publickly in the Churches But although these Councils deserved this great Respect as keeping close to the Word of God yet other Councils which the Roman Church makes much of did not so That Councils may possibly erre and recede from Scripture-Rules St. Hierom declared his Judgment in that Expression of his cited by Chemnitius Spiritûs Sancti Doctrina est quae Canonicis literis prodita est contra quam siquid statuant Concilia nefas duco That is the sure Doctrine of the Holy Ghost which is delivered in the Canonical Writings against which if Councils determine this or that I count it wicked And did not their famous Council of Constance when three Popes were upon the stage at once John set up by the Italians Gregory by the French and Benedict by the Spaniards define contrary to the Word of God not to mention the case of John Husse and Jerom of Prague when they forbad all Priests under the Penalty of Excommunication to administer the Eucharist in both Kinds to the Laiety And was not this Canon so contrary to the general Custom of Antiquity that we must either grant the Primitive Church to have been mistaken in their old universal Practices or else this Council to have been erroneous in this new Constitution Indeed the Roman Church doth very well approve the Council of Constance in their Sacrilegious Decree which robs the People of half the Sacrament but I remember the Roman Church doth also condemn the self-same Council for that Definition of theirs whereby they robbed the Pope of more then half his Authority For when the Council of Constance had passed their Judgment and declared that the Authority of Councils is superiour to that of Popes and when the Council of Basil had ratified and solemnly confirmed the same Assertion in opposition to these two Councils the last not then dissolved Engenius the Fourth calleth a Council at Florence which by a contrary Vote sets the Pope above the Council So then here is Council against Council Canon against Canon directly contradicting one another in the self same matter and since 't is so we have all reason to conclude either that some of these Councils were in an Errour or else that all Logicians are certainly so who tell us that two contrary Propositions though possibly both may be false yet both can never be true together But the truth is 't is observed that there was such Ambition such Animosities and Factions discovered in several Councils that were convened in several Centuries that Gregory Nazianzene had he lived in later Ages might have had far more just occasion for those Complaints of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I never saw an happy Issue of any one Synod whatsoever which did not rather augment then remedy Evils Upon which score he thus resolves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If I may but write the Truth my purpose is to decline all Conventions of Bishops whatsoever But what is his Reason 'T is clear enough that this excellent Person did highly esteem the Council of Nice for he doth not onely call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Holy Council but he also tells us that those three hundred and eighteen Bishops were such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom the Holy Ghost had brought together and as for the Council of Constantinople the Argument of his Epistle to Procopius tells us that he himself was magna Concilii pars a very great man in it and if so what occasion had he to write such unkind things of Councils Himself informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was so much Dissension and such Ambition in them as was beyond expression And certainly if such an eminent Person as Gregory Nazianzene who was deservedly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Great Theologue or Divine of that Age found cause enough to blame some early Councils of those Times had he lived to see the Decrees and Canons established by the several Factions of later Conventions he would never have thought them as the Romanists contend to be Infallible True it is St. Austine tells us Concilia posteriora prioribus apud Posteros praeponuntur Men that live in later times are apt to prefer later Councils before those that are more ancient but what reason is there for it That of Justellus is certainly true concerning these later Councils Non sunt ejusdem fidei dignitatis cum prioribus illis Quatuor Oecumenicis c. They are not of the same Credit Faith and Honour with the Four first General Councils And if so since there are some just grounds of Suspicions and Jealousies concerning their Determinations who shall perswade us that they are Infallible But 2. What if it appear that Councils are not onely fallible but that they have been most miserably corrupted and forged too What sure warrant have we for such and such Practices not recommended in Sacred Writ from the Authority of Councils when such and such Constitutions Decrees and Canons have been ascribed to such and such Councils which indeed were never theirs We reade that Zosimus Bishop of Rome sent his Legats to the sixth Council of Carthage with Instructions to maintain the Primacy of the Roman Bishop as the onely Judge in cases of Controversies and Appeals and for that Prerogative of his they pretended a Canon of the first Nicene Council which was indeed a very fair Plea had it been true because the Acts of that Council were not onely confirmed by the Emperour but received by the universal Church What particular Canon of the Nicene Council was pleaded for the Primacy of the Roman Bishop Bellarmine tells us Habemus Nicaenum Concilium illum ipsum sextum Canonem c. We have on our side the Nicene Council and that very sixth Canon c. The Canon is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Design of this Canon was onely this that the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch and all other Metropolitans should still govern the Churches within their respective Provinces as the Bishop of Rome was wont to govern those within his These being the express words and this being the undoubted Sense of the Canon the Council of Carthage answered Faustinus Philippus and Asellus who were the Pope's Legates that although they had strictly searched all Registers and examined the most authentick Copies of the Acts of the Nicene Council which they had received from Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and Atticus Bishop of Constantinople yet they could find nothing done by that Council to establish or countenance the Primacy of the Roman Bishop nor that the Bishops of Africa were obliged by any Canon of the Nicene Council to appeal and be subject to the See of Rome But the Primacy of the Pope being a Point of great Concern to the Roman Church and there being nothing more likely to establish it then the Authority of the Nicene Council which is received by the universal Church what greater Service could any man doe for the Bishop of Rome then to prove his universal Preeminence over all other Bishops and Churches by some Act of that famous Council which no Church gainsayeth
to the very written Oracles of God yet 't is clear enough that himself Baronius and others of the Roman Faith do use the Authority of these forged Epistles to countenance several Doctrines and Practices wherein the Reformed Church and theirs differ And yet for all this there are several learned Writers of the Roman Church who cannot but acknowledge that such and such Epistles Constitution Recognitions fathered upon their Primitive and Martyred Bishops are shrewdly suspected yea and clearly proved too to be false and counterfeit Thus Lorinus Verborum Domini liber tam est Apocryphus quà m in quibus memorantur Clementis Recognitiones The Book of our Lord's Words is as Apocryphall as the Recognitions of Clemens wherein that Book is mentioned He tells us indeed Clementis Constitutiones paulò majoris sunt fidei the Constitutions of Clemens are of a little more Credit But are these unquestionable no that he denieth Clementis libri Constitutionum non sunt usquequaque indubitatae Authoritatis The Constitutions of Clemens are not of an Authority that is undoubted altogether And what else can we think of those Decretal Epistles that are ascribed to Zephyrinus which contain things foolish ridiculous and false as that the Consecration of the Holy Cup must be in a vessel of Glasse onely that a Bishop must be accused before twelve Judges and that Evidence against him must be made by seventy two Witnesses How contrary is this not onely to Scripture but to those very Canons which are ascribed to the Apostles whereof this is one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to the same purpose the Council of Nice too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Canons according to the Rules of St. Paul require the Testimony two or three Witnesses onely even against a Bishop whereas the pretended Decree of Zephyrinus demands seventy two and that with an Appeal to Rome which is enough to prove it false and forged Such a counterfeit Epistle too was the second of those two fathered upon Pontianus which begins thus Pontianus Sanctae Vniversalis Ecclesiae Episcopus Pontianus the Bishop of the Holy and Vniversal Church This Title in those early days unknown to the World being as yet not claimed nor assumed by any Roman Bishop but afterwards denied and decried by Gregory the Great gives us a fair and clear Evidence that this Epistle is counterfeit and written by some other hand as well as those of Fabianus Stephanus and some other succeeding Bishops with a design to pretend something of Antiquity for the defence of those unwarrantable Doctrines and Practices of the present Roman Church for which they can produce no fair and clear Evidence from the genuine and acknowledged writings of the most ancient Fathers And as for the Decrees Constitutions and Canons of the Bishops of Rome which have sate in that Chair since the time of Sylvester what security have we but that these also may have been changed corrupted and falsified according as the exigence of the Roman Church hath so required Bellarmine tells us that Pope Leo complained that whilst he himself was yet alive the Graecians had corrupted his Epistle to Flavianus and why might not the Latines for their own ends doe as much What reason have we to give credit to such and such Papal Decretals when Bellarmine himself being pressed with a Canon of Zacharias that made against him had little to say but this Zachariae Canon mihi valde suspectus est This Canon of Zacharias I do very much suspect And the truth is we are so much of his mind and have so much cause to be jealous that many Canons and Constitutions ascribed to such and such Bishops of Rome were indeed none of theirs but onely forged and counterfeited that we cannot upon their Authority admit those Doctrines and Practices for which we can find no warrant in the written Word of God But 2. The Testimony of Roman Bishops in the Cause of Traditions is not firm and sure because the Pope at least in matters of this nature notwithstanding their Pretence of his being Infallible may possibly be deceived himself and if so he may deceive us too 'T is the free Concession of Bellarmine and that as he saith wherein all Catholicks do agree Posse Pontificem etiam ut Pontificem cum suo coetu Consiliariorum vel cum Generali Concilio errare in Controversiis facti particularibus quae ex Informatione TestimoniÃsque hominum pendent That the Pope considered as Pope with his private or General Council may erre in particular matters of Fact which depend upon the Information and Testimonies of other men And that seems to be the Case in hand the business of Traditions is a matter of Fact and the whole Controversie under our present Disquisition is onely this Whether Christ delivered to his Apostles the Apostles to the Primitive Bishops they to their immediate Successours and so from Age to Age such and such particular Doctrines and Practices as are now contended for by the Roman Church So that the whole Question in hand being concerned about matters of Fact wherein they themselves acknowledge the Fallibility of the Pope we have little Reason to acquiesce in his Determinations and to be so well satisfied with his Testimony as to think our selves obliged thereby to believe and doe those things which the Scriptures do neither assert nor command But what if the Pope may erre in considerable Points of Faith too and become an Heretick are we obliged to believe his Testimony even then too Photius tells us that by the Canon-Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hereticks might not in any Judicature be admitted to bear witness against any Orthodox Christian within the Church And certainly if Heresie be a Crime of that nature as that it hath been thought enough to exclude or evacuate any man's Evidence in Civil Causes we shall have but little reason to admit any person that is as liable to Heresie as other men as an infallible Witnesse in matters of Spiritual and Sacred Concern And that several Bishops of Rome have been not onely shrewdly suspected but publickly accused and condemned too and that of the foulest Heresies 't is not to be denied by any man whose brow is not made of Brass 'T is recorded by several Authours and those of good name and credit that some Roman Bishops have been Monothelites some Montanists some Eutychians some Arrians yea and some downright Atheists too But the Charge being heavy against them and the Honour of the Roman See lying at stake and the Pope's Infallibility also being herein somewhat concerned we must enquire into the Witnesses and see that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as deserve to be believed For so justly tender is the Christian Church of the reputation of her Bishops that she will not admit all persons whatsoever to bring in Evidence against them No the sixth Canon of the Second General Council forbids it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Works of all Catholick Writers but chiefly those of the ancient Fathers to be purged and made clean from blots and stains of Errours that is from every thing that contradicts the Superstitions of the Roman Church But if it were a thing indeed so commendable to purge the Fathers yet is it a thing praise-worthy to falsifie and forge them too St. Chrysostom left upon record an Expression which the Roman Church doth no way like and that was this In times of Heresie there is no means to find out the Truth save onely the reading of the Scriptures Bellarmine confesseth Totus hic locus è quibusdam codicibus nuper emendatis sublatus est This whole Passage is left out of some Editions newly set forth and corrected But how comes St. Chrysostom thus to deserve the Spunge The Cardinal gives this Reason Hoc Testimonium non est Chrysostomi This Testimony is not Chrysostom's but whose then Ab Arrianis locus hic insertus This place was inserted into St. Chrysostom's Works by the Arrians and therefore deserved rather to be expunged then believed We see what liberty the Romanists take to themselves to raze and blot out such and such Passages of the Fathers which make against them upon a groundless pretence that those Passages were inserted by some Heretick or other and can they then justly complain of us if we are not willing to credit some Expressions of ancient Authours upon which they ground those Doctrines and Practices of theirs which we reject since we have too much reason to believe that those Expressions are corrupted falsified and forged and that by some of their own Church That the Roman Catholicks have indeed miserably corrupted the ancient Writers in their Editions we are sufficiently convinced by the Testimony of our learned Doctour Featly who hath traced them through the several Ages of the Church and discovered to the world this unworthy dealing of theirs by giving us particular Instances and naming the Treatises and Expressions of several Fathers which their Adversaries as well as ours have abused perverted and corrupted thus or thus That of Ignatius is one who bespeaks Virgins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. In your Prayers set Christ before your eyes and his Father c. To evacuate this great and ancient Testimony against the Invocation of Saints and Angels a late Popish Edition printed at Lyons reads it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In your Souls set Christ before your eyes c. Again those words of our Blessed Saviour The flesh profiteth nothing Tertullian thus expounds Caro nihil prodest ad vivificandum scilicet The flesh profiteth nothing that is to quicken so saith the true Tertullian but a former Edition of theirs set forth at Paris though mended since by Rigaltius contrary to the meaning of Christ and Tertullian too reads it thus Caro nihil prodest sed ad vivificandum The flesh profiteth nothing save onely to quicken Once more our learned Authour mentions those words of St. Cyprian too Post gustatam Eucharistiam After the eating of the Eucharist which the Popish Edition at Paris to countenance a Ceremony of theirs changeth thus Post gestatam Eucharistiam After the Circumgestation of the Eucharist Nor can this Change be imputed to the mistake of the Presse because their Authours own and endeavour to justifie the Alteration These and a great many more Corruptions Forgeries and Falsifications of the ancient Fathers are reckoned up in that learned Treatise which give us fair warning not to believe every Testimony which our Adversaries pretend to produce out of such and such old Writers set forth by themselves for the justification of those Traditions for which they can bring no good warrant from the written Word of God For since 't is undeniable that they have notoriously abused the Records of Antiquity by suppressing changing and inserting what and where they pleased we have abundant cause to believe that these Alterations are made in those very places which they commonly cite in their own defence they being too wise to forge any counterfeit Deeds and suborn any other false Witnesses then such as are designed to speak for their Advantage But IV. The Champions of the Roman Church endeavour to justifie their Traditions by the Testimony and Authority of such and such Councils To which we have two things to reply 1. We cannot imagine but that whole Councils may erre in their Judgments and be mistaken in their Canons Decrees and Constitutions That no meer man save onely the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles ever was Infallible is acknowledged by some learned persons even of the Roman Church If Cajetane were not perfectly of this mind what means that Expression of his Solis Sacrae Scripturae Authoribus reservata est haec Authoritas ut ideo sic credamus esse quia Ipsi sic scripserunt That we should certainly believe things to be thus and thus barely because 't is so written by such and such is a Privilege peculiar to the Pen-men of Holy Writ alone Surely then that Assertion of Gratian mentioned by Bellarmine seems somewhat sawcy Epistolas Pontificum Decretales numerari debere inter Scripturas Canonicas The Pope's Decretal Epistles ought to be reckoned amongst the Canonical Scriptures And methinks the Cardinal himself seems somewhat confident when he speaks thus indifferently of Scriptures and Councils Vtraque sunt infallibilis Veritatis aequè certa They are both of infallible Truth and equally certain But if Cardinal Cajetane were in the right if all those Bishops and Doctours of whom Councils have consisted were but men subject to Mistakes and Errours in their own particular persons how the whole collective Body of any Synod should in the result prove infallible the Church of Rome will never be able to shew by any such clear Evidence as may satisfie a sober and impartial man We do not deny but that there is much of Truth in that Assertion of St. Austine Conoiliorum in Ecclesia saluberrima est Authoritas The Authority of Councils is of great Advantage to the Church of God we do with all thankfulness to Heaven acknowledge and own the Four first General Councils that of Nice which vindicated the Divinity of Christ against Arrius that of Constantinople which asserted the Divinity of the Holy Ghost against Macedonius that of Ephesus which maintained the Unity of Christ's Person against Nestorius and that of Chalcedon which asserted the double Nature of Christ against Eutyches So venerable is the Authority of these Four Councils that we do not quarrel with that high Expression of that good Emperour Justinian if rightly understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We receive the Doctrines of these Four holy Councils even as not in equality but similitude the Holy Scriptures and observe their Canons as so many Laws Accordingly Evagrius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Emperour commanded that the Decrees of these Four Councils should be read
God To style himself by this humble Title he took occasion from the Pride and Arrogance of John called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Patriarch of Constantinople which being at that time the Imperial Seat this John had took upon him the Title of Vniversal Bishop whereof Gregory thus complains O tempora ô mores Ecce destructae urbes eversa castra c. tamen Sacerdotes qui in pavimento cinere flentes jacere debuerunt Vanitatis sibi nomen expetunt novis prophanis vocabulis gloriantur With this Expression of Gregory the Great agreeth that of Vspergensis Rogatu Bonifacii Phocas constituit Sedem Romanae Apostolicae Ecclesiae Caput esse omnium Ecclesiarum nam antea Constantinopolitana Ecclesia se scribebat primam Omnium Phocas at the Request of Boniface ordained that the See of Rome should be Head of all Churches for before that time the Church of Constantinople did write herself the Prime of all Churches And if so how can it be imagined that the Primacy of the Roman Bishop should be acknowledged and granted as Bellarmine contends by the sixth Canon of the very first General Council No the certain truth is this Canon was unworthily corrupted in favour of the Roman Bishop and although our Adversaries cannot for shame acknowledge their own corrupting of Councils yet they cannot deny but that it hath been familiarly done by other persons Nay doubtless in some cases they themselves pretend the Corruption of Councils when in truth there was no such matter For if the Authority of such or such a Council be urged against the Roman Church and cannot otherwise be well escaped they have no other Shift to save themselves but onely to pretend that such and such a Canon which they cannot answer is false and counterfeit 'T is a certain Truth that their Pope Honorius was condemned for a downright Heretick by the sixth General Council which consisted of an hundred and seventy Fathers assembled at Constantinople so 't is recorded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith one The Council condemned Honorius and some other Assertours of the same Opinion as Hereticks that fought against God And that this Sentence was just Photius thus assures us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they brought them under a righteous Condemnation But will the Roman Church contentedly suffer any Bishop of theirs to be condemned branded and recorded for an arrant Heretick and plead nothing in his behalf What would then become of their dear Infallibility what would then become of Pope Agatho's Letter to the sixth General Council wherein he bragged that the Bishops of Rome never erred in Points of Faith Or will the Roman Church acknowledg that a General Council may be mistaken and that in a matter of so great Concern to themselves as they take the Infallibility of their Bishops to be 'T is a shrewd Dilemma that our Adversaries lie under in this case For if Honorius were certainly an Heretick their Infallibility ceaseth but if Honorius were no Heretick then may General Councils erre which the Roman Church is loath to grant Well to secure the Credit of Honorius and the Authority of that General Council which condemned him too Bellarmine invents this trick and tells us Erat Consuetudo Graecorum ferè ordinaria corrumpendi libros c. It was even the familiar Custom of the Grecians to corrupt the Copies of Councils And that it was so indeed in the case of Honorius he takes for granted Sine dubio Honorii nomen inter eos qui damnantur à sexta Synodo insertum esse ab aemulis Romanae Ecclesiae c. Without doubt the name of Honorius was inserted among those Hereticks whom the sixth Council condemned by some persons that bore no good will to the Roman Church Thus would the Cardinal make the world believe that what Canon soever spake any thing against a Bishop of his Church must certainly be corrupted and forged by the Grecians who as he intimates had no great Kindness for the Roman See And methinks if Bellarmine be real in what he saith if he did verily suspect that such and such Councils were indeed corrupted and forged by the Grecians as being disaffected to the Roman Church we have greater cause to be jealous that such and such Councils have been miserably corrupted and forged by the Latines who are sworn enemies to every Church which differs from their own For since 't is evident that they have made so bold with that famous Council of Nice as to falsifie a Canon of theirs we cannot think that they have so great a Veneration for any other Council besides but that they will corrupt and forge them even as oft as their Interest doth so require And since 't is thus since by the Confession of our Adversaries themselves such and such particular Fathers have strangely erred since the most Learned men of the Roman Church have acknowledged that even Popes and Councils have been if not mistaken in themselves yet basely corrupted by others we cannot think our selves obliged to accept the Authority and Testimonies of such Fathers Popes and Councils as sure and infallible Proofs of those Traditions which are now received in and recommended by the Roman Church though neither attested by the Vniversal Church nor warranted by the written Word of God And upon this score we can doe no less then wonder at the strange Confidence and unparallel'd Presumption of the Council of Trent and their Abettours who dare at least equal their own Traditions which stand upon such uncertain and slippery Grounds even to those Holy Scriptures which are universally owned and infallibly proved to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sure and undoubted Word of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FINIS Chrysost ad Col. c. 1. v. 1. Theophyl in Argum. Epist ad Col. Oecum in Argum. Epist ad Col. Chrys ad Col. c. 1. v. 1. Chrys ad Col. c. 1. v. 2. Theophyl in locum eundem Oecum in locum eundem Theoph. in Argum. Epist ad Col. Theodoret. in Argum. Ep. ad Col. The◠Col. 1.2 Joh. 1.17 Origen in Joannem Erasm in Joann c. 1.17 Cast in Joann c. 1.16 Acts 7.38 Chrys in Joan 1.17 Theophylact. in locum Chrys in locum Galat. 3.19 Act. 7.38 Grot. in Heb. 2.2 Exod. 20.1 Deut. 5.24 Gregorius Naz. Orat. 49. Chrysostomus in Act. 7.30 Dionys Areop Coelest Hierarchiae c. 4. Dionys ubi supra Joseph l. 1.5 August Contra Adimantum c. 9. Cael. Rhodig l. 18. c. 19. Seneca Epist 9. Deut. 33.1 2 Pet. 1.20 Heb. 1.1 2 Pet. 1.21 Ezek. 11.5 Pearson on the Creed Epiphanius in Ancor Gal. 4.6 Rom. 8.9 1 Pet. 1.11 Rom. 1.9 Heb. 1.2 Ephes 4.11 Rom. 1.5 1 Pet. 1.1 1 Cor. 11.23 Gal. 3.24 Psalm 40.7 Joh. 5.46 Luk. 24.27 Act. 13.27 Matt. 1.22 Luk. 24.44 Matt. 26.54 Act. 3.18 Act. 1.1 Act. 9.20 2 Cor. 4.5 Maldon in Luc. 24.27 Cornel à Lap. in Heb. 10.7 COROLLARIES Cael. Rhodig Antiquit. l. 30. c.
all Restraints We are grown like some fiery horses that will endure a Spur rather then a Bridle that never fret and foam so much as when they are strongly curbed 'T is somewhat hard to determine whether Sins of Commission or of Omission be the greater whether that man bids the higher defiance to the Majesty of Heaven who neglects what the Great God requires or he who doeth what the same God forbids Nor is it easie to say whether the perverse Will of man doth more incline him to disobey such and such Positive Laws or to violate such and such strict Prohibitions 'T is sure that God's Positive Commands do frequently require from us such and such things which do by no means please us and 't is as sure that the Prohibitions of God do restrain and give us check in those things which our corrupt nature doth hugely like and love When God Almighty gives us this Prohibition Thou shalt not avenge nor bear any grudge against thy neighbour doubtlesse he layeth upon us as hard a Task as when he exacts from us this or that But however though God Almighty be pleased by his Negative Precepts to cross our corrupt Inclinations to tie up our hands and chain our irregular and extravagant Affections though the Scriptures deny us those matters which we fain would enjoy though we must not doe what we infinitely desire though we must not have what we strangely long for yet notwithstanding we must gladly suffer our selves to be over-ruled we must readily and chearfully submit to the Wisedom and Pleasure of God in all this being well assured that there is no one Prohibition that doth concern us but is a part of that holy Writ which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ IV. Since the whole Scripture is undoubtedly the Word of Christ we are all obliged to reade and hear it with that Attention Meekness Fear and Reverence that well becomes it and us it to receive and us to shew What a great deal of Respect the ancient Servants of God have expressed towards the Holy Writ is sufficiently evident from those reverential Gestures of body that have been used both by the Minister that read and the People that heard What Posture the Minister who read the Word was wont to use the Scriptures tell us They stood and read in the book of the Law Our Saviour himself did so in the Synagogue He stood up for to reade And thus St. Paul He stood up and said 'T is the observation of St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was the constant Custom of the Jews so to doe True it is the persons who expounded the Law did sometimes sit Thus our Blessed Saviour when he began to make his Sermon 't is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sate down and from his example the Primitive Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sate in the Church and preached But as for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the person that read his constant custom was to stand But what then Suppose that not onely the Reader of the Law but its Expounders too had for ever been accustomed and obliged to stand yet what Reverence doth this import 'T is certain that amongst the Nations of the World mos erat Oratorum stare it was the general practice of Oratours to stand and speak Amongst the Romans it was not onely Tully's Practice but his Advice too Oratoris staus sit erectus Let an Oratour stand erect and upright when-ever he makes a speech It was thus amongst the Grecians too How oft doth Homer introduce such and such a person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rising and standing up to speak His excellent Commentatour tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amongst the Ancients if the King himself made an Oration notwithstanding his Majesty he was to stand up and speak The reason of this Custom the same Authour gives us thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus Grotius too ut rectiùs ab omni caetu exaudirentur The Speaker who-ever he were stood up that he might be the better heard by the whole Assembly But certainly besides this Convenience of the People's better hearing there was some farther reason why the Minister who read or preached the Word did rather stand then sit and what that was Carthusian gusseth well ut Concioni ipsi honorem impertirentur or as Lorinus words it reverentiae causâ They stood to testifie what a reverential respect they had for that holy Word which they delivered And doubtlesse upon the self-same account did the People stand to hear too Such was the Custom in the Church of the Jews So the Scriptures tell us Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people and when he opened it all the people stood up recti steterunt they stood upright so Vatablus Grotius observes that the whole Assembly stood dum ipsa Legis verba legebantur whilst the express letter of the Law was in reading and he tells us out of the Talmud that this Practice continued in the Jewish Church even till our Saviour's time Ad tempora Gamalielis stantes dudicêre Legem Till Gamaliel's time they stood whilst they learnt the Law And as the Jews stood whilst the Law was read so did the Primitive Christians whilst the Gospel was pronounced too and particularly that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that select Portion of the Evangelists which we now commonly call by that name This Ceremony of standing up at the Gospel is laudable in it self and venerable for its Antiquity too The first Constitution of it is ascribed by some to Clemens but by most to Anastasius the first of that name who was not Pope but Bishop of Rome Nay such a reverential Respect had the Servants of God for his Word and every Part thereof that as the Jews stood at the reading of the Law and the Christians generally at the pronouncing of the Gospel so the Greek Churches as Micrologus tells us were wont to stand ad lectiones Apostolicas even when the Epistles were read too And lest all this Respect to the Word of God should seem too little they thought fit to testifie what great Reverence they had for the Holy Scriptures by standing up not onely whilst they were read but whilst they were expounded too Thus Lorinus Auditam olim à stantibus Concionem c. The people of old stood not onely whilst the Psalms and Chapters were read but whilst the Sermon was preached Nor was this Posture used out of necessity but from their own election and choice They who thus stood at the Sermon were not onely men of low degree who perhaps might want a convenient place to sit but even the noblest Persons who might have commanded what Seats they pleased Thus Eusebius reports of Constantine the Great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When he heard the Sermon he stood as well as the meanest person there Nay he would by no
non dixit temerarium est velle praesumere dicere To affirm what those things were which Christ himseIf did not now declare were rash and bold Quis nostrûm dicat ista vel illa sunt Who of us can tell whether it were this or that And yet for all this whatever St. Austine thinks that Jesuite Maldonate as if he knew what Christ was pleased as yet to conceal tells us with more of Confidence then Truth Dicimus ex hoc loco constare Christum non omnia dixisse quae ad salutem nostram putabat pertinere idémque fecisse Spiritum Sanctum credendum c. From the warrant of this Text we do affirm that Christ told not his Disciples whatever he thought pertinent to our Salvation and that the Holy Ghost did not afterwards doe it neither we have cause to believe Nay to make way for Ecclesiastical Traditions and the Pope's Authority to create new Articles of Faith he makes bold to adde thus much Idem ab Apostolis factum ut non omnia scripta multa etiam nè vivâ voce traderent The same thing was done by the Apostles too insomuch that they did not deliver all matters of Salvation in their Writings no nor many so much as by word of mouth 'T is strange to think into what Absurdities and Contradictions the Romanists do run themselves that they may justify those Doctrines and Practices which they are loath to part with For this Jesuite Maldonate declares his opinion that there are some matters of Salvation that were neither taught by Christ nor by his Spirit nor by his Apostles either by Writing or Tradition and yet Cardinal Bellarmine doth positively affirm that the Church of Rome holds no Doctrines maintains no Traditions save onely such as they can clearly prove to be from Christ or his Apostles But as to those forenamed Discourses wherein our Blessed Saviour did privately instruct his Apostles and whereupon the Roman Church doth mightily ground their Doctrine of Tradition though it cannot be certainly discovered what was the very Subject and particular Arguments of our Saviour's frequent Talk with his Disciples at his several Apparitions to them after his Resurrection yet perhaps some probable guesses may be given and accordingly several Conjectures are offered us by Interpreters So Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. What were those many things which Christ had to say to his Apostles which they could not bear He answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It was the design of our Blessed Saviour to teach his Disciples the utter abolition of the Ceremoniall Law and the Mosaicall Ordinances So St. Chrysostom guesseth too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Whether our Saviour speaks of the Abrogation of the Law c. And to this Christ might well refer when he said I have yet many things to say but ye cannot bear them now considering how hard it was for them who were Jews and the professed disciples of Moses to embrace a new Religion and quit the Principles of that wherein they had been born and bred Nor indeed had this Discourse as yet been seasonable because the Ceremoniall Law was not abrogated till the Sacrifice Death and Passion of Christ which then was not actually accomplished But besides this Guesse of Origen's and Chrysostom's St. Austine gives us some ground for another when he tells us Mori pro Christo nondum idonei erant Apostoli The Apostles were not as yet fit and strong enough to die for Christ Which expression giveth us a fair Intimation of St. Austine's Judgment concerning our Saviour's words I have many things yet to say but about what probably about their Sufferings and Martyrdom but saith Christ ye cannot bear them now But why not now Surely it was now a time of trouble and sorrow with them their hearts were almost broken already with the consideration of their dear Master's approaching Death and Passion and therefore saith St. Austine Nunquid debuit illis ovibus dici in illo Tentationis articulo quòd certare usque ad mortem pro veritate oportebat pro Christi nomine vel Doctrina sanguinem fundere Was it seasonable for Christ to tell his Apostles in this juncture of time and hour of Temptation since as yet they were but as sheep infirm and weak that they must expect to shed their bloud and suffer death for the Truths Doctrines and Name of Christ No our Saviour was pleased to reserve these Lessons that as yet might have seemed too harsh as Origen words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a fitter Opportunity namely the time after his own Passion and Resurrection That these Opinions of Origen Chrysostom and Austine concerning the matter of our Saviour's personall Discourses with his Apostles betwixt his Resurrection and Ascension which the Romanists urge for their Traditions are but conjecturall we do acknowledge but withall we do avouch that they are ten times more probable then that of Lorinus For that the many things which the Apostles could not yet bear and therefore Christ did not deliver till after his Resurrection should be such as concerned the Abolition of the Mosaicall Law or the Disciples own Sufferings rather then the Authority of the Romane Bishop the Invocation of Saints and other superstitious Doctrines and Practices now taught and used in the Roman Church as delivered by Christ in his forenamed private Discourses with his Apostles is much more consonant to Christian Religion humane Reason and the Authority of the written Word And if so if we may take the Judgment of Origen Chrysostom and Austine whose Opinions in this matter are countenanced by Holy Writ rather then the Judgment of Lorinus whose Opinion in this case the Scriptures themselves oppose though there be in this business no Certainty on either side yet if we have fairer Probabilities on our part then the Romanists have on theirs if it be more likely that the many things which Christ had to say before his Passion but did not for prudentiall considerations actually declare till after his Resurrection might concern as the forenamed Fathers probably thought the Abrogation of the Jewish Religion the Calling of the Gentiles and the Martyrdom of his Apostles rather then those unwarrantable Traditions for which the Romanists do now contend how then comes Bellarmine to assert that they are not written But upon the whole matter the Truth is this Since 't is altogether impossible to find out what those many things were which Christ had to teach his Disciples before his Death but did not doe it because as yet they could not bear them till after his Resurrection 't is equally impossible to prove that they are or are not registred But if the Romanists are of another mind and will undertake by infallible Testimonies to demonstrate to us what were the particular matters of our Saviour's severall Discourses at the time of his severall Apparitions to his Apostles before his Ascension then will we also
was the day of Christ's Passion their Sabbath of his Buriall and our Lord's day of his Resurrection 'T is mentioned by Tertullian who saith Die Dominico jejunium nefas ducimus To fast on the Lord's day we count it sin 'T is mentioned by Nazianzene who styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 'T is from the great Probabilities given us in the written Word and the pregnant Testimonies of Antiquity that the Reformed Church doth observe this Tradition which concerns the Lord's day with greater strictness then the Roman They tell us again that the Baptism of Infants is an Apostolicall Tradition we are so far from contradicting them that we do not onely practise it our selves but maintain it against all Opposers because 't is mightily countenanced in Sacred Writ and commended to us by all Antiquity I remember Dionysius the Areopagite if he that goeth under that name be indeed the man tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Children who were yet uncapable to understand the Mysteries of the Gospel were made partakers of Divine Regeneration and saith that the Church observed this Practice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being taught so to doe by ancient Tradition Accordingly Nazianzene thus adviseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hast thou an Infant let him be sanctified from his Infancy And so St. Cyprian and other Bishops give their Judgments Prohiberi non debet Infans qui recèns natus c. The Infant that is but newly born must not be debarred from Baptism Whoever denied this was condemned by the Church and accordingly the Council of Carthage which consisted of two hundred and seventeen Fathers passed this Sentence upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever denieth that little Children newly dropped from their Mothers Womb ought to be baptized let him be Accursed These and the like Authorities do induce us to believe that the Baptism of Infants though no-where in plain terms commanded in Scripture is yet a Divine Tradition and upon that well-grounded Confidence our Church doth as constantly practise and as strongly defend it as ever theirs did or can do They tell us again that the Institution of our Christian Festivals and the observation of Lent are Apostolicall Traditions Well though they will find it a difficult task to prove them such though the first Institution of Lent is by some ascribed to Telesphorus and though about the observation thereof there was and that very early too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doubts and various opinions as Irenaeus and Eusebius tell us yet because our Christian Fasts and Festivals are very suitable to Scripture-Rules and were observed as great helps to and expressions of their Devotion and Piety by our religious Ancestours and indeed the Universality of the Christian Church we do readily embrace and practise both But when our Adversaries press upon us under the notion of Apostolicall Traditions many things of Faith and Worship defined in their late Conventicle of Trent though altogether unknown to the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church and contrary to the written Words we find reason to lie under the Anathema's and Excommunication of the Roman Church rather then to comply witâ— it in those Doctrines and Practices of theirs whicâ— are so exceeding far from being Apostolicalâ—â— They tell us indeed that their Veneration 〈◊〉 Saints is practised juxta Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae usum à primaevis Christianae Religionis temporibus receptum according to the use of the Catholick and Apostolick Church and was received from the beginning of the Christian Faith whereas the Invocation of Saints now practised in the Roman Church is not mentioned by any of the Fathers till above two hundred years after Christ and consequently cannot be imagined to be an Apostolical Tradition And as for the Roman Custom of Praying for the dead by the Practice whereof in former Ages they would fain establish their Doctrine of Purgatory and that especially to keep up the credit of their dear Indulgences though we find this excess of groundless and uselesse Charity used in the Christian Church and that somewhat early too though St. Cyprian in the third Century mentions Oblatio pro Dormitione Deprecatio nomine defunctorum though Tertullian in the same Century mentions Oblationes pro defunctis nay more though Dionysius the Areopagite who if he be the man lived in the first Century tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Priest makes an holy Prayer for or over the dead yet none of all these do assert this Practice to have had its Originall from any Divine or Apostolicall Tradition as the Roman Church contends Tertullian indeed concerning this and some other Practices used in his time confesseth thus Si legem expostules Scripturarum nullam invenies If you require a Scripture-command for this and that there is none to be found upon which score he ascribes these things to Tradition but whence that Tradition took its rise he doth not tell us But the truth is St. Chrysostom doth who in the behalf of persons deceased in the Guilt of sin exhorts his hearers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us assist and succour them to our utmost power But what can surviving persons doe for the relief of departed Sinners he answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us both pray for them our selves and beseech others to doe so too And that the Dead should be particularly remembred in the Prayers of the Church at the celebration of the Lord's Supper he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was ordained by the Apostles and that not in vain And that this Practice spred and continued in the Church after St. Chrysostom's time is evident from that expression of St. Austine Non parva est universae Ecclesia Authoritas quae in hac consuetudine claret ubi in precibus Sacerdotis quae Domino Deo ad ejus Altare funduntur locum suum habet etiam commendatio Mortuorum 'T is clear indeed from these words that to remember the dead in their most solemn Prayers at the celebration of the Eucharist was grown in St. Austine's time the generall Custom of the Church but that this Custom had its Originall from the Apostles he doth not say Nor indeed could this be the Institution of the Apostles that there should be a particular Commemoration of the dead and a solemn form of Prayer put up to God on their behalf at the administration of the Lord's Supper if that Observation be true which Chemnitius ascribes to St. Hierom St. Gregory and others in these words Apostolos ad solam Orationem Dominicam celebrâsse actionem Mysteriorum Divinorum If this be so that the Apostles themselves used no other Prayer but the Lord 's alone at their Celebration of the Eucharist how can it be imagined that those solemn Supplications which in after-times were made for the dead at the Altar should be of
Apostolicall Institution But however though the Church of Rome may pretend but cannot prove for one St. Chrysostom is not enough Apostolicall Tradition for such and such Doctrines and Practices of theirs yet what Authority from Christ or his Apostles can they plead for those Articles of their new Creed which their Pope Pius the Fourth hath impiously imposed upon the Church of Christ and added to that received Nicene Creed as if it were of equall Credit even with that and to be believed upon penalty of Damnation When St. Paul delivered such and such Traditions to the Christian Church he tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I received of the Lord but could Pope Pius say as much of his and can the present Church of Rome say as much of theirs when in their new-found Creed they teach us to say I profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the new Law instituted by Christ Do they indeed gather this Article of their Faith as we do all those in the three received Creeds from clear Testimonies of Holy Writ or do they collect this Doctrine and number of their Seven Sacraments as their Patriarch of Venice is said to have done from that particular expression of St. Andrew when he told his Lord There is a lad here which hath five loaves and two fishes When they require us to say I profess that there is a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice offered to God in the Masse for the Quick and the Dead do they indeed father this Tradition upon St. Paul who saith Christ was once offered and again Christ by one offering hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Again when they teach us to say I profess that in the Eucharist the Bread and the Wine and why not their Water too are transubstantiated into the body and bloud of Christ do they ground this Tradition upon the words of Consecration This is my Body when Scotus himself who was one of their own great Champions hath told the world that the words of Christ do not necessarily import it and that Transubstantiation for which Bellarmine indeed corrects him was no Article of Faith till the Lateran Council When they teach us to say I acknowledge that under one Kind whole and perfect Christ and the true Sacrament is received do they ground that Doctrine upon a Canon established by the Council of Constance or upon the Example and Command of our Blessed Saviour who delivered both the Elements to all his Communicants and gave them this express injunction concerning the Cup in particular Drink ye all of this And that this Command of our Blessed Saviour was observed in the Primitive Church where the Minister according to Christ s own Example delivered the Consecrated Cup to all the Communicants is evident from the Testimony of the most early Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Ignatius and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. saith Dionysius there was then one Cup distributed to all And if this were the known Practice of the Primitive Church what ancient Tradition can the Roman Church produce for their Communion in one Kind onely Again when they bid us say I do constantly hold that there is a Purgatory do they derive this Tradition from the writings of Plato who mentions three Receptacles for departed Souls or from those Expressions of Prophets or Apostles which say of all departed Saints They rest from their labours and of all departed Sinners They shall be turned into hell Once more when they would have us believe that Saints and Angels are to be worshipped that there is a Veneration lawfully paid to the very Reliques of Saints to the Crosse of Christ to the Images of the Virgin Mary c. do they ground this Tradition upon the Second Commandment which they could as willingly blot out of their Bibles as they have done out of some of their Catechisms or upon any Expression of St. Paul both which do flatly condemn the Worshipping of any Creature No 't is well observed by Calvin Sub Traditionum titulo includunt omnes crassas abominationes manifesto Dei Verbo contrarias The Romanists under the name of Traditions do include all their grosse Abominations which are directly contrary to the Word of God and so are far enough from being those traditionall Doctrines or any whit like them of Faith and Worship that are recommended by St. Paul who imposed not any Belief or Practice upon the Church but what was as himself words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Scriptures But 2. 'T is urged by the Roman Church that St. Paul and other Apostles too delivered some unwritten Traditions to their immediate Successours which concerned the external Discipline Order Policy Rites and Ceremonies of the Church Well and who denieth it not Calvin who though he were a great opposer of superfluous and burthensome Ceremonies doth yet grant thus much Paulus Ecclesiae Corinthiacae primus fundator Itstitutis piis honestis eam formaverat ut decenter ordine illic agerentur omnia St. Paul who was the first Founder of the Church of Corinth did so form it with pious and laudable Institutions that all things there might be transacted without the least Indecency or Disorder So runs that written and well-known Rule of his Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently and in order But besides this Rule that he hath left upon Record he farther tells them The rest will I set in order when I come And what he did or enjoyned to be done in pursuance of this Promise perhaps might be never written But as Calvin demands Quid hoc ad insulsas Ceremoniarum nugas quae visuntur in Papatu quid hoc ad Superstitionem plusquam Judaicam What 's all this to the insipid and foolish Ceremonies of the Roman Church how doth this justifie those Superstitions of theirs that are more then Jewish So numerous are their Ceremonies that I cannot imagine what St. Austine would have said had he lived in our times who thus complained of his own Religionem servilibus oneribus premunt ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum c. The Condition of the Jews in respect of burthensom Ceremonies was more tolerable then that of Christians I remember Bellarmine reckons up no less then twenty two Ceremonies used in the Roman Church in the Administration of Baptism and tells us that they are all of Apostolicall Institution or at least of great Antiquity some of which are these Exorcisms Salt Spittle Chrism the Wax-taper the white Apparrell and the Kisse c. And as to the Sacrament of the Eucharist the same Bellarmine tells us Apostoli legem condunt ut sumatur ante omnes alios cibos nimirum à jejunis the Apostles established a Law that it should be receiv'd before all other food that is by persons fasting And yet that Rule of St. Paul which the Romanists can never satisfactorily answer stands
upon record to the contrary If any man hunger let him eat at home Hence Luther tells King Henry the Eighth Apud nos non peccat qui modestè ederit biberit ante Communionem With us the man doth not sin who eats or drinks moderately before the Sacrament And 't is well known that the Primitive Christians who were very tender of all Apostolicall Institutions did at least in some places and upon some days in imitation of our Blessed Saviour receive the Sacrament after Supper So much may we collect from that expression of St. Austine who grants Institutum esse multis locis ut die Paschae post refectionem Deo offeratur c. that it was the Custom of many places to offer the Eucharist to God after meat And Sozomen tells us that some also dined before the reception of the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They coming together on the Sabbath towards the Evening and having already dined they partake of the Mysteries From this Authority Cornelius à Lapide is forced to acknowledge thus much Perduravit hic mos in nonnullis Ecclesiis per multa secula This Custom of eating before the Sacrament continued in some Churches for many Ages and yet is fasting an Apostolicall Institution is it indeed Consuetudo necessariò servanda a Custom that must of necessity be observed as Bellarmine contends But since Tertullian hath given us a fair Intimation in that expression of his Non sciet maritus quid ante omnem cibum sumas c. that in his time the Sacrament was received before all other food since Nazianzene hath assured us that the Eucharist was celebrated in his Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Supper and since St. Austine hath told us Per universum orbem mos iste servatur The Custom of receiving the Lord's Supper fasting is observed by the whole Christian Church throughout the World we look upon it as a laudable Practice and use it as an ancient Rite though it will be hard to prove it an Apostolicall Institution For St. Austine's Placuit Spiritui Sancto c. urged by Bellarmine will not evince it no not upon the Principles of his own Church for 't is well known that the Pope and his Councils do commonly ascribe to the Holy Ghost as well their own Determinations as the Tradition of Christ's Apostles But although our receiving the Eucharist fasting were granted to be the Dictate of God's Holy Spirit signified to the Church either by the Apostles themselves or their immediate Successours in that Age wherein the extraordinary Revelations of the Holy Ghost were as yet continued though I say this Ceremony of receiving the Sacrament fasting were certainly of Divine or Apostolicall Institution yet doubtlesse severall Rites recommended and used by the Roman Church in the Administration of this Sacrament are not so For who commands that the Sacramental Bread must needs be broken into three Pieces as if there were some great Mysteries signified by a threefold fraction Who requires the Circumgestation of the Host Who commands the Priest to sign himself the Altar the Book the Elements and all the Congregation with the Crosse Was it some Apostle or their own Alexander which ordained that the Sacramental Wine should be mixed with Water What warrant can be pretended from the command or example of Christ or any Apostle of his for putting the consecrated Bread not into the Hand but the Mouth of their Communicants I remember that Canon of the Council of Altissiodorum a Town in France Non licet mulieri nudâ manu Eucharistiam sumere 'T is not lawful for a woman to receive the Sacrament with a bare and naked hand no if she want her Dominical her linen Gloves non communicet let her not partake of the Sacrament that 's their law I remember also another Canon established by a Council assembled in Constantinople which runs thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Communicant must frame his hands into the figure of a Crosse And how that must be done too there is a Jesuit who thus instructs us Dexterâ superpositâ sinistrae in modum Crucis c. Certainly these Canons are so superstitious that they savour of a Pope rather then an Apostle but however they give sufficient evidence that the Eucharist of old was received by the Communinicants with their Hands not their Mouths The truth is the Roman Church hath no more warrant from any Apostolicall Tradition for these and some other Ceremonies used therein about the Eucharist then they have for their half-Communion whereby against the Institution of Christ the Discourse of St. Paul and the Evidence of Primitive Practice the Laiety are unworthily robbed of half the Sacrament and are admitted onely to a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dry Feast indeed 'T is very evident that these and many other Vsages and Doctrines received in the Roman Church are not the Doctrines and Practices taught and required by Christ or St. Paul no such they are as have no Countenance from any clear Text of Prophets Evangelists or Apostles and because 't is so because the Scriptures will never justifie those Practices and Assertions of theirs they are resolved and indeed much obliged in point of honour to seek out for other Arguments to prove them and what they are we shall now consider II. The Champions of the Roman Church do endeavour to prove their Traditions to be Apostolicall by the Testimonies of their own Bishops as if they were Infallible Thus that the yearly Renovation of their Chrism is an Apostolicall Tradition doth Bellarmine offer to prove by the Authority of Pope Fabian who in his second Epistle to the Bishops of the Eastern Church tells them thus Ista à Sanctis Apostolis eorum Successoribus accepimus VobÃsque tenenda mandamus 'T is that which we have received from the Apostles and their Successours and so we require from you its Observation To this he adds the Testimony of Innocent the First who in his first Epistle to Decentius saith Si Instituta Ecclesiastica ut sunt à beatis Apostolis tradita integra vellent servare Domini sacerdotes c. If our Lord's Priests would entirely observe the Institutions of the Church as they were delivered by the blessed Apostles c. Now to these and the like Testimonies of the Roman Bishops which are cited in the defence of such and such Traditions we have two things to answer 1. The Roman Bishops that have pleaded for the unwritten Traditions of that Church are not competent Witnesses nor doth their Testimony deserve to be admitted in matters of this Concern 'T is notoriously known that there are severall Traditions maintained by the Roman Church that are very advantageous to their Bishop and others of their Clergy too and that upon severall accounts That Doctrine which teacheth the Pope's Primacy and Supremacy over all other Bishops and Secular Princes makes much for
his Greatness Splendour and Magnificence that Doctrine which asserts his Power to dispense with Vows Oaths and in several cases with Matrimonial Contracts either to allow or null them that Doctrine which assigns him a Power more then ordinarily Ministeriall to pardon Sin and deliver whom he will from Purgatory c. makes for his Wealth and fills his Bags apace And if so if these and other Doctrines do bring in such a Revenue to the Roman Bishop and many more of his Church too 't is very likely that they will be so kind to themselves as to plead for those Traditions by which alone those Doctrines can be maintained That the Bishops of Rome have the usual Infirmities of other men and may perhaps fail now and then in matters of Morall Concern I think no man denieth 'T is a bug word that Baronius speaks of Pope Vigilius whom he calleth a Thief a Brigand c. and 't is no great Commendation which Bellarmine gives of John the Twenty third when he doth acknowledge him to have been a man vitae dissolutae of a loose and dissolute Conversation so dissolute that fifty three severall Articles that concerned his Manners for in Points of Faith the Pope though an Heretick must not be thought to erre were exhibited against him in the Council of Constance and proved by sufficient Testimonies These two Instances not to name the Sorceries and Treasons of Gregory the Seventh nor the Concubine of Nicholas the Third and to passe by the late pretty stories of Donna Olympia who governed the Roman Chair as Themistocles his little Son ruled Athens are more then enough to evidence that even his Holinesse himself may erre in point of Morality And since other Vices are incident to the Bishops of Rome why should we think it impossible for them to be a little tainted sometimes with those small Infirmities of Covetousness Pride and Ambition Though St. Bernard indeed might tell his friend Pope Eugenius Apostolis interdicitur Dominatus Christ forbad his Apostles to exercise any Despotick Power at least over one another yet perhaps Boniface the Eighth might have in him some little remainders of unmortified Pride which might prevail with him to accept the Title from others yea and to style himself too Mundi Dominum the Lord of the World And though Alexander the Fifth who professed himself a rich Bishop a poor Cardinall but a mere beggarly Pope might perhaps deserve that Character which St. Paul requires in a Bishop not greedy of filthy lucre yet what may we think of John the Twenty Third who was so covetous of Money and heaped up so much Treasure that he thought himself concerned to brand that man for an Heretick who should dare affirm that Christ and his Apostles had no Possessions in the World Now then if the Roman Bishops as well as other men may possibly so far forget themselves as to be guilty of Ambition and Avarice 't is not reasonable that we should admit their Testimony for the Justification of those Traditions wherein their own Advantage and Honour is so very much concerned they are Parties so mightily interessed in this Cause that there is ground enough to suspect their Evidence and to imagine that they will represent the matter not impartially as it really stands but with those favourable Constructions or false Glosses and Equivocations which an ambitious or covetous heart may probably suggest and a bad Cause doth certainly require But 2. Although the Testimony of the Roman Bishops should be admitted for the justification of their own Traditions should we be so kind as to accept their Evidence in a Cause which so deeply concerns themselves nay should we pass a candid interpretation upon it and suppose it to be impartial yet neither so would it doe their work nor prove firm sure and cogent See why upon a double ground 1. The Testimonies of several Roman Bishops especially those early ones who would indeed have been very credible Witnesses in any matter which concerns the Church have been counterfeited and notoriously forged Methinks we may use the same Consideration to invalidate the Testimony of any Roman Bishop which Bellarmine himself doth to weaken and take off the Evidence of a Roman Cardinall We find what horrid Crimes if Simony Heresie Sorcery and Adultery be such indeed are by several Authors laid to the Charge of Pope Gregory the Seventh And because these detestable Villanies do much reflect upon the Honour of the Roman See and do intrench too much upon that Fundamental Point of the Pope's Infallibility 't is the great endeavour of Bellarmine by all ways and means to wipe off this Guilt and to make the world believe that all these Vices objected against as he styles him an innocent Pope were but unworthy Reproaches and base Calumnies that were raised by Tilmannus and the Centuriatours out of a forged Book that was fathered indeed upon Cardinal Benno but was probably written so Bellarmine would have it by some Lutheran or other This kind of Argumentation we may justly retort upon the Roman Church who justifie their own Traditions and unjustly charge us with Heresie as having departed from the true Faith of the Primitive and Catholick Church and this they would fain prove by Testimonies produced out of some Writings which are ascribed to several ancient Bishops of Rome whereas 't is very certain that those Writings neither were nor could be theirs 'T is the great Honour of the Roman See that in the three first Centuries the Bishops who governed that Church were very choice and excellent Persons we reade that Thirty and one successive Bishops of theirs even from Linus to Sylvester if we except but Hyginus and Pius who lived under the kinder Empire of Antoninus Pius were Martyrs or Confessours at least The memory of these Champions and stout Assertours of the true Catholick Faith being precious and their Authority being venerable in the Church of Christ some well-wishers to the present Roman Church that there might be some pretence of great Antiquity for their superstitious Novelties have written such and such Epistles Constitutions and other Tracts in the names of these Primitive Roman Bishops which they have published and sent abroad into the world with as much confidence as if they were genuine and authentick indeed What Authority such Epistles have in the Roman Church we learn from Gratian who equals them to the Definitions of General Councils and is not ashamed to make St. Austine say that they are equal to the very written Word of God But St. Austine is so much wronged in being produced by Gratian as the Authour of such an intolerable Assertion that Bellarmine who for once hath something more of Modesty doth thus excuse it Deceptus est Gratianus ex depravato Codice quem ipse habuit beati Augustini Gratian was deceived by a corrupted Copy which he had of St. Austine's Works But however though Bellarmine dare not equal these Decretall Epistles
No man shall be admitted to accuse a Bishop till first his quality be duely examined nor shall every fellow be suffered to exhibit Articles against the Governours of the Church And as every man might not accuse a Bishop so whosoever wrongfully did it though it were but a Bishop elect and yet to be ordained he was severely punished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let his Penalty be a long Excommunication So saith the Canon-Law So then since there is an Indictment of no less Crimes then Atheism and Heresie drawn up and exhibited against several Bishops and those of the Roman See too who claim a Superiority over all Bishops besides as being the onely Successours of the Prime Apostle and the immediate Vicars of Christ 't is of a considerable Concern that what is thus alledged against them be well proved too And here that Pope Marcellinus offered Incense to Idols might be proved with ease and evidence enough but because he did it barely for fear of Diocletian and afterwards repented and became a Martyr we pass him by Rhenanus saith of Pope Zephyrinus Episcopus Romanus Montanizat The Bishop of Rome embraceth the Heresie of Montanus So Tertullian who was too much of the same Opinion witnesseth too That Pope Honorius the First was a Monothelite and denied the distinction of two Wills in Christ we have the Testimonies of Pope Agatho Leo the Second Adrian the Second besides the Evidence of the Sixth General Council wherein he was publickly condemned for an Heretick That Pope Liberius and his Antipope Felix were Arrians is testified by Athanasius and St. Hierom too Nor need we be ashamed to produce the Testimony of Calvin and Erasmus who do both affirm that Pope John the Twenty second denied the Immortality of the Soul And what if we mention that Expression of Picus Mirandula Alium meminimus Pontificem qui nullum Deum credens c. We remember another Pope who believing that there is no God c. But that of the Council of Basil must not be forgot which having voted a General Council to be above the Pope could not possibly give a better Reason for it then this Multi Pontifices in Errores Haereses lapsi esse leguntur c. 'T is recorded that many Popes have fell into Errours and Heresies c. And the truth is there is no Pope who stifly maintains those Doctrines which assert the worshipping of Angels Saints Images Reliques a Morsel of Bread or a Consecrated Wafer but is a down-right Heretick and since he is so we cannot so far betray our own Reason as to rest satisfied and be convinced that such and such Doctrines which have no Countenance in Scripture are Apostolical by the Testimony of any Roman Bishop who notwithstanding the Pretence of his Infallibility is proved to be obnoxious to gross Errours even Heresie and Atheism it self as well as other men But III. The Champions of the Roman Faith do endeavour to justifie their unwritten Traditions by the Testimonies of the Fathers who are produced as Witnesses which seem in their account to speak a great deal for them Thus Bellarmine cites Ignatius who is an early and substantial Witness indeed as being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Coetane Collegue and Scholar of the very Apostles themselves and of him Eusebius thus records 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He exhorted the Christians to stick fast to the Traditions of the Apostles and that they might be preserved incorrupt not long before his Martyrdom he judged it necessary that they should be written This Testimony is clear for traditions and so is that of Dionysius the Areopagite too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The first Founders of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy the Apostles delivered to us Heavenly Mysteries by Instructions written and unwritten according to the Sacred Laws And thus great St. Basil too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To persevere in unwritten Traditions I think 't is Apostolical And so Tertullian also mentions several particular Observations quas sine ullo Scripturae Instrumento solius Traditionis titulo exinde Consuetudinis patrocinio vindicamus c. which the Church practised and defended without the Authority of any Scripture upon the bare credit of Tradition and the Patronage of Custom c. Now this being Argumentum Achilleum one of the strongest Arguments which the Romish Church can possibly urge for their Traditions we shall give an Answer to it in some distinct Particulars 1. Whatever Traditions are expresly and dogmatically delivered by the Vniversality of the ancient Fathers we do readily embrace own and defend That Expression of St. Basil the Great we do willingly close with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Old Doctrines are to be reverenced and for as it were their hoary Antiquity they deserve a Veneration But withall those Doctrines that may justly challenge a respect for their Age must be such as were generally received believed and practised according to that Rule which Vincentius Lyrinensis gives us Id teneamus quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus creditum est Let us hold that which hath been believed at all times in all places and by all Christians And for this St. Austine gives this Reason Illa quae non sunt scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto terrarum orbe observantur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis Conciliis quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrima Authoritas commendata atque statuta retineri sicuti quòd Domini Passio Resurrectio Ascensio in Coelum adventus de Coelo Spiritûs Sancti anniversariâ Solennitate celebrantur siquid aliud tale occurrerit quod servatur ab universa quácunque se diffundit Ecclesia This Expression commends the belief and practice of those Traditions supposing them to be the Institutions either of the Apostles themselves or ancient General Councils which were unanimously observed by the universal Church But now that such and such traditional Doctrines and Vsages were indeed generally received by the whole Christian Church we must have clear Proofs from credible Witnesses that have given Testimony thereunto throughout all the respective Centuries and Ages of the Church This is no more then was urged long since by Gregory Nyssene for the Ratification and full Establishment of all such Vsages and Doctrines as pretend to Antiquity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this and nothing lesse is sufficient for the Proof of our Assertion that we have a Tradition derived to us from the Fathers as it were a certain Inheritance descending by entail from the Apostles by those Saints who were all along their Successours And this is the onely thing which we demand from the Roman Church being ready to acknowledge the Truth of all Doctrines and the Equity of all Practices which the Vniversality of the Fathers have left upon Record as things believed and done in the first and purest Ages of the Church And thus to doe
we have a great Encouragement from that Expression of Tertullian Constat omnem Doctrinam quae cum Ecclesiis Apostolicis Matricibus Originalibus Fidei conspiret veritati deputandam id sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesiae ad Apostolis Apostoli à Christo Christus à Deo accepit c. 'T is manifest that every Doctrine which agreeth with the Apostolick Churches which were the Wombs and Originals of Faith must be esteemed a Truth as holding that which those Churches received from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God So that whatsoever Traditions the Church of Rome can prove to be Apostolical by an unanimous Consent of all the ancient learned and holy Bishops and Doctours who from Age to Age have governed and taught the Church though such Traditions are no-where recorded in the written Word yet being obliged by the universal Testimony of all Antiquity to esteem them Apostolical Institutions and consequently no-way repugnant to Holy Writ we shall most readily receive and practise them upon the very first Conviction For so great a respect hath the Church of England for all her pious Forefathers in Christ that she doth most chearfully follow their Example in every thing that is convenient and laudable and doth pay to venerable Antiquity all that imaginable Reverence which is consistent with that inviolable Rule she walks by which is the written Word of God But 2. Although we are thus ready to embrace all those Doctrines and Practices which can be recommended to us by the general Consent and Approbation of Antiquity yet the Testimonies of such and such particular Fathers which the Romanists produce for the justification of their unwritten Traditions we cannot think our selves obliged to accept nor is it safe to comply with them in all Points whatsoever 'T is the great Prerogative of the Scripture alone to deserve and require our Assent to every thing that is there delivered by every particular Prophet Evangelist and Apostle When once we do but clearly understand the meaning of Divine Revelations and comprehend what such and such a Text doth import there is no room for any farther Scrutiny or Examination but all our business is to believe and practise Thus stands the case with the Word of God every line whereof is of unquestionable Authority but as for the Writings of men how holy or learned soever but not infallibly guided by God's unerring and holy Spirit we have ground enough in all Points and matters of Controversie which the Scriptures do not clearly determine to pause a while suspend our faith and not immediately to give too quick an Assent to such and such Assertions till we have taken mature Advice and deliberately considered what is the matter of such and such Propositions that relate to the Worship of God Points of Faith or other Concerns of the Church as well as who it is that recommends them And for this we have several Reasons 1. That the whole Church of God in after-Ages should without all farther Examination give an immediate Assent to all Propositions Principles Conclusions Doctrines or Practices which are laid down recorded or recommended in the Works of such and such ancient Fathers is a thing which those Fathers themselves did never doe or expect The truth is to give a firm and quick Credit to every thing which such or such a person hath said were an instance of such a Respect as the best of men cannot deserve nor did the best of the Fathers ever require or shew We are in this to imitate St. Austine who told St. Hierom thus Alios Scriptores praeter Canonicos ità lego ut quantâlibet Sanctitate Doctrinâve praepolleant non ideo verum putem quia Ipsi ità senserunt sed quia mihi vel per illos Authores Canonicos vel probabili ratione quà d à vero non abhorreat persuadere potuerunt When I reade any Authours that are not Canonicall how holy or learned soever I do not presently grant this or that to be a truth barely because those Authours thought so c. And as he reserved to himself this liberty of dissent when he found just cause from other mens Writings so did he as willingly allow the same liberty to all other persons who should become the Readers of his So he tells his friend Fortunatianus Talis ego sum in Scriptis aliorum tales volo esse Intellectores meorum Such am I in other mens Works and such would I have other men be in mine But how is that he tells us Neminem velim sic amplecti omnia mea ut me sequatur nisi in iis quibus me non errare perspexerit I would have no man so to credit what I write as immediately to comply with my Judgment except it be in those things onely wherein he perceives me to be in the right 'T is a Golden Rule which he elsewhere gives us Audi dicit Dominus non dicit Donatus aut Rogatus aut Vincentius aut Hilarius aut Ambrosius aut Augustinus sed dicit Dominus Hear and believe not every thing which such and such a man saith but what God saith So then though perhaps we may dissent in some particular matters not determined in the written Word from such and such particular Fathers though we have entred our Dislike and do solemnly protest against some Expressions that have unwarily dropped from some of their Pens yet since these good men have declared themselves to be no-way injured or affronted thereby we do not need or if we did we should not matter a Pardon from his Holiness who wants indeed some better Evidences to confirm the Validity of his Indulgencies and make them saleable in English Markets But 2. To comply with every thing that such and such a Father hath asserted and to receive all their Testimonies indifferently as undoubted Truths is a thing so gross and irrational that even our Adversaries of Rome themselves will not doe it 'T is indeed very usual with them to exclaim against us as persons that have no Reverence for Antiquity but reject the Fathers and tread them under foot but the truth is if it be a fault to dissent from ancient Writers in any thing whatever if our refusal to subscribe to their Opinions in all matters of Controversie may be interpreted as a Contempt done to those excellent Persons from whom in some things we disagree then do we retort this Argument upon our Adversaries and having a just ground of Recrimination we do tell and can easily prove to the world that if this be indeed our Crime it is certainly theirs too That the Church of Rome doth give an universal Assent to whatsoever all the Fathers have written will not be imagined by any person who considers what the Jesuits and other Doctours who well understood the Sense of that Church and durst not openly contradict it have left upon Record I remember that expression of Bellarmine who being urged
at the Pleasure of the Pope's Mercy and the Offender's Purse And methinks 't is strange that such a Tradition as this which can never be delivered from the just imputation of encouraging Vice should because mentioned by Origen and his Followers be declared Apostolicall and equalled to that written and sure Word of Christ from which it receives sufficient Confutations but nothing of Countenance whatever the Romish Church may pretend But alas Origen is but one of many that are cited as Patrons and Abettours of the Romish Traditions there is another Person as well as Origen who lived as Eusebius words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the very next Age to the Apostles whose Testimony is often urged in this matter too I mean Clemens Alexandrinus who flourished in the reign of Commodus and was the Scholar of Pantenus which two were the first that I meet with who delivered the Principles of Christian Religion in a Catecheticall way in publick Schools and for that deserve an Honour What Eusebius reports concerning this Clemens cannot be denied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This man's Books are full of much excellent Learning so excellent that Chemnitius saith expresly of him In tota Antiquitate habitus fuit vir celeberrimus In all Antiquity there was not a man so famous as he But yet for all that he fell into many strange and heterodox Opinions such I suppose as our Adversaries themselves will by no means allow He telleth us that our Blessed Saviour preached but one year onely that the Apostles being departed from the World preached to the Dead and converting some of them raised them to life again He countenanced the Tenets of Anabaptists that Christians ought not to swear nor implead one another before any Tribunal whatsoever He affirmed that if men who were once Baptized and enlightned fell into Sin God perhaps might grant them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 place of Repentance for once or twice but no more for ever and yet notwithstanding as if he had forgot himself and were not constant to his own Opinion he saith elsewhere that if men repent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no place either in this world or in the next void of the Goodness of God And methinks if this excellent and learned Person were betrayed into such gross and absurd Opinions as are directly contrary to the written Word through those Traditions which had even thus early crept into the Church and were fathered upon St. Paul St. Peter and other Apostles we must beg and may justly expect our very Adversaries pardon if we still suspect that such and such Traditions mentioned by this Clemens are very far from being as Bellarmine contends Apostolicall But although Clemens Alexandrinus fell into such erroneous and fond Opinions that they have given the Church just occasion in doubtfull matters to like his Testimony so much the worse yet what hath Tertullian done to forfeit his Credit and so far to blemish his Reputation that the large Testimony which he also gives in the case of Traditions should be questioned too Tertullian was indeed a learned Preacher of the African Church a man that confuted Marcion and wrote excellent Apologies for the persecuted Saints of God a man that is styled by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most famous of all the Latine Writers and yet notwithstanding when he treats of Religious matters not contained within our Bibles we have too much ground in some things to suspect his Judgment too and for so doing Bellarmine himself hath given us his own Example 'T is notoriously known that this Person of excellent Parts shewed himself to be but a son of Adam when not finding that Respect from the Roman Clergy which he might have expected through Discontent and Anger he miserably fell off from the Orthodox Christians and took up the detestable Opinions of that Phrygian Heretick Montanus What were the Opinions of this Montanus Apollonius in Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This was he that taught the world to dissolve that sacred bond of Wedlock this is he that taught his Disciples such and such Doctrines tanquam à Paracleto traditas saith Chemnitius as if he had received them from the Blessed Spirit of God this is he whom his Followers took to be the Paraclete but whom sober persons looked upon as Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a man possessed and acted by the Devil who had two women Priscilla and Maximilla to be his Prophetesses And certainly if this Montanus were such a monstrous Villain 't is as well sad as strange to think that such a man as Tertullian was should ever be so much transported with Passion upon such and such Neglects or perhaps Indignities received from some Clergy-men at Rome as to make such a Defection from the true Faith as if for some Affronts received from some particular persons he meant to revenge himself upon the whole Christian Church by patronizing the cursed Doctrines of so vile an Heretick But however since 't is clear that he did so we are by no means bound to believe what indeed he himself doth never affirm that all those Traditions which we find recorded in his Writings are of Divine Originall because we have ground enough to suspect that he might receive some of them at least from Montanus or some other unwarrantable hand rather then from Apostles or Apostolicall men But may not St. Cyprian pass for an unquestionable Witness if Tertullian do somewhat fail Was not this Cyprian the renowned Bishop of Carthage the stout Champion of Christ's true Religion yea and his faithful Martyr too And doth not this eminent Person give Testimony to justifie some of those Traditions and to prove them Apostolicall which are now received in the Roman Church and yet have not the least Countenance from the written Word of God What Great St. Basil once said of Dionysius Alexandrinus may without any Affront or Injury to St. Cyprian's name be affirmed of him too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We do not admire whatever that man said but some things we condemn too We are of St. Austine's mind who writes thus of Cyprian Cypriani literas non ut Canonicas habeo sed ex Canonicis considero Quod in eis Divinarum Scripturarum Authoritati congruit cum laude ejus accipio quod autem non congruit cum pace ejus respuo I do not take St. Cyprian's Epistles to be Canonical but I judge of them according to those which are such indeed Whatever therein agreeth with the Authority of Divine Scriptures to his honour I do applaud but whatever agreeth not with his leave I do reject 'T is evident by this Expression that although St. Cyprian were indeed what Nazianzene thought fit to style him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Name of the whole world though he were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Champion of the Truth yet it was St. Austine's Judgment
This is that which Bellarmine attempts and because he cannot doe it convincingly by the Canon as it is vulgarly read and expressed in the usual and publick Editions he produceth a private Copy and tells us that the Canon as it is commonly read is imperfect and ought thus to begin Ecclesia Romana semper habuit Primatum Mos autem perduret c. The Roman Church hath always had the Primacy c. One would think it strange that Bellarmine should adventure to make such an Addition to the Canon of so known and famous a Council but to justifie himself he tells us that this Canon was anciently so read and that about a thousand years ago it was thus translated out of the Greek Copies into Latine by a certain Abbot named Dionysius and that such a Copy was found in the Roman Library and that it was so read by Paschasianus the Legat of Pope Leo in the Council of Chalcedon and there approved But in desperate cases the old Rule must be observed Scelere tutandum est Scelus One Lie must be justified by another For 't is not easie to believe that the onely true Copy of the Acts of the Nicene Council and that in a Latine Translation too should be preserved at Rome nor is it easie to imagine that if there had been such an authentick Copy of that famous Council lodged at Rome it would have been permitted so long to have lain in the dark and never have been produced ti◠the Council of Chalcedon especially since the Interest of the Roman Bishop required the Production thereof to prove the same Prerogative above fifty years sooner For will any man believe that those Roman Bishops Zosimus and his Successour Boniface who claimed this Primacy from the sixth Council of Carthage would have been so far wanting to themselves as not to have produced such an authentick Copy which if clearly made out would have satisfied the Council ended the Controversie and established the Primacy of Rome by a Law True it is Faustinus the Pope's Legate produced in that Council his Commonitorium which he had from Rome pretending the Authority of the Nicene Fathers for the Primacy of the Pope and particularly in matters of Appeal but how little these Pretences were liked by the Council we may easily guess by that Answer which was returned by Alipius who was a great man there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It troubleth me that though we have examined the Greek Copies of the Nicene Council yet how it comes to pass I cannot tell we can by no means find any such thing as the Roman Bishop pretends and claims And so much did they certifie Pope Boniface himself in their Synodical Letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having many Greek Copies before us we could not find what was intimated and demanded from Rome no not so much as in any one However that they might satisfie themselves and the Bishop of Rome too so much the better they thought fit to dispatch away their Letters to Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and Atticus Bishop of Constantinople desiring them to send over what Copies and Registers they had of the Nicene Council who accordingly did so For thus Cyril tells them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thus Atticus too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is evident by these Expressions that these two Bishops sent over to the Council of Carthage the Acts Decrees and Canons of the Nicene Fathers entire uncorrupted and unquestionable And what 's the Issue do any one of these Copies agree with that of Rome No the Council having perused 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these true Copies sent this Message to Caelestinus who was now become Pope and had made the same Demands with Zosimus and Boniface 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We cannot find any such Canon as is pretended no not in the most authentick Copies that we have perused But the truth is that Copy of the Nicene Council mentioned by the Pope's Legate to the Council of Carthage was to the shame of the Roman See unworthily and basely corrupted and those words mentioned by Bellarmine Ecclesia Romana semper habuit Primatum were de novo how politickly soever yet knavishly enough added to the old Canon For 't is evident that the Council of Carthage resolved to alter nothing that had been defined by the Nicene Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Expressions are enough to convince all reasonable men that this Council of Carthage had no inclination to change any but confirm all the Constitutions of the Nicene Fathers but as to that Canon which the Pope's Legate pretended requiring or allowing the African Clergy to appeal from their own Bishops to the Bishop of Rome they were so far from confirming this that they established an express Canon against it and thus it runs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters Deacons and other inferiour Clergy-men in whatever Causes they have let them not appeal to any Tribunal beyond the Sea i. e. as the Council expresly words it in their Letter to the Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let them not appeal to the Bishop of Rome This Canon did so nettle the Roman Bishops that upon this occasion Boniface the Second told Eulalius Bishop of Carthage who had now unworthily submitted his Chair to the See of Rome that his Predecessour Aurelius St. Austine and above two hundred more learned and pious Bishops assembled in the Council of Carthage had denied Subjection to the Roman Bishop because they were as he impudently affirmed inspired and instigated by the Devil But as from this Determination of the Council of Carthage we may conclude that pretended Canon of the Nicene Bishops alleged by Faustinus in the Pope's behalf to be spurious and forged so may we reasonably infer as much from the consideration of its matter which is altogether untrue and evidently false For is it imaginable that so early a Council as that of Nice should acknowledge and ratifie the perpetual Primacy of the Roman Bishop since 't is notoriously known that the Primacy of the Roman Bishops was first derived from that bloudy Emperour Phocas and procured by the crafty Insinuations of Boniface the Third who magna cum contentione as Platina writes with much adoe procured but most willingly assumed to himself the Title of Vniversal Bishop and Head of all other Churches That it was not thus in former Ages we have the Confession of Gregory the Great who tells us Nullus unquam Praedecessorum meorum hoc tam prophano vocabulo uti consuevit None of all my Predecessours would ever assume to himself this profane Title and as for himself he was so far from owning it that he was the very first Bishop of Rome that styled himself Servus Servorum Dei the Servant of the Servants of