former it was truly a Church but not a true Church in respect of the latter it was a true Church Ob. But why then did not these persons if they were of any considerable number more publickly oppose what they so much disliked Answ If you look into Father Pauls History of the Council of Trent you will find them censuring most of their determinations you will find there the German Bishops determining against the adoration of Images in a Provincial Council and delcaring that the Saints departed are to be honored but with the worship of society and love P. 278 279. as also gadly men may be honored in this Life Which Explications saith Father Paul being well considered do shew how much the opinions of the Catholick Prelates of Germany do differ fromt hose of the Court of Rome youwill there also find sthem quarrelling with that saying of the Synod that Divine worship was due to the Sacrament as improper and saying it was well corrected in the sixth Canon which said that the Son of God was to be worshipt in the Sacrament 2. There was no reason to expect more open opposition of these Doctrines and abuses there being no probability of success against the Court of Rome which was then very powerful and had not only worsted mighty Princes but used extreme severity against such dissenters destroying them without all mercy V. Mr. Dodwel Answer to Qu. 2. p. 59 67. which had all the Bishops engaged to them by their oaths and worldly interests which lastly declared all things Heresie in which men differed from them and prosecuted them upon that account with the extremest infamy and highest punishments here then we have a true Western Church not Idolatrous before the Reformation in which Salvation might be had Ob. 7 § X But saith R.H. if the Church of Rome be guilty of that Idolatry with which the Writers of the Church of England charge her Discourse p. 76 77. she must be guilty of Heathenish Idolatry for according to Dr. Stillingfleet and others her Idolatry is the same with that of Heathens and surely that excludeth from Salvation and must be inconsistent with a true Church Answ When we say the Idolatry of the Church of Rome is the same with that of Heathens we do not mean that it is so either in reference to the object viz. those evil spirits which the Heathens worshiped or in respect of the rites with which they worshipped their Deacons viz. human sacrifices and unclean performances but only in this respect that both of them do worship the creature for the Creator or give that worship to the creature which belongs to God alone 2. Although the Papists be in some single actions guilty of Idolatry yet do they in the general service of their lives give God the honor due to him they pray to God trust in him they praise and love him and perform to him all the positive duties of the first Table though they do not perform them all to him alone whereas the Heathens paid their whole worship to their Demons and gave no worship to the God of Israel they were without God in the world Ephes ii 12. saith B. Paul and God was without service from them Rom. i. 21. and even they that knew God yet did not glorifie him as God Now that Idolatry which robs God of his whole service performing it intirely to evil spirits or in an undue manner may very well be damnable and inconsistent with the being of a Church whilst that which is consistent with the performance of all those positive duties which we ow to God and doth not wholly rob him of any part of our Religious worship may not deserve so hard a censure This is apparent 1. From the instance of St. Leo Sermon 7. in Nativ Dom. who speaks of some foolish persons who from some eminent places did