do grant it Hart. They grant that the Pope may be an Heretick perhaps by a supposal as many things may be which never were nor are nor shall be For you cannot prove that any Pope ever was an Heretick actually though possibly they may be whereof I will not strive This point of the fallibility of the Pope and his subjection to a Council is so notorious with every man that is acquainted with the more ancient and modern Writers so known to any one that hath either read the determinations of Bishop Davenant qu. 5. or the defense of the Dissuasive of Bishop Taylour pag. 40. or the Review of the Council of Trent written by a French Catholick from whom the Disswader borrowed his allegations or that hath so much as read over the History of the Council of Trent that I need not insist on it any longer Notwithstanding the earnestnesse of the Iesuits under Laynez in the Council of Trent yet neither was the Pope's superiority over a Council nor the Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome defined there directly as appears out of the Review of that Council lib. 4. c. 1. and out of the English History pag. 721 722. Neither is there to this day amongst the Papists any thing enacted or determined in that Church which obligeth a man under pain of Excommunication to hold any such thing as the personal Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome the contrary being daily maintained there by more than the Iansenists much lesse is there any Sovereignty in matters of Faith ascribed unto them at this day All books of the Papists are subjected to the judgment of the Church not to the Arbitrement of the Pope The fides Carbonaria or Colliers faith so famed amongst the Papists was not established upon the infallibility or sovereignty of the Bishops of Rome no he told the Devil that He believed as the Church believed and the Church as He. And how necessary soever they make the communion with the particular Church of Rome how great influence soever they ascribe to the Pope over Councils yet the Decrees of the Council of Trent run in the name of the Holy Synod not Pope and there it is determined sess 4. that none dare interpret Holy Scripturs against the sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held or does hold If you enquire in-the doctrines of M r White D r Holden Serenus Cressy and such others as endeavour at present and that with great shew of wit and artifices to seduce the English to that Apostaticall Church there is not one of them that I knowe of who attributes any infallibility to the Pope or submitteth his faith to the Sovereigne decisions of the Bishop of Rome As for Serenus Cressy he very judiciously deserts the School-terme of Infallibility for that of the Churches Authority and saith that the exceptions and advantages which the Protestants have against the Roman Church proceed only from their mis-understanding of her necessary doctrines or at most that all the efficacy they have is onely against particular opinions inferences made by particular Catholique writers He shews that D r Stapleton asserts that the infallible voyce and determination of the Church is included in the decree of the Church speaking in a Generall Council representatively In which the Church is infallible with this restriction viz in delivering the substance of faith in publique doctrines and things necessary to salvation Other Catholiques and namely Panormitan teach that the decrees of Generall Council are not absolutely and necessarily to be acknowledged infallible till they be received by all particular Catholique Churches because till then they cannot properly be called the faith of the universall Church or of the body of all faithfull Christians to which body the promise of infallibility is made And this was the Doctrine of Thomas Waldensis and some other Scholmen c. An opinion this is which though not commonly received yet I do not saith S. C. find it deeply censured by any yea the Gallican Churches reckoned this among their chiefest priviledges and liberties that they were not obliged to the decisions of a Generall Council till the whole body of the Gallican Clergy had by a speciall agreement consented to them and so proposed them to the severall Churches there And to this last opinion doth S. C. incline and his book was approved at Paris as consonant to the Catholique faith He guides himselfe by the Authority of received Councils he acknowledges that to be onely necessarily accounted an Article of Catholique faith which is actually acknowledged and received by Catholiques and since contradictions cannot be actually assented unto it will follow that whatsoever decisions of Councils may seem to oppose such articles are not necessarily to be accounted Catholique doctrines and by consequence not obligatory He denies that Generall Councils can make new articles of faith they are witnesses of what hath been delivered not Sovereigns to determine of new truths either by way of addition to the former or in opposition thereunto Their Infallibility is limited to Tradition and spiritually assisted in the faithfull reporting of what hath been delivered what ever reports or decrees they make of another nature they are to be received with a different assent from what is Catholique faith There is a double obligation from decisions of Generall Councils the first an obligation of Christian beliefe in respect of doctrines delivered by Generall Councils as of universall Tradition the second onely of Canonicall obedience to orders and constitutions for practice by which men are not bound to believe those are inforced as from Divine authority but onely to submit unto them as acts of a lawfull Ecclesiasticall power however not to censure them as unjust much lesse to oppose and contradict them Much more doth the same Author adde which give little countenance to that state of the controversie which our Author forms unto us No Soveraigne dominion over our faith is by him ascribed to the Bishop of Rome or Nationall or Generall Counâ—ills and as to Infailibility which Mr Chillingworth had impugned he thus acquits himselfe I may in generall say of all his Objections that since they proceed only against the word Infallibility and that word extended to the utmost heighth and latitude that it possibly can beare Catholiques as such are not at all concerned in them seeing neither is that expression to be found in any received Council nor did ever the Church enlarge her authority to so vast a widenesse as Mr Chillingworth either conceived or at least for his particular advantage against his adversary thought good to make show as if he conceived so As to the subject wherein Infallibility or Authority is to be placed since Catholiques vary as to that point he sayes 't is evident thereby that they are not obliged to any one part of the Question only they are to agree in this Tridentine decision Ecclesiae est judicare de vero sensu Sacrae
culpable Schismaticall and damnable 2. Secondly that He represents the case so as if some of the Reformed Churches onely did forbeare all Communion with them 3. Thirdly That the grand occasion of the differences betwixt those of the reformed religion and the Papists was that the Bishops of Rome did assume an Infallibility and a Soveraigne dominion over our Faith 4. Fourthly That notwithstanding this usurped infallibility of the Bishops of Rome their assuming a soveraigne dominion over our Faith yet we may give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient and famous a Church and to decline this is to run into an extreame 5. Fifthly That the Church of Rome according to its present establishment and under that constitution wherein the first Reformers found it may be denominated a Church Ancient Famous and that upon those accounts for none other are mentioned possibly there doth belong a respect unto it or an obligation to communicate therewith 6. Sixtly That such a respect or exterior communion may be entertained with Rome and yet we incurre no danger of Superstition The first Proposition is Impious Blasphemous and Offensive to all Protestant eares It condemnes the Reformation carryed on by the Evangeliques abroad and in the Church of England as culpable guilty of an extreame and there is so much of Schisme justly charged on us as there is of extremity in our procedure It subverts all those Laws which are now in force whereby all Communion with Popish Offices and Sacraments celebrated in a different way from that of the Church of England is prohibited to us upon penalty of being imprisoned six months without bayl for the first offense for the second twelve months and for the third during life upon 5 and 6 Edw. 6. cap. 1. 3. The second Proposition is notoriously false there being no Reformed Church no not of the Lutherans but hath constantly held themselves obliged to forbear all Communion with the modern Bishops and Church of Rome Besides it carries a most dangerous insinuation in it as if the Reformed Churches were divided upon this point the contrary whereof is manifest out of the Harmony of Confessions so that such as abet this Popish compliance want not their Assertors even to the repute of most of the Reformed Churches and such as disclaim it are the lesse considerable for number and authority having onely the concurrence of some of the Reformed Churches How pernicious an intimation this is amongst ignorant persons and such as are unacquainted with the state of Religion a study much out of fashion now let any man judg and withall remember that the Church of England is of the number of those reflected upon here Who are they that pretend to forsake the Churches corruptions and not her external Communion Some there be that say they have not left the Church but onely her corcorruptions some that they have not left the Communion but the corruptions of it meaning the internal communion of it and conjunction with it by faith and obedience which disagree from the former onely in the manner of speaking for he that is in the Church is in this kind of Communion with it and he that is not in this internal communion is not in the Church Some perhaps that they left not your external communion in all things meaning that they left it not voluntarily being not fugitivi sed fugati as being willing to joyn with you in any act of piety but were by you necessitated and constrained to do so because you would not suffer them to do well with you except they would do ill with you Now to do ill that you may do well is against the will of God which to every good man is an high degree of necessity But for such Protestants as pretend that de facto they forsook your corruptions and not your external communion that is such as pretend to communicate with you in your Confessions and Liturgies and participation of Sacraments I cannot but doubt very much that neither you nor I have ever met with any of this condition Postremò addit Rex magnum se quidem crimen judicare defectionem ab Ecclesia sed huic crimini affinem se esse aut Ecclesiam suam penitus pernegat Non enim fugimus aiebat ejus Majestas sed fugamur Scit verò tua illustris Dignitas ut qui optimè quà m multi quà m praestantes pietate ac doctrinâ viri ab annis minimùm quingentis Reformationem Ecclesiae in capite membris optârint Quà m graves bonorum Regum ac Principum quaerelae sint saepe auditae statum Ecclesiae suis temporibus lamentantium Quid profuit â—ihil enim eorum ad hanc diem videmus esse emendatum quae correctionis egere cum primis censebantur Quare non veretur Ecclesia Anglicana nè candidis aestimatoribus in hac separatione Donatistis simile quid fecisse videatur Illi gratis sine ullâ causâ Ecclesiam Catholicam gentium cunctarum assensu comprobatam cujus neque fidem neque disciplinam culpare poterant deseruerunt Angli ab ea Ecclesia NECESSITATE DIRA COGENTE Secessionem fecerunt quam innumeri populi Christiani veram Catholicam universalem esse non concedunt ut modestissimè dicam quámque in dogmatis fidei disciplinae formâ multùm variâsle ab antiquâ multa assuisse nova vetustis mala bonis etiam è vestris Scriptores quà m plurimi ingenuè dudum sunt confessi verò notius jam est universo mundo quà m ut possit quisquam vel negare vel etiam ignorare Adde quod jugum Romanae servitutis ita durum per aliquot retro secula erat experta Ecclesia Anglicana novis subinde vexationibus inauditis angariis atque exactionibus supra hominum fidem cruciata ut vel illa sola causa apud Judices non iniquos à Schismatis suspicione ut loquitur Augustinus de Donatistis iniquae discissionis posse videatur ipsam liberare Non enim proâ—ectò Angli à charitate fraternâ animi causâ dissilierunt ut Donatistae neque ut decem tribus populi Iudaici metu impendentis mali quod nondum premebat sed post plurium seculorum patientiam post exantlatas inenarrabiles aerumnas onus intolerabile cui ferendo pares ampliùs non erant neque permittebat conscientia subductis cervicibus tandem excuslerunt From hence as also from our Laws our Thirty nine Articles and Homilies t is manifest that the Church of England is in the number of those that separate from the communion of the Church and Bishops of Rome and that for such important reasons as justifie the action from being causelesse or culpable though amongst all the Reasons alledged by K. Iames in that Letter of Causabon's or in our Laws or other Controvertists I do not find that reckoned for any motive of that great rupture much lesse for the principal or sole one which is
represented as such by our Historian The third Proposition therefore carries something of prevarication in it So those Advocates which would betray the causes of their Clients propose a wrong state of the Case the vanity whereof being once discovered renders the Plaintiff contemptible in the sight of all men and reduces him to a necessity of complying with the injured Defendant There is a great deal of ignorance and intricateness the Consequent thereof in the Proposition of our Author as it is by him worded for Infallibility and a sovereign Dominion over our Faith are not equipollent Termes nor termes indifferently used No Papist did ever ascribe unto the Bishop of Rome except some Parasitical Canonist whose Credit is little in that Church a sovereign dominion over our Faith He that is Sovereign knows not any Superior nor any coercive Law but his will the objects about which his power is conversant are liable to what alterations he pleaseth and he rules by the Lex Regia but what Divine did ever ascribe such a power to the Pope in matter of Faith Place the Chair where and how you will none of that Church ever assumed so much nor did that Church ever attribute so much to the Bishop of Rome There have been those that have taught that if by way of supposal it could be imagined that all the Pastors of the Church Catholick should erre in a Decree of Faith the Laiety were bound to submit thereunto but such a Sovereignty in matters of faith none except some Iesuits and Parasites ascribe unto the Pope's person his Briefs and Decretals have not that credit amongst the Romanists as to authenticate such Assertions nor is the belief thereof a necessary condition to communicate with that Church upon If we look upon the contests in Germany that introduced Protestancy at first we find the erroneous doctrine about Indulgences to be the primary occasion there In Switzerland and in France and Holland abuses and Idolatrous practises or false Doctrines are the first subjects of Disputes and occasion the Reformation there Transubstantiation Communion in one kind the propitiatory sacrifice of the Masse Image-worship praying to Saints and such like Controversies are the first and most fiercely debated In England under Henry the VIII the Pope's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes and appeals to Rome c. give the the first occasions of discontent and that change which was afterwards carried on to a total Reformation of the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England then came in question the power of the Bishop of Rome the nature of his Primacy the Authority and Fallibility of General Councels the power of National and provincial Churches to reforme themselves during the interval of Councels or without dependance thereon whether the Scripture were the sole rule of faith how obligatory were Traditions the interest and influence of the Civil Magistrate in ruling Ecclesiastical Affairs these came next into agitation The usurpation of Infallibility and a pretended Sovereignty in matters of faith to be lodged in the Pope was neither the occasion of the Protestant separation nor a material part of the first controversies though perhaps some Italianated persons and Canonists might assert some such thing and since the growth of the Iesuites tenets of that nature have been much advanced thereby to justifie their Vow of blind obedience to the Papal commands The memory of the Councils of Basil and Constance was fresh in the minds of men and the superiority of a Council above the Pope a common and authorized tenet in that Church The personal infallibility and the supremacy of the Bishops of Rome had of old received too great a check in the cases of Vigilius and Honorius and in the declared sentences of the Councils of Pisa Constance Basil and of the Universities of Paris Loven Colen Vienna and Cracovia not to mention particular Writers to be the occasion of that rupture The Sorbone to this day continues its former judgment and even the present King of France hath asserted the liberties of the Gallick Church in that point See Arrest de la Cour de Parliament portant que les propositions contenues en la declaration de la Faculte de Theologie de Paris c. Da. 30. May. 1663. And Declaration du Roy pour l' Enregistrement des six propositions de la Faculte de Sorbonne c. A Paris 4. d' Aoust 1663. What the Popish Church now holds and requires amounts not to any such Authority as our Author asserts if you will believe Cardinal Perron before our Virtuoso Scribis de Romano Pontifice nolle te verba facere quum vel mediocriter in Historiâ Ecclesiasticâ versatis compertum sit primorum seculorum Patres Concilia Imperatores Christianos primas illi semper detulisse praecellentis dignitatis praerogativam in omnibus negotiis ad religionem aut Ecclesiam spectantibus atque hoc solum exigere Ecclesiam vestram pro articulo fidei credendum ab iis qui communioni suae se adjungunt If this Cardinal understand any thing the Romish Church demands no more of her Members then that they own the Pope's primacy not Supremacy or Infallibility nor have the the books of such as derogate from the excessive greatnesse of the Papal power been ever called in or censured in that Church or communion denied to the Assertors of the infallibility of Oral Tradition or of General Councils in opposition to the personal Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome It was and is still a common opinion amongst the Papists that the Pope may be an Heretick I learn'd it from Franciscus Victoria in his Relections Haereticus potest esse non solum Presbiter sed Pontifex etiam summus ergo caput Ecclesiae And Bellarmine himself doth not assert the Infallibility of the Pope no not though He be assisted with a provincial Council In libr. 2. de concil c. 5. fatetur hanc propositionem scilicet Concilia particularia à summo Pontifice confirmata in fide moribus errare possunt non esse fide Catholicâ tenendam ejus tamen contradictoriam temerariam erroneam pronunciat Nay the same Writer in his solemn Lectures at Rome teacheth that it is true the Pope maybe an Heretick But it is probable and godly to be thought that he cannot be an Heretick In the conference betwixt Dr. Raynolds and Hart I find this passage Raynolds The Pope may not onely erre in doctrine but also be an Heretick which I hope you will not say that Peter might Hart. Neither by my good will that the Pope may Raynolds But you must no remedy It is a ruled case Your Schoolmen and Canonists Ockam Hostiensis Turrecremata Zabarella Cusanus Antoninus Alphonsus Canus Sanders Bellarmine and others yea the Canon Law it self yea a Council a Roman Council confirm'd by the Pope
pronunciat Hoc quidem res ipsa manifestissimè ostendit sive privata quaedam Ecclesia eò loci intelligitur appellatione Babylonis sive universae pars major eam priùs fuisse legitimam Ecclesiam cum qua pii piè communicarent postea verò quà m longiùs processit ejus depravatio jubentur pii exire communionem abrum pere ut facile fit vobis intelligere non omnem communionem cum iis qui de nomine Christi appellantur fidelibus esse expetendam sed illam demum quae sit salvâ doctrinae coelitus revelatae integritate Out of which words and they seem to be the words not of Casaubon or K. Iames but the Church of England if I am able to deduce any consequence I am sure this is one that it is not at any time lawful to hold with any Church a communion with her ènown defaults and impieties and that how desireable soever Unity be yet the regard thereto ought never to transport us so far as to mix the service of God with that of Belial that some circumstances do legitimate an holy war and that a bad agreement is not to be chosen before a contest and separation in the behalf of real Godlinesse I am sure I am by the tenor of that Letter justified if I dare not joyn with a Church service wherein Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the Masse and prayers for the dead and to the Saints not to mention the mutilation of the Communion and Image-worships must be owned or hypocritically complyed with to the dishonour of God 1 Cor. 10.20 21 22. the detriment and offense of the weak Christians 1 Cor. 8.10 11 12. and the strengthning of the party communicated with in those errors and Blasphemies How far further I am warranted by that Letter and the practice of the primitive fathers to rescind a Communion not otherwise erroneous or faulty upon the account of errors Idolatry or conceived Blasphemy in the practice or speculative tenets of a Church or person what private men what a particular Bishop or national Church may do I shall not entermeddle with as having alledged enough in opposition to what our Virtuoso layes down I should proceed now to enquire whether that we may hold communion with the Bishops of Rome supposing that they challenge a Sovereign dominion over our faith But since there was no such thing pressed upon the English Church to occasion the first rupture the generality of Christendome being then and at the first calling of the Council of Trent inclined to the contrary tenet of the Pope's being inferiour to a Council General denying his Sovereignty and Dominion over the faith of the Church and his personal Infallibility being an opinion scarcely to be mentioned or insisted on much lesse authenticated in those dayes and since that now neither the one or other tenet can justly be charged upon that Church nor is a condition of their Communion at present since the Controversie would be large and intrigued with distinctions I leave the debating thereof as inutile and content my self with having sufficiently refuted our Virtuoso already in what hath been alledged though seemingly to another purpose Undoubtedly there is no conniving or complying with such a person for one that is to avoid the appearance of evill It is a dethroning of Christ whom God hath appointed to be the head of the Church and by him all the body furnished and knit together by joints and bands increaseth with the increasing of God It is the introducing of another Corner-stone and another foundation the creating of another fabrick then what is built upon Christ and the Apostles and Prophets at least it is a compliance with all such unchristian Monstrosities a silence that is equivalent to an Assent in such high cases I have learn'd it from Dr. Raynolds Seeing that to exercise this rule and dominion is a prerogative Royal and proper to the King of Kings to give it either in whole or in part cannot be a lesser offense than High Treason Fifthly that the Church of Rome according to its present establishment and under that constitution wherein the first Reformers found it may be denominated a Church Ancient and Famous and that upon these accounts for none other are mentioned possibly there doth belong a respect unto it or an obligation to communicate therewith The first part of the Proposition is false and notoriously contradicts the doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles and Homilies of the Church of England For although it be granted that even those Articles the Homilies and our Writers and I my self do bestow vulgarly the appellation of a Church yet is that an impropriety of speech and not to be justified otherwise then by professing that when the name of Church is attributed to Rome and England the predication is equivocal since that the definition of a true Christian Church which makes up the Ninteenth Article cannot be accommodated to the Romanists viz The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithful men in the which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same This Definition is asserted and enlarged upon in the second Homily for Whitsunday in these words The true Church is an universal congregation or fellowship of God's faithful and elect people built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head-corner stone And it hath alwaies three notes or marks by which it is known Pure and sound doctrine The Sacraments ministred according to Christ's holy institution and the right use of Ecclesiastical Discipline This description of the Church is agreeable both to the Scriptures of God and also to the doctrine of the Ancient Fathers so that none may justly find fault with it Now if you will compare this with the Church of Rome not as it was in the beginning but as it is presently and hath been for the space of Nine hundred years and odde you shall well perceive the state thereof to be so far wide from the nature of the true Church that Nothing can be more For neither are they built upon the foundation of the Apostles retaining the sound and pure Doctrine of Jesus Christ neither yet do they order the Sacraments or else the Ecclesiastical Keyes in such sort as he did first institute and ordain them but have so intermingled their own Traditions and inventions by chopping and changing by adding and plucking away that now they may seem converted in a new guise Christ commanded to his Church a Sacrament of his Body and Bloud they have changed it into a Sacrifice for the quick and the dead Christ did minister to his Apostles and the Apostles to other men indifferently under both kinds they have robbed the Lay-people of the Cup saying that for them one kind is sufficient Christ ordained no other Element to
Council of Chalcedon was held Rex Ecclesia Anglicana quatuor prima Concilia Oecumenica quam ad mittant eo ipso satis declarant verae as legitimae Ecclesiae tempus non includere se uno aut altero demum seculo verùm multò longiùs producere Marciani Imperatoris sub quo Chalcedonense Concilium est celebratum tempus complecti If our Historian can shew that the present Church of Rome and the Tridentine model is so ancient as to come within this period I shall admire him and the Congregatio de propaganda fide multiply their acknowledgments unto him beyond what his present performances deserve yet really He merits very much from the Romanists in charging all the Schisme upon the Protestants who made a causlesse separation and whilst he condemnes the Pope onely for usurping an infallibility and sovereign dominion over our Faith without so much as imputing unto him any abuse of that pretended power and infallibility without fixing on him any error superstition Idolatry or other temporal retrenchments upon our Monarchy which alone would have justified a separation from the Papal Church But to resume my former Discourse I shall adde this passage out of K. Iames thereby to manifest how much more knowing our Virtuoso must be than all the Prelates of the Church of England were then if he can assert this Fame and Antiquity of the Romish Church Fatetur Rex Ecclesiam suam à capitibus non paucis ejus fidei disciplinae quam hodie Romanus Pontifex probat omnibus tuetur viribus discessionem secisse verùm eam Rex Ecclesia Anglicana non defectionem à fide veteris Catholicae interpretantur sed potiùs ad fidem Catholicam pristinam quae in Romana novis inventis fuerat multipliciter mirè deformata reversionem ad Christum unicum Ecclesiae suae magistrum conversionem Quare siquis doctrinâ hujus observationis fretus inferre ex illa velit Anglicanam Ecclesiam quia Romanae placita nonnulla rejicit à veteri Catholicâ discessisse non hoc illi prius Rex largietur quam solidis rationibus probaverit omnia quae à Romanis docentur illa praecipuè quae volunt ipsi ut necessaria ad salutem credi ab omnibus antiquae Catholicae à principio probata fuisse sancita hoc verò neminem posse facere aut unquam facturum neminem certè hactenus fecisse tam liquidò Regi constat Ecclesiae Anglicanae Antistitibus quà m Solem meridie lucere But to gratifie our Historian to yeild up the utmost of Antiquity to the Church of Rome to ascribe all that renown which so charmes our Virtuoso and which is not to be found in the Narrative of that Papacy which contains nothing almost but what is ignominious base and detestable to do all this signifies nothing to Communion unless I also grant that the Romanists are a true Church and that there is not any thing in the constitution of that Church which may give a pious Christian just occasion to avoid or rescind Ecclesiastical Communion therewith Imagine them as ancient as the Manichees Gnosticks and Simon Magus or even the old Serpent as flourishing and renowned as ever were the Arrians or Saracens all this concernes not the little flock them whose portion and kingdom is not of this world whose calling is of another nature There was a time when Christianity it self must have been slighted justly and the Scribes and Pharisees were in the right if to make one Orthodox he must be fortunate and that Antiquity and outward splendor must be the Characteristical discoveries of Truth t is better to be Master of the treasures in the Castle of S. Angelo than to be endowed with the Holy Ghost if Peter must also say Gold and Silver have I none The Laws of the Iews were thought novell by Haman what S. Paul preached at Athens was not endeared with the most material circumstances of Antiquity and Fame Et Celsus cùm ex professo scriberet adversùs Christum ut ejus Evangelium novitatis nomine per contemptum eluderet An inquit post tot secula nunc tandem subiit Deum tam sera recordatio Eusebius etiam author est Christianam religionem ab inition contumeliae causâ dictam fuisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est peregrinam novam But I shall silence my self and pursue this controversie no longer it having a thousand times been handled succesfully in opposition to the Papists by Protestant writers of our Nation and others beyond the Seas who have treated de signis Ecclesiae It is evident that the Romanists are not ancient nor famous nor a true Church according to the doctrine of the Church of England Or if in any limited sense it may be called a Churâ—h Ancient and Famous none of these attributes can give it such a repute that any obedient and true Son of our Church can say that such respect is due thereunto as infers any Ecclesiastical exteriour Communion much lesse can I or any else assent to the subsequent Proposition 6. That such a respect or exteriour Communion may be entertain'd with Rome and yet we incur no danger of Superstition To censure this Proposition it is necessary that we consider it in a twofold sense either as it relates to that original mistake of our Historian about the Infallibility and Sovereign Dominion over our faith assumed by the Pope or as it relates unto the real condition and constitution of the Romish Church in its Offices and religious Doctrines Upon the first consideration ariseth this Question Whether a Protestant of the Church of England can entertain communion with the Church of Rome supposing no material Errours in the worship wherein the Communion is maintained the Bishop thereof assuming and the Church allowing of an infallibility in him and a sovereign dominion over our Faith and not onely over theirs and this without danger of Superstition Upon the second Consideration ariseth this Question Whether it be possible for any Protestant of the Church of England to hold Communion with the present Church of Rome in its Ecclesiastical Offices and Doctrines without danger of Superstiton The first Question is easily decided against our Virtuoso from that those Churches who have held communion with the Pope when those pretensions were on foot have been involved in superstitious and idolatrous practices which is notorious out of all Church history and the exorbitancies of the Pope in that kind when the Canonists and other abettours ascribed unto him a Sovereignty over the Christian faith have introduced all the Superstitions of the Gregorian Missal and Blasphemies and Idolatries nor doth it appear that any thing ever contributed so much to the advancement of all those superstitious and Idolatrous practices and Tenets as some unwary expressions and respects of Communion which have been indulged to the Pope by the Fathers and others of succeeding Ages which is notorious to any man
Churches by the Ministers There are many circumstances required by Canonists and Casuists and Lawyers to determine of promulgation which no man ever applied to Scripture which is the formal object of our Faith and to the particular doctrines which compose our Religion If bare promulgation a common apprehension and sense enough to understand the Grammatical meaning of ordinary words were sufficient requisites to make a Religion accepted what Religion almost could be false Or how was not Arianisme of old how is not the Council of Trent now true If Grammatical meaning in our History be equipollent to literal and opposed to figurative how then is not Transubstantiation not to mention other tenets how is not it credible If a common apprehension and sense enough to understand the Grammatical meaning of ordinary words be the standard by which faith is to be regulated or measured is not the Natural man capable hereof though incapable of the things appertaining to God 1 Cor. 2.14 In a Synod holden in a Council before Constantine Helena where it was disputed whether the Iewish law or the Christian should be preferred Craton the Philosopher who would not possess any worldly goods Zenosimus who never received Present from any one in the time of his Consulship were appointed for judges With which doth accord that saying of Gerson the learned Chancellour of Paris There was a time when without any rashness or prejudice to faith the controversies of faith were referred to the judgment of pagan Philosophers who presupposing the faith of Christ to be such as it was confessed to be however they did not believe it yet they knew what would follow by evident and necessary consequence from it Thus it was in the Council of Nice as is left unto us upon record So likewise Eutropius a pagan Philosopher was chosen judge betwixt Origen and the Marcionites who were condemned by him Is it not recorded that the Devils believe and tremble Iam. 2.19 they are qualified with all our Virtuoso requires to be Religious yet sure He will not say they are so Where is that exceeding great and hyperbolical grace of God by which true converts are induced unto and fixed in the Christian Religion what needed the Apostle to pray for the Ephesians thus That the God of our Lord Iesus Christ the father of glory might give unto them the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledg of him the eyes of their understanding being enlightned that they might know what is the hope of his calling and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints and what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us ward who believe according to the working of his mighty power Why did he pray of God for any more then that he would make them good Grammar-scholars and give them a common apprehension In what language must this promulgation be made In the vulgar Latine If none but ordinary words must be the ingredients of our Religion and Symbols what must become of the words Essentia Persona Hypostasis the first second and fifth Articles of our Church and the Athanasian Creed what of justification mediator imputed righteousness Grace new birth and regeneration and many such words that have a place in our Confession Must we all turn Nicodemus's who must be the judge of words ordinary some words being ordinary with the learned which are not so to the ignorant and illiterate where is the Authority of the Church in controversies of faith avowed by our Church Artic. 20. if a common apprehension be that according to which controversies of faith must be decided Should a man demand of our Virtuoso according to what is here laid down what is the formal object of his faith or why he believes the Protestant religion here in England established I doubt the Answer would not be satisfactory nor agreeable to the Church of this Nation which should be shaped thereupon If Religion must not be the subject of Disputations we must receive it implicitely we must not try any thing nor in order to our holding it fast consider and dispute what is good but what promulgated such an Assent is the reasonable sacrifice which we must offer up and this that reason of our faith which we must be ready to give to all that ask us Oh foolish and not more generous Beraeans that durst controvert this Religion and searched the Scriptures daily to see whether those things were so which the first missionaries promulgated and therefore believed because they found the truth of the doctrine confirmed by the holy writers Act. 17.12 13. Why did Christ dispute with the Doctors in the temple both hearing them and asking questions why did he argue with the Sadduces about the resurrection why did Paul dispute at Athens with the Iews and devout persons and sometimes in the school of Tyrannus what mean those argumentations in the word of God by which the principal points of our Religion are evinced Besides if Faith be not a blind assent if we must hear and understand Math. 15.10 if we must search the Scriptures John 5.39 if an understanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be requisite that we may know him that is true 1 Iohn 5.20 If we must take heed how we hear Luc. 8.18 If we must prove all things 1 Thes. 5.21 and try the spirits whether they be of God 1 Ioh. 4.1 If the very nature of faith be such that it cease to be what it is if it be not discursive it not being an adherence to principles self-evident but an Assent grounded upon Divine Revelation so that it necessarily involves in it this Syllogisme Whatsoever God revealeth is true But God hat revealed this or that Ergo. If this be true how can it be said that Religion ought not to be the subject of disputations but by one who thinks the owning thereof to be needless and that faith is but empty talk If it be certain Christiani non nascuntur sed fiunt if there be any such thing as Conscience which is a Syllogism and defined Applicatio generalis notitiae ad particulares actus if there be any such thing as those practical argumentations by which Believers apply unto themselves particularly the general promises of the Gospel it is manifest that there must be Disputes Whereas he sayes that Religion should not stand in need of disputes me thinks it is a reflection upon the Divine Providence which so ordered the condition of mankind that disputes are unavoidable as Heresies are who introduced Faith amongst the intellectual Habits and made it an Assent firme certain but destitute of scientifical evidence who made us but to know in part and to see even that but as it were in a glasse the consequent of which mixture of light and shade knowledg and ignorance is disputatiou and fallibility Alphonso King of Portugal professed that if he had assisted God Almighty at the Creation he could have amended
Scripturae It belongs to the Church to judge of the true sense of holy Scripture Dr Holdens booke is Licensed and highly commended by the French Divines and he himselfe a Doctor of the Sorbonne and he thus delivers himselfe Statuendum est quod quicquid à Theologis Catholicis in utramque partem etiam cum maximâ acerbitate disseritur ac disputatur dum vel propriis suis adhaerent nimis Sacrarum Scripturarum interpretationibus vel patronorum suorum opinionibus vel tandem consecutionibus deductis ex fidei principiis certissimum est neutrum contentionis seu concertationis extremum posse Divinae Catholicae Fidei rationem habere Quo sequâ—tur Summum Pontificem nullatenus posse in suâ solâ personâ disceptatas hujusmodi quaestiones ita decernere ut vi solius sui decreti pars definita sit fidei divinae Catholicae articulus Disputant siquidem Theologi an si quando Summi Pontifices hujusâ—emodi argumenta in Scholis utrinque agitata definiverint sintne eorum decreta ex institutione Christi ab omni errere libera Imò an Decretum aliquod à solo Pontifice Summo emanans sit ex hoc tantùm capite divinitùs infallibile Haec inquam in utramque partem ventilata videmus à piissimis quamplurimis doctissimus Catholicis Autoribus tam antiquioribus quà m recentioribus quorum neutram partem audivimus unquam fuisse Censuris aliquibus authenticis prohibitam aut improbatam Quapropter evidentissimè constat Catholicum neminem astringi aut huic aut alteri part adhaerere tanquam Fidei Catholicae divinae articulo tametsi Summorum Pontificum definitionibus debitum obsequium sit praestandum Out of all this precedent discourse 't is manifest that Infallibility and Sovereigne dominion over our faith usurped by the Bishops of Rome neither was nor could be upon Catholique principles and amongst men of common understanding the cause of Separation betwixt the Reformed Churches and the Romanists since neither the one nor other branch of that assertion is defined in that Church or so censured as not to be held upon paine of Excommunication The fourth Proposition as it is conjunctive or copulative to which it is necessary that both parts be true must admit of a distinction before it be censured To assert that we may hold coÌ„munion with any one that is account him of the same Church in generall with us and joyne with him in the celebration of the same Church worship and participation of Sacraments 't is necessary that we consider what it is He professeth and what it is wherein he and we communicate and what relation we stand in in relation to the Actings of our Superiour Governours that may have influence upon the case As for Example if the King by an Act of Parliament shall forbid us exteriour Communion with the Pope whatever charitable opinion I might be induced to have otherwise of him yet I should not thinke fitting to do it or that such my procedure were Schismaticall Thus Obadiah and the seven thousand incorrupt Iewes together with Elijah and Elisha did not resort to the Temple-worship at Ierusalem by reason of the prohibition by Ieroboam 1 Kings 12. Thus the English Papists complyed in England with the Actions of H. 8. Now 't is notorious that by our Laws the English are forbid in England to be present at any other rites or communion then what are authorised by the Church of this Nation and that upon penalties very great upon 5. and 6. Edward 6. and 23. Eliz. 1. so that in reference to this particular the Assertion of our Virtuoso is contrary to the Lawes of our Land charges them with injustice tends to seduce the Kings Subjects from their obedience If we abstract froÌ„ this consideration and reflect upon the persons to be communicated with and the things wherein the communion is held I say it is a difficult thing to determine what those tenets are which cut a man off from the generall communion of Christians provided that the matters wherein the communion consists be innocent and blamelesse I finde the Apostles to communicate with the Iewes in the Temple-worship and in their Synagogue-worship I finde the Communion not interrupted by the Assertions that the Observation of the Leviticall Law was necessary to a Christian Act. 21.20 Thus though S. Paul found very enormous errours and such as would now be called Fundamentall a ground for Anathema's in the Churches of Corinth Galatia and Colossi yet did he speake honourably of them calls them Churches communicates with them but not with their errours and heresies I finde the Arians and the Orthodox to communicate together at first in the same worship scarce to be distinguished one from another till the Gloria Patri came to be said and after the determinations of Nice when the Arians had gained the advantage at Ariminum though there were some Catholiques so scrupulous that they would have no communion with such as received the Council of Ariminum yet S. Hilary thought it best to converse with them and to call them to such Councils as were frequently held in France upon such occasions And where this sort of communion is to be carried on and when to be interrupted I am not learned enough to understand out of Antiquity It appeares to mee that the bare pretense of an Infallibility is not enough to cut off Communion if the Infallibility be restrained to some limitations and explications for as the naturall man may say he is sometimes infallibly assured of sensible objects and consequently be so farre infallible so the Spirituall man may be in many things infallibly assord certitudine fidei cuÌ„i non potest subesse falsum by the grace of God and the special assistance of the Holy Ghost so as that he is so farre infallible Rom. 8.16 1 Iohn 5.13 Iohn 14 20. 2 Cor. 13.5 1 Cor. 2.11 12. And this circumstantiate Limited infallibility if it extend it selfe to some things past whether of a morall or spirituall nature is not alwaies blame worthy much lesse a sufficient ground for to rescind Exterior Communion It remaines then that we inquire into the nature of the pretended infallibility what it proceeds upon and what it interferes with For any man to assume to himselfe an absolute and essentiall and unconditionate infallibility is blasphemy if not madnesse in an humane creature and undoubtedly rescinds all communion if it do not rather entitle to Bedlam For any man to assert that he is by the particular favour and promise of God infallible either in omnibus quaestionibus tam facti quam juris which some Iesuites avow of the Pope or in matters of faith only however that tenet be explicated either in relation to the determining of what hath been taught by the Church of Christ or as to additionall decisions that the profession of such infallibility provided it do not extend to the preaching of any knowne fundamentall errour