fallaces Opiniones suas conantur defendere as Hilarius attests Lib. prim de Trint Vincent Lyrinensis to the same effect Nihil de suo proferunt quod non Scripturarum verbis adumbrare conentur This they formerly did and still do to reject the Authority of the Church and to avoid a living Judge they appeal to the Scripture then they assume to themselves what they deny the Church it 's Exposition perverting it's true Sense according to their wild Fancies and so crooken the Rule to their own Bent This was observ'd by St. Basil Hexam Hom. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These falsifiers of Truth which do not teach their mind to follow the Scripture but contort the meaning of Divine Writ to their own Wills Now tho' the Scripture as being the Word of God is infallibly true yet it do's witness of it self that it is not of private Interpretation and those that dare Expound it that way may instead of sound Truths extract damnable Doctrines St. Austin avouches That all Heresies take their Birth from its wrong Interpretation in his 222 Epistle to Consentius Neque enim natae sunt Haereses nisi dum Scripturae bonae intelliguntur non bene To avoid this we must not Interpret them according to our Fancies but adhere to the Interpretations of the Church not at all questioning but that that Spirit of Truth which did direct it to distinguish Canonical from Adulterine Writ will likewise instruct it in the right Interpretation And herein consists the difference betwixt Catholicks and Hereticks as St. Austin observes Libro de Gratia Haeretici secundum suum sensum Sacras Scripturas legunt but we according to Antiquity and constant Tradition receiving both the Scripture and its Sense from the Church and her Authority is so considerable herein that St. Austin Epist Manich. says Ego Evangelio non crederem nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoveret authoritas The Second Reason is because you pay Reverence to the Antient Fathers of the Church Of this I shall hereafter have occasion to take notice and likewise of your Honesty and Integrity in quoting them The Third Reason to acquit your self of Schism is because you own the first four General Councils and are willing that the difference betwixt you and other Churches should be decided by their Vmpirage but I must tell you That if you own'd Forty Councils instead of Four and revolted from the Church that would not discharge you of the Crime of Schism As for your pretended willingness to admit them as Judges in differences betwixt you and other Churches this will appear to be a very empty Compliment unless you can prove that they made Definitions concerning our Modern Controversies they conven'd to define about the Heresies rise in those days of the Arrians Nestorians Eutychians Macedonians not concerning those of Protestants a word not then known and had their Doctrines been then extant they would as certainly have been condemned as the foregoing I shall only instance in one point in one Council that of Chalcedon I am fully convinc'd that that Council which paid so much respect to Pope Leo acknowledging him to have receiv'd the custody of the Vineyard from Christ granting him when they sent their Relation to him to preside over them by vertue of his Legate as the Head do's over the Members would have severely sentenc'd your revolt from that See That Council which depos'd Dioscurus the Patriarch of Alexandria and consequently no Subject of Leo's as he was Patriarch of the West not for any Erroneous Doctrine but for his Sawciness against him whom they call his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord and because he dar'd to convene a Synod without leave from the Apostolick See would most certainly have condemn'd your defection ftom the Authority of your Occidental Patriarch and more your Opprobrious Revilings of him But why the first four General Councils why not a Stage farther why Hic Terminus haeret Can you prove that all Contests in Matters of Faith arising in future Ages and in much different Centuries could possibly be determin'd in those Councils Would you have an Heresie be condem'd before it be broach'd your referring all our Controversal Differences to their Decision is as irrational as if Macedonius who was condemn'd concerning his Heresie about the Holy Ghost in the Second General Council had appeal'd to the Nicene which assembled chiefly to confute the Heresie of Arrius concerning God the Son and determin'd nothing about the Third Person of the Trinity Besides I know no reason why the Church should be credited in the first four General Councils and slighted and disbeliev'd in the following Christ promis'd he would be with them to the consummation of the World I do not in the least question but that the same Spirit of Truth which guided and directed the Church in its first Synods did accompany it in all its succeeding Conventions rendring it inerrable in its Definitions of Faith I can find no place where Christ promis'd to be with them for a limited time so as to direct them in their first four Assemblies and to leave them for the future to themselves It would have been a great incouragement to all new Heresies if no Decision in Gods Church should have been after the first four General Councils The truth of it is this 'T is usual with Hereticks to be Enemies to those Councils and to reject them that have condemn'd their Opinions charging them with Error as the Arrians did that of Nicene the Nestorians that of Ephesus the Eutichians that of Chalcedon and accordingly the Emperor Zeno being an Eutychian having put out a Profession of Faith which he call'd Henoticon he left out the Council of Chalcedon which had condemn'd that Error embracing only the Faith of the three first Councils The next thing I shall Discourse of will be concerning your Church which you assert to have all the Essentials of a true Church and to be a sound part of the Catholick This I wish you had prov'd as manifestly as you confidently affirm it Had you done this I would never have forsaken its Communion You cannot but imagine it to be a very hard task for any to forsake his Relations his Friends his Countrey-men in Matters of Religion and thereby to expose himself to their Odium the severity of rigid Laws and his Temporal Concerns to ruine nothing but the saving of ones Soul can be preponderant to all these Mischiefs So you may conceive that had I imagin'd my self as safe in reference to my Salvation in your Church as where I now am I had most certainly fix'd my self there Clavo Trabali As to your asserting your Church to have all the Essentials of a true one I must tell you plainly this That I find in the Fathers many to be condemn'd for Hereticks for denying but one of those many Articles which you disown But as for Essentials and Fundamentals I know you pretend to them but I cannot see
where your Authors define how many they be but leave them uncertain for their own advantage As to the other branch of the Assertion That your Church is a sound part of the Catholick Church I must beg your Assistance herein to inform me how a particular Church that did voluntarily fall off from the Catholick as yours did and afterward was cut off by Excommunication from it can yet continue to be a sound Member of it this I desire you to clear up to me You must not shuffle with me herein and tell me ye did not fall off from it but from its Errors that 's ridiculous Neither that ye did not fall off from the Catholick but only from the Roman Church that is false for ye then broke Communion from all Visible Orthodox Churches both in the West and East According to my Authors such Churches as yours can be no more Members of the Catholick Church than a dead Bough may be term'd part of that Tree from which 't is separated by Excision The Church is but one and cannot be divided Scindi unitas non potest nec corpus unum discidio compaginis separari divulsis laceratione visceribus in frusta discerpi quicquid a matrice discescerit seorsim vivere spirare non potest substantiam salutis amittit Cyp. de Unit. And accordingly St. Austin Epist 48. ad Madurenses Videtis multos praecisos à rudice Christianae societatis c. de solâ figurâ originis sub Christiano nomine quasi arescentia sarmenta gloriari quas Haereses schismata nominamus But I find when your Party lay claim to be the Catholick Church and would vie for extent and number with the Romanist's then they make their false Musters and spread their wide Lap to several Sects only to acquire a more considerable multitude which when compar'd with one another are indeed found to be so many several Churches distinguish'd not only by Nation and Climate but by Doctrine and Points of Faith Now tho' these be opposite Parties of different Principles yet to enlarge their bounds and to boast of their greatness they rake all those together under the Title of Protestants who have revolted from Rome counting them on their side as if the definition of a Protestant were One that had apostatis'd from the Roman Church and that stands in opposition to it And I find some Protestants to specify as much as Dr. Willet in his Preface to his Synopsis a Protestant is he who professeth the Gospel of Jesus Christ and hath renounc'd the Jurisdiction of the See of Rome And Musculus in locis tit de coenâ I embrace all for Brethren in the Lord however they disagree from or amongst themselves as long as they maintain not the Popish impieties By this Method they patch up an Heterogenial Church consisting of all condemn'd Sects jarring with one another as Eutychians Nestorians Monothelits Sacramentarians Lutherans Calvenists Hugonots Anabaptists with all the numerous Spawn and Increment of fruitful Error this made Dr. Vane very ingenuously to say That the Church hath the property of Heat Congregare Homogenea things of the same kind Disgregare Heterogenea separate things of a different nature casting out of her Communion all sorts of Hereticks but your Church he says hath the property of cold Congregare Heterogenea enfolding under her Name a Miscellany of different Religions rather freezing than uniting them together and accordingly I find Bishop Vsher in a Sermon of his preach'd at Wansted before King James to adopt and matriculate into his Church Greeks Abyssines Aegyptians Jacobites tho' at variance with one another and more at odds with him and tainted with Heresies expresly condemn'd by General Councils For the Aegyptians Aethiopians and Abyssines were cast out of the Church by the Council of Chalcedon as infected with Eutychianism holding but one Will Nature and Operation in Christ much of the same Kidney are the Armenians Jacobites Georgians and Copthites The Christians under the Turk and Persian are tainted with Nestorianism and ejected out of the Church for asserting two Persons in Christ The Grecians Muscovites and Russians according to Athanasius's Creed are excluded from Salvation for denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son on whom Mr. Rogers in his Thirty nine Articles is very Decretory This says he discovereth all of them to be Impious Erroneous from the way of Truth which hold and affirm that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father but not from the Son as this day the Grecians Russians and Muscovites maintain It was a saying of King James the First That they erring about the Holy Ghost had lost it As for the Doctrines of Lutherans and Calvenists I find them formerly condemn'd in Donatus Aerius Vigilantius Xenias Nevatus c. But now after all this I find that neither Schism nor Heresie according to the Sense of your Party hinders one from being a Member of the Church Thus Dr. Field in his first Book of the Church thinks when he says That the departure of Schismaticks is not such but that notwithstanding their Schism they are and remain parts of the Church of God and Luther Serm. de Dominic says That they are frantick who go about to separate the Church from Hereticks This their favourable Opinion of Hereticks and Schismaticks made me imagine they themselves were guilty of both and that they did not exclude them from being Members of the Church lest by that Action they should bar out themselves but how a Schismatick who go's out of the Church or how a Heretick who depraves its Doctrine who has made shipwrack of his Faith and whom we are ordered to shun and avoid can be a Member of the Church I cannot conjecture so I shall keep steddy to St. Hieroms saying contra Lucif Nulla Haeretica Congregatio potest dici Ecclesia Christi Neither can I imagin how Churches opposite one to another disagreeing in weighty points so as not to join in Communion can be said to be Members of the same Catholick Church which is but one Body and has but one Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Name Church is no Name of Separation but of Vnion and Symphony says Chrysost 1 Homil Corinth And accordingly St. Austin told the Donatists who came much nearer to Catholicks than you do If our Communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church for that is but one whichsoever it be In his first Book against them And St. Cyprian in his Seventy sixth Epistle If the Church were on Novatus his side it was not with Cornelius So careful were they to preserve the Unity of the Church This makes them restrain the Church to a Company of Christians united together obeying their Supreme Pastor outwardly professing the same Faith Communicating with the rest of the Members in Publick Worship and Participation of the Blessed Sacrament Hence Austin in his Forty eighth Epistle to the Donatists tells them Nobiscum estis you are with us in
the World The Bishops of Rome then lineally descending from St. Peter have the same Pastoral Authority devolv'd on them by Divine Sanction which St. Peter had over the Church they succeeding him in all those prerogatives which are ordinary and belonging to him as Supreme Bishop for the Government of the Church for eadem Antecessoris Successoris ratio in alicujus maneris obeundi ratione so that Pastoral Praefecture which St. Peter was invested in after his Death passed to his Successor by him handed to the next from him transmitted to the following c. and so by a perpetual descendency embalm'd and convey'd to this present Bishop as being Ordinary successive and indefectible and correspondently I find Eusebius in his Catalogue of Roman Bishops having ranked St. Peter in the Van under the Title of Christianorum Pontifex Primus to reckon Linus for the Second and the rest in their order to Sylvester his Synchronist the one and thirtieth Pope from St. Peter this Catalogue was continued by St. Hierom to Damasus the thirty fifth from St. Peter The Popes of Rome then succeeding St. Peter in the Pontificate are Jure Successionis Heirs to the Sacerdotal Power and Dignities which belonged to St. Peter's Sacred Function as he was Pontifex Christianorum it being but rational that those Supreme Pontificial Royalties which St. Peter for the good of the Universal Church was inrob'd in should still reside in his Successors for the keeping all subordinate Pastors in their duty and for the prevention of Schism which will of necessity arise where there is no Coercive Compulsory Power to quash it Thus in the Old Law there was a Sacerdotal Succession of High-Priests and Aaron who was the Head of the Levitical as St. Peter was the Head of the Christian Hierarchy was succeeded by Eleazer and he by Phineas c. and the Authority which Aaron and his Children was invested with died not with 'em but was propagated to the succeding High-Priests CHAP. II. Concerning Schism and whether the Roman or English Church be guilty of it THE next thing you observe and seem to mislike is my skipping over that part of your Papers which treated of Schism I must confess I did decline handling it being unwilling to enter into so large a Field of Matter and so I am still but because you urge and remind me and seem so fond of what you wrote on that Point as to take it ill that I made a Preterition of it I shall now supply what I omitted then for I perceive it is your temper to imagine what I did not answer to be unanswerable It cannot but be as pleasant to hear you declaim against Schism as to have heard Verres inveighing against Theft or the Gracchi against Sedition You are pleas'd to call it Damnable Schism the Epithet was very proper and now look about you and strictly examine whether like David in his Parly with Nathan you have not through anothers side imprudently transfix'd your self by being found guilty of that Crime you have so severely condemn'd in another I perceive you make use of all your Artifice for your compurgation but all is but fucous and elusive your actual Separation having too much evidence to be deny'd and too much atrocity to be defended I shall now as summarily as I can contract what you write on this Subject and then shape my Reply to it Having defin'd Schism to be a voluntary departure from the Catholick Church you divide it into Paternal and Fraternal the former you say is a renuntiation of Obedience and Communion to and with our Ecclesiastick Governors the latter you term to be a Causless Division of one particular true Church from another then you say your Church is not guilty of Paternal Schism because you perform Obedience to Christ and his Apostles observing all their Rules and Ordinances left in the Scripture then you pay Reverence to the Fathers of the Church and own the Four first General Councils and are willing the differences 'twixt your and other Churches should be decided by their Umperage This you judge sufficient to clear you from Paternal Schism As for Fraternal you very fairly clear your Church of that because you give the Right-hand of Fellowship to so many Churches and Christians in the World Having as you fancy acquitted your Church you bring in your Indictment against the Church of Rome accusing her as notoriously guilty of Schism in both respects First of Paternal by many Doctrines and Practices contrary to the commands of Christ and his Apostles and of the Antient Church such as are Image-worship Transubstantiation c. Then you say she is guilty of Fraternal Schism by her renouncing Communion with all Churches not in subjecton to her denouncing all damn'd who submit not to her by sending Emissaries into all the World labouring to make a Spiritual Conquest of all other Churches c. These things prove the Church of Rome you say guilty of Schism in both acceptations This is a short abridgment of what you write about Schism which I design to answer as soon as I shall have premis'd something concerning the Nature and Danger of that Sin Schism do's essentially consist in deserting the External Communion of Christs Visible Church 't is a most heinous sin as tending to the destruction of Christ's Mystical Body whose Essence consists in the Union of all its substantial parts its ruine in their Division 't is a cutting Christ's Seamless Garment into Shreds as St. Chrysost affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What the bold Souldiers dar'd not to do the Audacious Schismatick performs This sin is of that Malignancy that neither rectitude of Faith nor a Vertuous Life nor Good Works can attone nay Martyrdom it self according to St. Cyprian cannot expiate it Macula ista nec Sanguine abluitur inexpiabilis gravis culpa discordiae nec passione purgatur St. Chrysost says of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing is worse August cont Parmen Lib. 2. says Non esse quicquam gravius Sacrilegio Schismatis The Devil seeing his Idols demolish'd and his Temples deserted by the planting of Christianity found out this Sin out of black Revenge Excogitavit novam fraudem ut sub ipso nominis Christiani titulo fallat incautos haereses invenit Schismata quibus fidem subverteret veritatem corrumperet scinderet unitatem rapit de ecclesia homines says Cyprian in his Book De Vnit Eccles How lucky this Stratagem has been to him the many Rents and Fractions amongst Christians can attest I shall now examine whether the Roman or the Protestant Church be guilty of this damnable Crime and herein I shall regulate my Discourse according to the Definition you have made of it namely That it is a voluntary departure from the Catholick Church and this being an evident Matter of Fact it will be easie to determine which forsook the External Commuion of the Visible Church That the Church of England in the beginning of the
Reign of Henry the Eighth agreed with the Church of Rome and all other Churches in her Communion concerning Faith and Doctrine is undeniable That at his coming to the Crown there was an Actual Church Government settled by a long continuance in Antient Possession is undebatable That Protestants alter'd the then own'd Faith and brake the Bands of that Government is manifest to the World Both the Time when and Occasion why can be assign'd Moreover That the first Protestants were born of Catholick Parents and Originally in the Communion of the Catholick Church is unquestionable and that they as desirous of Innovation voluntarily departing from that Church renouncing those points which were Principles of Unity both in Faith and Government ipso facto became Schismaticks is easily prov'd for Schismaticos non fides diversa facit sed communionis disrupta societas says St. Hierom on Matt. 11. Now how Rome should be guilty of Schism which did never withdraw from any known Christian Society or depart from the Communion of any former Church with which before she held Communion I cannot possibly apprehend she continu'd fix'd where she was as the Pillar and Firmament of Truth All Hereticks and Schismaticks go out of her this going out is an antient note of Falshood Truth being elder than Error They went forth from us 1 John 2. 19. And certain that went from us Acts 15. 14. and accordingly St. Austin 3. tract Epist Johan says Omnes Haeretici omnes Schismatici ex nobis exierunt i. e. ex Ecclesia exeunt And de Symb. Lib. 1. Haereses omnes de Ecclesia exierunt tanquam sarmenta inutilia de vite praecisa ipsa autem manet in sua radice And in this Case the Rule of Optatus is very observable Videndum est quis in radice cum toto Orbe manserit quis for is exierit Lib. primo Now as for Luther and Calvin when they had voluntarily departed from the Roman Church they separated from all the Christian-Churches in the World and consequently from the Catholick Church for they did not adjoyn themselves in Communion of Sacraments to any Christian Church which was existent before their revolt from the Roman there being not one Church to be found upon Earth antecedent to their Apostacy to which they did apply themselves after their defection but they stood alone till they had acquir'd more Revolters out of the Roman Communion this is most clear and confess'd by themselves Luther in his Preface to King Henry says of himself Solus primo eram and Calvin to the same effect in his Epistle to Melancthon Absurdum est postquam discessionem a toto orbe facere coacti sumus inter ipsa principia alios ab aliis dissilire So this New Church at the first was but one Person which by the accession of more Schismaticks grew numerous being protected by the Secular against the Spiritual Power But to prove your departure from the Roman Communion to be unvoluntary and consequently not Schismatical according to your definition of Schism you cite a saying which you say was King James's Non fugimus sed fugamur I must confess I never could be inform'd how the truth of these Words could be made out for Protestants before their Excommunication having made a wilful breach may be said to be Fugitivi rather than Fugati and accordingly their Expulsion may not so properly be term'd a driving them out of the Church as their Punishment for going out they having before deserted the Church of their own accord So she had too much reason to make use of her Spiritual Weapons for they by their Novel Doctrine and Schismatical Separation having first receded from her and by way of anti-Anti-communion rais'd a new party of Pretended Reform'd Christians distinct from the general Body of the Catholick Church having instituted new Rites and moulded new Articles of Faith contrary not only to the Roman but to the Faith of all particular Churches then known immediately before they began their Separation and refusing to Communicate and joyn with her in Publick Liturgy and Participation of Sacraments disowning her Faith and Power to which they had submitted for above 900 Years and persisting obstinate in their Opinions and Separation the Church having with much patience attended their return and having try'd all Methods that might seem conducive to their amendment was enforc'd at last to proceed against them according to her Canons by a just Excommunication eliminating them from her Bosom for their Schism as St. Paul did the Infamous Corinthian for his Incest who by the heinous offence gave the first cause of his Excision So 't is manifest that the orignal departure was theirs and accordingly St. Hierom in his Comments Epistle to Titus avers Haeretici in semetipsos sententiam dicunt suo arbitrio ab Ecclesia recedendo And Cyprian in his Fortieth Epistle Paenas quas meruerunt pependerent ut a nobis non ejecti ultro se ejicerent de Ecclesiâ se expellerent For the Church forsakes no Person neither doth she eject any but like a tender Mother cherishes her Children in her Vital and Fotive Breast unless such as wilfully separate themselves by their obstinate adhesion to Heretical Doctrines or by persevering in a Flagitious course of Life so as she is not now the hindrance of their Reunion so neither was she at first the occasion of their Separtion Protestants well knowing that their formal Schism can neither be deny'd nor maintain'd find themselves oblig'd to acknowledge the Matter of Fact but to blanch and candy their Crime pretend to have had a just Cause given them for their Separation and upon this supposition accuse the Church of Rome of causal Schism This is what I conceive Dr. Stillingfleet to mean when he says The Church of Rome imposing unlawful Conditions of Communion it was necessary not to Communicate with her Bishop Lawd is very clear herein The cause of Schism is yours says he for you thrust us from you because we call'd for Truth and Redress of Abuses As for Abuses if any were crept in they ought to have been redress'd and this is properly Reformation but to alter receiv'd Articles of Faith establish'd by Councils that is Heresie But I could not be satisfied what truth it was that the Bishop says they call'd for I am fully convinc'd that in the beginning of Henry the Eighth's Reign our English Church did retain as a faithful depositary all those Sacred Truths which Gregory the Great convey'd unto us by St. Austin who I do fully believe did convert this Nation to the true Faith establishing his Doctrine with Miracles which Doctrine is still preserv'd unstain'd by the Catholicks of this Kingdom So I could not understand what the Bishop meant by calling for Truth neither could I tell when or by whom it was call'd for I must confess Henry the Eighth who open'd the Sluces to let in all the ensuing Mischief did call and that Vocally but not for Truth
His first call was for a fresh Bedfellow that was Carnal then he call'd for innocent Blood that was Tyrannical his other call was for Church-Goods and Lands that was a Sacrilegious call he had no scruples concerning the truth of his Religion neither alter'd he any thing of it but to gratifie his Lust and Covetousness Nullâ fere in re a fide Catholica discessit praeterquam libidinis luxuriae causâ as Sanders affirms of him And accordingly he ordered his Son to be brought up in the Catholick Religion excepting the Title of Head of the Church Edward the Sixth was too young to call for Truth he had most reason to call for it being early infected with the Zuinglian Heresie contrary to his Fathers Will by the Sacrilegious Protector who did call indeed but it was for the remains of the Goods of the Impoverish'd Church he likewise call'd for false Teachers to dilate the Gangren Martin Bucer a Dominican Peter Martyr a Canon-Regular Ochinus a Capuchin Apostate Monks and Sacerdotes Vxorati from such we were not like to have Truth who not only fell from the Catholick Church but flagitiously violated their Oath of Continency for which by the then establish'd Law they lay obnoxious to an infamous Death I shall say nothing of Queen Elizabeth she being a Woman and wholly unqualified to meddle with Church Affairs and to tamper in Articles of Faith neither shall I say any thing of the succeeding Princes who found the Schism begun and Religion alter'd to their Hands I know very well that in this case Truth is the Pretext but that is no more than what is in the Mouth of every Sectary This is the usual Mask to hide the ugly Face of a foul Action which without so fine a cover would affright those deluded Souls that are cheated with its beatiful Paint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there must be a plausible glittering Title a winning Frontispiece to a bad Enterprize but if the Origine of this unhappy Schism be examin'd we shall find that Revenge Haughtiness impure Flames and desire of Plunder were the Springs that mov'd the first Machin and nothing at all of Truth I do not find that Henry the Eighth did ever recant the Book he writ in defence of the Roman Church he hated both Lutheranism and Zuinglianism and fell out with the Church rather for its Booty and Prey than for its Doctrine and this was Tyndals Sense of it in his Letter to Frith where writing of King Henry the Eighth's intention against the Pope and Clergy saith thus Fox pag. 987. I smell a Council to be taken little for the Clergies profit in time to come but you must understand that it is not out of pure Heart and for love of Truth but to avenge himself and to eat the Whores Flesh and drink the Marrow of her Bones which because 't is somewhat enigmatically express'd Fox is pleas'd in the Margent thus to expound eating the Whores Flesh is to spoyl the Popes Church only for the Prey and Spoyl thereof not Religion Bishop Bramhall is very honest herein As for the suppression of Monasteries says he we fear that covetousness had a great Oar in the Boat and that sundry of the Principal Actors had a greater aim at the Goods of the Church than at the good of it Having premis'd thus much I shall now take notice how you acquit your Church of Schism even according to your own Distinction and Division of it You say she is not guilty of that Crime because she owns and performs Obedience to Christ and his Apostles Then because she pays Reverence to the Antient Fathers of the Church Thirdly Because she owns the first four General Councils c. This you think enough to clear her of Schism whereas 't is nothing at all to the purpose being a meer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and besides the Cushion you define Paternal Schism to be a renuntiation of Obedience and Communion to and with our Ecclesiastick Governours so how do any of these Reasons clear you of it You are accus'd by Catholicks of a voluntary departure out of the Catholick Church of a defection from the Government of your Occidental Patriarch under whose Spiritual Prefecture this Nation was for several hundred Years From this your Spiritual Governor you have revolted renouncing his Authority look'd on as of Divine Institution this being your Accusation the Reasons alledg'd for your acquittance are too weak and dilute for such a purpose Now tho' you come off with a scratch'd Face concerning your Paternal I must needs say you come off very fairly with your Fraternal Schism because you so courteously give the Right-hand of Fellowship to so many Churches and herein your obliging carriage is highly to be commended you extending your kindness to Lutheran Calvenist or Hugonot and indeed to any Church that will but joyn with you in separating from and defaming the Catholick The next thing I have to do is to see how you prove Rome guilty of Schism and the Method you take herein I found to be as improper as that by which you would clear your own Church of it For instead of proving Rome separating it self from any visible Society of Christians with whom she formerly held Communion which is properly Schism you accuse her of false Doctrine which Accusation could you be able to make good it would prove her to be rather Erroneous than Schismatical But I shall now descend to the Examination of those three Particulars by which you would prove your self not guilty of Schism The first is because you own and perform Obedience unto Christ and his Apostles and observe all the Rules and Ordinances they have left you in the Scriptures But how you can pretend to pay full Obedience to Christ and disobey his Spouse whom he enjoyns you to hear under penalty of being reputed an Ethnick or how you can fancy to be united to him when you fall off from his Mystical Body the Church of which he is the Head I know not or how you can be said to follow all the Rules of the Apostles when they recommend Tradition and you reject it when they tell you that the Church is the Pillar and Firmament of Truth and you make her Apostatical I could instance in many particulars how counter you run to the Scripture you so much pretend to but I shall wave them and only tell you that it is an unwarrantable way to fall off from the Church and then appeal to that Scripture which commands you to obey the Church yet this is your practice when you dispute with Catholicks but when you have to do with Sectaries who plead Scripture against you then you have recourse to Fathers and Tradition using the same Arguments against them as we do against you It was long ago observ'd by the Fathers That Hereticks were great pretenders to the Scriptures backing their false Opinions with it Omnes Haeretici ex sacris Scripturis falsas atque
scudo della divina protettione però con ogni in trepidezza proteggete le ragioni della veritiera Religione à Gloria di Dio la cui persona sostenete à benefizio della sua chiesa che la vostra autoreuol difesa supplichevolmente implora Ben sapendo che in rimuneratione de' vostri gloriosi sudori riceverete nel secolo venturo messe granita O che applausi canori u ' assordaranno che Trionfi festosi ui esaltaranno che diademi ingioellati ui coronaranno che splendori abbaglianti vi glorificaranno ma io mi reprimo perche sò ch'l vostro ardente zelo non è bisognoso di stimoli però non aggiongerò d'auuantagio è la vostra opera natîa il proteggere le cose diuine O Prencipe Santo come valor con Religiosità accoppiate come brauura con pietà temprate Quinci nasce the S. D. M. hà voluto ampliar i confini della vostra grandezza Quinci è che à dispetto di tutti gli sforzi degli huomini tristi Ad onta dell'Inferno scatenato siate asceso al Trono de' vostri Illustri Antenati fermata immobilmente la corona sù la vostra testa Reale e tutta la malignità de' nemichi vostri non ad altro hà servito che ad augumentar la chiarezza della vostra sorgente gloria Indarno ordiscona trame e fanno empie congiure per distornar gli irretrattabili consigli dell'alta Providenza Cosi stà scritto nel infallibil libro nel fatal volume del Destino In vano folle humana forza per impedir l'esecutione degli eterni decreti giostra con incontrastabil braccio di Dio Gli solo tien in sua balîa le sorti e le dispensa come gli aggrada Corrono doue gli le inuia le Corone gli scettri ed gli ostri Iddio Arbitro della fortuna e Regnator de' Regi conceda a V. Maestà in tutte le sue grandi imprese felice riuscita E Voglia che ella impadronita degli animi de' sudditi Monarcheggi molti anni in disarmata pace con imperio assoluto sopra i cuori portando frà noi ll secolo d'oro Scusate Bella Reina l'ardir della mia penna e gradite questa picciola dichiaratione de' miei ossequii e permettete che con questo mezzo mi s' apra l'adito à vostra gratia feconda di ventura Mentre io pregandole il colmo di quei maggiori contenti che sono da lei piu ardentemente desiderati con profondissima somessione abbassandomi mele inchino Di Vostra Sacra Maestà Humilissimo Divotissimo Suddito Vassallo Guglielmo Clenche AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER Courteous Reader I Am to acquaint you by way of a short Preface that the Foundation of this Book was laid some Years elaps'd occasion'd originally by an Intercourse of some Papers which pass'd betwixt a Protestant Divine and my self which thinking that he would not so soon have interrupted having promis'd me a satisfactory Answer I continued my Indagation not only for my better Information but likewise to qualifie my self for to mould a Reply in case he had comply'd with his Promise But hearing no more from him and finding in me a particular curiosity to penetrate deeper into the knowledge of this important Point I found it absolutely necessary to consult with the Fathers whom my Opponent had in his Papers to me plentifully cited to avoid the frequent imposture of false imperfect Quotations and to acquire their true German Sense concluding that those great Luminaries of the Church could not write both for and against the same thing but that this their imaginary contradiction was engender'd either by the Interest or Weakness or depravity of their Readers picking out here and there some words which might seem to countenance their Opinion without weighing the scope of the Author or examining the precedaneous and succeeding lines Having given the Fathers a due Discussion I apply'd my self to the Modern Authors of both sides and finding them very warm the one in maintaining the other in impugning this Article and perceiving their Books larded with Citations out of the same Authors I assum'd a Resolution to find out on which side the Cheat lay and so to detect it well knowing the great importance of this Point clearly containing the irreversible Monarchic Government which Christ himself instituted investing St. Peter with it as a platform of Politie for the succeeding Ages of the Church to imitate From this Model Protestants have not only revolted but with opprobrious and reviling Infamations asperse and blacken it not only to make it and those who submit to it odious to the Populace but likewise to justifie their Schismatical Defection from St. Peters See Having perus'd the chiefest Propugnators of the Protestant Party I found my Opponent had very plentifully glean'd from them presenting me as it were with a Synopsis of them which he judging Irrefragrable made me more desirous to Probe it For indeed I had never imbarqu'd my self in so inconsiderable an Employ as to trouble my self about subverting any particular Error he might solitarily be found guilty of but the reason that induc'd me to confute him was to involve those Authors of whom he had borrow'd the substance of his Writings in his Confutation So I would not have any one fancy as if I guided thereto by some Pique had whet my Pen against one particular Person for I am in perfect Charity with him and heartily wish he may live to see his mistakes in Religion one may detest the Heresie and yet at the same time affect the Person infected with it according to what St. Chrysost affirms De Phocâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now as to my writing this Book I was in a manner enforc'd to Compose it for having formerly made some imperfect Essays on this Subject which were communicated to others I found my self now oblig'd to write more compleatly to prevent that injury to my Name which possibly might have been offer'd after my Death by their being made publick What I have here offer'd you is as well perform'd as my Abilities would permit so I am not asham'd to own it and what is here wanting shall be supply'd in my Second Book In the interim I am to beg your candid Censure and Pardon for the imperfections of a Work which was begun solely for my private satisfaction but having how finish'd it relying on your Benignity I divulge it for your benefit And I shall be heartily glad and think my self sufficiently rewarded if it becomes serviceable to you by confirming you if a Catholick or by convincing you if a Protestant And so Farewell THE CONTENTS PART I. CHAP. I. COntaining the Introduction and concerning St. Peter's True Successor Pag. 1 CHAP. II. Concerning Schism and whether the Roman or English Church be guilty of it p. 8 CHAP. III. Concerning the Respect which Catholicks pay to Images
p. 27 CHAP. IV. Of Transubstantiation p. 34 CHAP. V. Of Communion in one kind p. 43 CHAP. VI. Concerning Publick Prayers in Latin and of several other Points p. 50 CHAP. VII Concerning Protestants objecting Errors to the Church of Rome The Authors Apologie for himself His Advice to the Protestant Divine with some other Particulars p 56 PART II. CHAP. I. The Preface to St. Peter's Supremacy and whether St. Andrew knew Christ's Divinity before St. Peter p. 67 CHAP. II. The difference betwixt Nathaniel's and St. Peter's Confession of Christ and in what Sense St. Peter is said to be Os Apostolorum p. 74 CHAP. III. Whether the other Apostles knew Christs Divinity as soon as St. Peter Concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. John c. And concerning the Devils knowledge of Christ p. 86 CHAP. IV. Concerning Christs Reply to St. Peter's Answer Whether the Bishop of Rome's Supremacy be grounded on Scripture Of Christs being the Rock and St. Peter's being the Rock Of St. Austin's Interpretation of Super hanc Petram p. 95 CHAP. V. Concerning St. Peter's Faith or Confession being the Rock And how those Fathers who Interpret that to be the Rock Exclude not his Person p. 109 CHAP. VI. Concerning the other Apostles being Foundations Of Peters new Name given him by Christ Peter the Rock of the Church Of Origens Interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all one The Inconvenience of Expounding Christ to be the Rock in this place p. 117 PART III. CHAP. I. Of the Keys That they denote Supreme Power Whether Sobna were High-Priest Of the High-Priests and Kings of the Jews Whether the Jewish Kings were Supreme in Church Affairs The differenoe betwixt the Jewish and Christian Priesthood p. 133 CHAP. II. Concerning the Sacerdotal and Regal Head Of Christian Emperors intermedling with Church Matters The Fathers Opinion of it Particular Emperors who are falsly affirm'd by Protestants to Act as Heads of the Church Of our English Kings Of Henry VIII Of this our present King James II. p. 144 CHAP. III. Of the Keys In what Sense St. Peter may be said to answer for the Rest That what Christ reply'd was directed immediately to Peter only In what Sense 't was extendible to the Rest How the other Apostles may be said to share in the Keys An Account of the Fathers who acknowledge St. Peter Paramount in the Keys The Exposition of St. Matt. 18. v. 18. and of St. John 20. v. 21. How the Church receiv'd the Keys in St. Austin's Sense Whether a Minister of the Protestant Church has the Power of the Keys With Advice to him p. 156 CHAP. IV. Of St. Peter's being call'd Satan And of his Denial p. 171 CHAP. V. The Introduction to Pasce Oves meas Of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherein St. Peter exceeded the Rest as Pastor Whether Pasce Oves meas were an Exhortation or a Commission Why St. Peter was sorry for Christs thrice asking him The Reason of the trine Interrogation That the foregoing words were spoken immediately to St. Peter only p. 176 CHAP. VI. That St. Peter's surpassing love to Christ was the Foundation of his Prelation That Peter by vertue of Pasce Oves meas had Vniversal Jurisdiction Several nice Distinctions answered That the words Oves meas included the other Apostles That St. Peter was the only Supreme Pastor With an Apostrophe to him p. 190 CHAP. I. Containing the Introduction and concerning St. Peter's True Successor SIR I Had no sooner perused the Papers you sent me but by way of a Letter I imparted unto you my Sense of 'em and withal acquainted you that I would answer ' em But having at that time Imbarqu'd my self in a particular Study which my Genius warps to with a stronger propension than to Controversal Points in Divinity I could not prevail with my relucting Fancy to relinquish it and reassume Polemics till I had conducted it to a Completion But I need not make use of any excusive words for this my long silence matters of so high importance as I am now about to handle ought to be maturely perpended and not spurred on with a hurrying precipitancy However if the adjournment of this my rejoynder hath seem'd to you too long protracted I am content to afford you a proportion'd consideration for your forbearance which you shall find lapp'd up in these Papers As for Disputation I am not so much a forreigner to my self as to be ignorant of its being an imployment not only discordant to my Temper but surmounting my Abilities requiring a richer Exchequer of Learning than I can pretend to So I would not have you figure to your self that I catch at the name of a Disputant I yield that Dignity to those whose politer Temper and more embellish'd Parts entitle 'em to that Honor. But if my Talent did excell this way I should very unwillingly grapple with so topping an Antagonist as you are It might seem presumption in me who am but a Laic to enter the List and take up the Gantlet against so eminent a Controvertist But that which makes me more backward herein is my fear you being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of incurring the displeasure of the rest of your Coat who like the Bells in Joves Dodonean-Grove hang so close together that if one be touch'd all of 'em sound this inconvenience I have fully surrounded so I shall not here so much pretend to oppose you as to defend my self which in Honour I am oblig'd to do And I hope hereby I shall not disgust any Ingenuous Person for you having answered me so briskly and so convincingly as you fancy'd I could do no less than try whether your or my Opinion were erroneous and so expiscate the Truth which I find not to float on the Surface of the Well but to dive very deep according to the saying of Pyrrhon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Truth lies at the bottom It will then be my present employ to examine those Papers which I composed both for the Satisfaction and Defence of my Brother and withal to bring your Answer to a strict Disquisition this is my whole proponiment my pretensions aspiring to no more than what every Christian ought to have a short Scheme and Diagram of his Religion which is what St. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such a Platform of Sound Doctrine is attainable by one of the Laity if he will bend his Mind to the Acquisition of it and not indulge himself in a lazy desidious acquiescency For as St. Chrysost affirms Serm. de Sigillis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every Soul hath in it self the Seed of Divinity Now if it ever were necessary to possess such an abridgment of wholesome Principles 't is much more so in this humorous inquisitive Age which presents us with so many varieties of false Opinions dress'd up in the semblance of Truth that if a discerning Circumspection be not made use of the fallacy may pass
undiscover'd and whoever considers the vast differences amongst those who are in the attire of Christians their various and discrepant Judgments in Doctrinal Points and ritual Ceremonies and with what ardour every Sect endeavours to defend its Opinion and with what acrimony it opposes that of anothers must needs judge it absolutely necessary to purchase so much knowledge as to be able to shield himself from those many impostures which Prestigiators in Religion obtrude on credulous Persons under the livery of saving sound Doctrines This made Theoph. call false Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dicers or Coggers of Dice alluding to St. Paul's Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This setting topping the Die even in Temporals is pernicious enough being able to decoct and ruine the most flourishing Estate but in Eternals it is far more exitial and destructive as much as Spirituals transcend Temporals It will therefore highly concern every one to guard himself from the grand cheat of being impos'd on in matters of Religion and considering there is so much cozenage in the World to be cautious what Articles he admits as Sterling measuring his Faith by a sure Standard which is the Method I design to take in my ensuing Discourse not devoting my self to any Private Persons Opinion or Dictates but steering my course by the unerring Pharos of Antiquity The first Objection you make against my Treatise of St. Peter's Supremacy is That if his Monarchic Power were suppos'd the Bishop of Rome 's Succession in that Dignity could not be inferr'd any more than the Primates of Antioch c. This Opinion of yours I look on as erroneous for those Primates succeeded him not in the full ampltitude of his Power but in that particular Diocess Succession to any in his whole right being only to him who leaves his place either by voluntary Resignation Deposition or natural Death whereas St. Peter tho he was at Antioch for some time yet he invested in the High Priest-hood quitted that place Vivus valensque and with his Person transplanted all the Pontificial Dignities from thence to Rome having upon his departure from Antioch subrogated in his place either Evodius or Ignatius This his removal from thence to Rome is asserted by St. Chrysost in Inscript Act. Apostol 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is one of the Prerogatives of our City of Antioch to have had first the Prince of the Apostles for its Teacher for it was no more than fit that that City in which the name of Christians was first heard should receive the first Shepherd of the Apostles but when we had him for our Teacher we did not keep him all his life-time but we deliver'd him over to the Royal City of Rome This clearly manifests his relinquishing Antioch and his Transmigration to Rome where he settled and fixed his Cathedra and concluded his Life by a most glorious Martyrdom so that the Bishop of Rome who succeeded St. Peter dying there and not the Bishop of Antioch which place he had abandon'd inherits the Pontificate and Prefecture of the Universal Church as being his apparent Heir Hence St. Hierom in his 58th Epistle ad Damasum calls him Successor Piscatoris and in the Council of Ephesus Parte Secunda Pope Coelestine is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Successor and Vicar of St. Peter and accordingly Rome by the Fathers is called St. Peter 's See as in St. Augustin cont literas Petil. Cathedra quid tibi fecit mali in quâ Petrus sedit in quâ hodie Anastasius sedet And likewise St. Hierom in his 57th Epistle ad Damasum Ego Beatitudini tuae id est Cathedrae Petri communione consocior Suitable to which is that of St. Cyprian Navigare audent ad Petri Cathedram ad Ecclesiam Principalem But that which gives me full satisfaction in this point is the Custom of the Fathers who in their enumeration of the Bishops of Rome place St. Peter first as the Author of that Succession some of them joyn St. Paul with him Irenaeus reckons the Catalogue from St. Peter and Paul to Pope Eleutherius Eusebius likewise to Sylvester Optatus from St. Peter to Siricius St. Austin from St. Peter to Anastasius Tertullian from the same to Anicetus and demands of the Hereticks of his time a List of their Bishops Irenaeus having begun a Roll of Popes succeeding one the other adds Per hanc Successionem confundi omnes Haereticos and St. Austin contra Epistolam Manichei confesses that this Succession of Bishops from St. Peter was one of the Reasons which kept him in the Catholick Church 'T is observeable That when the Fathers design to give the true Succession and descendency from St. Peter as he was the Christian High-Priest they do not enumerate the Antiochian but the Roman Succession Not placing St. Peter first then Evodius or Ignatius Bishops of Antioch but first St. Peter then Linus c. Bishops of Rome These things duly perpended I could not but wonder how B. Bramhal should question how the Bishop of Rome came to be St. Peter's Heir ex asse to the Exclusion of his Elder Brother the Bishop of Antioch I never read says he that the Church was govern'd by the Law of Gavelkind that the youngest must inherit Here he affecting to shew some sportive Wit seem'd to me to talk more like a Lawyer than like a Divine But now you pretend to give a Reason why the Bishop of Rome could not succeed St. Peter in his Dignity affirming That singular and personal Priviledges are not derivable to Successors herein you are certainly right for Privilegium personale cum persona moritur but then on the other side you are as much in an Error in fancying what was spoken by our Saviour to him was delivered as to a Private Person and to terminate with him You had pleas'd me very well had you mention'd what those singular Priviledges were that were so solely affix'd to St. Peter's Person as not to be inherited by his Successors Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram c. was none of them nor Confirma Fratres nor Pasce oves meas Cardinal Bellarmine gives this account of them Quaedam dicuntur Petro pro se tantum ut vade post me Satana Ter me negabis quaedam ut uni ex fidelibus ut si peccaverit in te frater quaedam pro se Successoribus ratione officii Pastoralis ut Pasce oves meas c. This Pastoral Privilege conferr'd on him was not Personal but transient to his Successors being granted him as a Publick Person so not to expire with him but to survive in his descendents For the Office of a Pastor being ordinary ought to be continued as long as there be Sheep Quamdiu permanet ratio institutionis Christi tamdiu etiam res instituta necessario permanere debet the Pastorship which was instituted for the good of the Flock ought to have an equal duration with it which is to the consummation of
Baptism and the Creed c. In ipsa Ecclesiâ Catholicâ non estis They believ'd more than what you esteem as Fundamental yet were out of the Pale of the Catholick Church In this Church is Unity of Faith Harmony in Doctrine Conformity in Administration of the Sacraments Uniformity in her Liturgy and Ceremonies all the World over To distinguish this Church from all Heretical Sects the Apostles in their Creed the Antient Fathers in their Writings gave her the Sir-name of Catholick This very name seem'd so emphatical to St. Austin that he reckons it as a principal reason next to the Succession of Popes from St. Peter that kept him in the true Church Cont. Epist Manichaei Tenet ipsum Catholicae nomen quod non sine causa inter tam multas Haereses sic ipsa Ecclesia sola obtinuit ut cum omnes Haeretici se Catholicos dici velint Quaerenti tamen peregrino alicui ubi ad Catholicam conveniatur nullus Haereticorum vel Basilicam suam vel domum audeat ostendere From this place you may evidently see That it was the humor of the Hereticks of those Days as well as it is now to affect the Title of Catholick but this was but an usurpation in them and so 't is with you He says the Greeks call'd this Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod per torum orbem terrarum diffunditur And according to this sense it is true Hereticks may be called Catholicks for they are disseminated all over the World But in his Fourth Book against Cresconius he makes this distinction betwixt a Real Catholick and an Heretical one Catholicks says he are the same every where and Hereticks are different Hence 't is that a Lutheran will not Communicate with a Greek nor a Greek with a Lutheran nor a Calvinist with a Muscovite nor an Anabaptist with an Armenian or an Hugonot with a Georgian vice versa whereas a Catholick Communicates with a Catholick in any part of the World as Members of the same Body and as having the same Unity of Faith as Irenaeus affirms in his first Book C. 3. The Church spread over the whole World having receiv'd the true belief keeps it and practiseth it as if it dwelt but in one House and had but one Soul and Heart Neque hae quae in Germania sunt fundatae Ecclesiae aliter credunt neque hae quae in Iberis sunt neque hae quae in Celtis neque hae quae in Oriente Aegypto Lybia Thus it was at first when Christian Churches were united and untainted with Heresie for the Apostles taught the self same Doctrine wherever they went and all those various Churches seated in divers Kingdoms and Regions differed only in Situation not in Doctrine Hence from their Unity of Faith they may be called One Church as St. Chrysost in his Comments on first Corinth affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There ought to be but one Church in the World although it be divided into many places Now 't is evident that of all Orthodox Churches an Union of which constitutes the Catholick Rome as being the See of St. Peter the Prince of the Apostles was the chief and upon that account though Hierusalem and Antioch were somewhat before her in time she was before them in Dignity Hence by Irenaeus she is called the Greatest and most Glorious by St. Cyprian the Principle Church and St. Austin says 't is Arrogancy to deny her the Primacy and that she had obtain'd the Primacy frustra Haereticis latrantibus Hence it is that by way of Eminency she is call'd the Catholick Church including all the latitude of her Communion of which she is the Center the Mother the Mistress the Radix Matrix Hence 't is that the Fathers promiscuously use Catholick and Roman as Synonima's as I shall hereafter demonstrate out of them CHAP. III. Concerning the Respect which Catholicks pay to Images I Shall next employ my self in taking a Prospect of those Points for maintaining which you would prove Rome notoriously guilty of Paternal Schism and this I do the more willingly because you stand highly guilty of a false Representing them The First is Image-Worship as you phrase it which you have improv'd and sublimated to that height as to make it pass for Idolatry This is done to render your selves acceptable and us odious to the Populace as Violators of the first Commandment 'T is but rendring Pesel which properly signifies Sculptile to be an Image and then boldly affirming us Idolators to bring all the places in Scripture and Fathers against the Idolatry of the Gentiles and the business is done But those places are indeed nothing to your purpose they only importing a Prohibition of giving Soveraign Honor due to God to an Idol whereas you are to prove out of Scripture That 't is unlawful to give a Relative Honor to the Picture of Christ for his sake But by this Action you do not only shew your self defamatory but ungrateful to the Roman Church which when this Nation lay really in the Pollutions of Idolatry took compassion of us and by planting the Gospel here rescu'd us from that Calamitous Condition This confounding Image-worship with Idolatry is certainly a most fraudulent and malitious Method they being quite different things the one is an Honorary Relative Respect to the thing represented which is Sacred But the other is a Worshipping a Creature an Idol a Devil or false God in some dark Representation giving it Divine Incommunicable Attributes and in the Imagination exercising supreme Devotion to it for to those Idols by Magical Conjuration they annexed an Evil Spirit to do Wonders and thereby to extort Divine Worship from the cheated People hence they are often call'd Gods as in the Fifth of Daniel they pray'd their Gods of Silver Brass Iron Wood Stone Now to ascribe this heinous Sin to the Catholick Church is highly injurious Idolatry being the blackest Sin a Church can be spotted with for it doth not only thereby cease to be a true Christian Church but it becomes worse than a Jewish Synagogue and I had rather turn Jew or Turk than Idolater There is no Question but that Idolatry is a sufficient excuse for any one to fall off from a Church that is tainted with it But if this were the reason of your falling off from Rome the pretence was malicious and forg'd and Mr. Thorndike who well knew what Idolatry was will tell you in his Just weight Cap. primo his Opinion herein whose words are these Should the Church of England declare that the change which we call Reformation is grounded upon this supposition I must then acknowledge that we are Schismaticks But I shall now make a short Discussion of this Point according to the Definition of the Council of Trent which I find to take all care imaginable to obviate any accusation herein the Words being as so many Characters to distinguish the respect paid to an Image from Idolatry First the
Vinum Eucharistiae ante sacram invocationem adorandae Trinitatis Panis erat Vinum merum peractâ invocatione Panis fit corpus Christi Vinum Sanguis Christi And in like manner Theoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bread is chang'd into the very Body of Christ Now that we might not disbelieve this stupendous change because 't is supernatural he tells us how it is effected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Bread is chang'd into the Flesh of our Lord by arcane words by the Mystical Bendiction by the accession of the Holy Ghost on John 6. St. Chrysost in his 83 Hom. on Matt. says That this change is not a work of Human Power but Christ himself performs it He Sanctifies and Transmutes it That Christ who as soon as he will'd or spoke a thing by his Omnipotency effected it as soon as he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will the Leaper was cleans'd as soon as he said Lazare exi foris he caus'd and enabl'd him to come forth as soon as he Commanded the Devils to dislodge out of the Demoniacks he drave them out as soon as he ordered the Winds to hold their Breath he caus'd a Calm as soon as he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he rais'd the Virgin to Life The same Almighty Jesus at his last Supper having taken Bread into his Hands and having said Hoc est Corpus meum did by vertue and energy of those Operative Divine Words incomprehensively ineffably change and transelement it into his Body and the like concerning the Wine This adorable Mystery I shall not in the least question because I cannot comprehend it that is to incur Nicodemus his Error neither will I disbelieve it because 't is above the strength of Nature that was the weakness of Zaoharias but with the Blessed Virgin I will rely on the word of God who neither can deceive nor be deceiv'd Fiat secundum verbum tuum firmly without any diffidence by a generous and vivid Faith acquiescing in the veracity of Christ his words Cum Christus ipse affirmet ac dicat hoc est corpus meum quis deinceps audeat dubitare ac eodem dicente hic est Sanguis meus quis dubitet ac dicat non esse Sanguinem Aquam aliquando mutavit in Vinum quod est Sanguini propinquum non erit dignus cui credamus quod Vinum in Sanguinem transmutâsset Quare cum omni certitudine Corpus Sangninem sumamus nam sub specie Panis datur tibi Corpus sub specie Vini Sanguis says St. Cyril in his Mystag Catechism Which words are as clear for Transubstantiation as any thing in the Council of Lateran or Trent Now as I do undoubtedly believe that when Christ spake these words they had their effect as soon as they were uttered and for this I have St. Chrysost Authority who affirms That Christ when he said this is my Body made it his Body So with the same Father I do believe when a lawful Priest of the Catholick Church pronounces the same Consecratory words that they have the same effect Sacra ipsa oblatio sive illum Petrus sive Paulus sive cujusvis meriti sacerdos offerat eadem est quam dedit Christus Discipulis quamque sacerdotes modo conficiunt nihil habet ista quam illa minus cur id quia non sanctificant homines sed Christus qui illam antea sacraverat in his 2. Hom. on 2 Epist Timothy I know this Doctrine is much oppos'd by our Adversaries and they fancy that we are sufficiently confuted by having it try'd at the Tribunal of our Senses but this is not at all prevalent with me for Christ never intended that this supernatural change should be subjected to our External Senses for had it been visible to them it could not have been matter of Faith which is properly argumentum rerum non apparentium It is observable that Christ before he wrought this invisible Miracle had done many visible ones to convince his Disciples of his Divine Power they having imbibed that belief could never rationally doubt of his Veracity or Ability in performance of what he had said knowing him to be Omnipotent Ipse Dominus testificatur nobis quod Corpus suum accipiamus sanguinem quid debemus de ejus fide testificatione dubitare says St. Ambrose Christ then willing to exercise their and our Faith in this Mystery and at the same time to free us from eating Flesh and drinking Blood in their proper Species which we naturally abhor was pleas'd to give us them Clothed Apparell'd under another Species of Bread and Wine Quod occulis apparet species sunt visibles panis vini quod sub speciebus iisdem fides nostra non sensus aut ratio comprehendit id verum Christi corpus And accordingly Theoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore God indulgently condescends to us and preserves the Species of Bread and Wine but transelements them into the strength of his Flesh and Blood There is no question but that the Fathers were Men of Sense and as acute and subtle Persons as any of our Adversaries yet in judging of this Mystery they admitted not their Senses as Umpires Credamus ubique Deo nec repugnemus ei etiamsi sensui cogitationi absurdum esse videtur quod dicit superat sensum rationem nostram sermo ipsius verba Domini falsa esse nequeunt sensus noster saepe fallitur quoniam ergo ille dixit hoc est Corpus meum nulla teneamur ambiguitate sed credamus says St. Chrysostom in his 60 Orat. ad Pop. Antioch and some of them advise us not to judge of this great Mystery either by our tast or by our sight being of an higher nature than to have such an inquest to sit on 't Non est panis etiamsi gustus panem esse sentiat sed esse corpus Christi vinum quod a nobis conspicitur tametsi sensui gustus vinum esse videatur non tamen vinum sed sanguinem esse says St. Cyril in his Catech. St. Ambrose raiseth a Question for you but then he solves it Sed forte dicis speciem sanguinis non video sed habet similitudinem ut nullus horror sit cruoris Lib. 4. Sacrament And in like manner Theoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But why do's it seem to us not to be Flesh but Bread that we should not loath the eating of it And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems unto us to be Bread but 't is Flesh indeed And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 't is chang'd by an ineffable energy tho' it seems to us to be Bread Now the high abuse you offer Catholicks in this Point is by representing our belief herein after a Gross Carnal Capharnaical meaning impressing those of your Party with the same false Ideas concerning us as the Heathens conceiv'd against the Primitive Christians as if we were a Barbarous Inhumane sort of Cannibals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Catholicks had the use of the Cup been frequent they being a sort of Hereticks who by the Principles of their Religion would not drink Wine abhorring it as a thing unlawful to be drunk as a Creature of the Devil as Fel Draconis and so superstitiously abstaining from the Chalice in detestation of which Heresie the Church Commanded Communion in both kinds not as if the other were either unlawful or imperfect but for the detection of those Hereticks pursuant to their Exclusion from Catholick Societies At that time the Bishops to crush and extirpate that Heresie highly extol'd and commended the use of the Chalice but that Error being extinct and in process of time another Heresie arising against the Essential Integrity of Christs Body under either kind as also avouching the absolute indispensable necessity of both the Church began universally to practice Communion under one kind and to confute this Error did not only declare and publish the Truth by her Decrees and Definitions but likewise by her Practice well knowing that as it was not unlawful in its self to Communicate under both sorts so it was likewise not necessary but in its own nature indifferent and so consequently determinable to one or both kinds according to the Discretion of the Church the Precinct and Line of whose Power extendeth it self to things Adiaphorous for things absolutely Commanded Man cannot forbid nor Command things absolutely forbidden This thing being thus of a middle nature was as such within the territory of the Churches Legislative Power which according to the differences of Place Time and Persons hath power to enjoyn both or command but one as the juncture of Affairs may be and the benefit of the Church may require and upon these accounts the Church may restore the Cup again having Power to dispence in this Point of Discipline according as may be most advantageous to its Peace and Unity and accordingly as a tender Mother for quietness sake she restor'd the Cup to the Bohemians and there is no question but that she would have granted it you upon that account had it been requested before your Revolt rather than see you perishing in Damnable Schism Now that the Church has this Power is acknowledged by the Council of Basil Sess 30. Ecclesia quae regitur Spiritu veritatis c. ordinare habet quomodo ipsis non conficientibus ministretur prout pro reverentia ipsius Sacramenti salute fidelium viderit expedire and accordingly the Council of Trent Sess 21. Declarat Synodus hanc potestatem perpetuo in Ecclesia fuisse ut in Sacramentorum dispensatione salvâ illorum substantia ea statueret vel mutaret quae suscipientium utilitati seu ipsorum Sacramentorum venerationi pro rerum temporum locorum varietate magis expedire judicaret Hence 't is that the Church varied from the first institution in reference to time which was then after Supper whereas 't is now taken fasting and before Dinner so I believe that Christ did not strictly tie us up to the first institution but left it to the discretion of the Apostles who afterward referr'd it to the Judgment of the Succeeding Church this seems to be St. Austins Sense of it Non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretur ut Apostolis per quos Ecclesias dispositurus erat servaret hunc locum 118 Epist ad Januarium and certainly 't is more fit that this Power should be lodg'd in the Hands of the Church than committed to the Arbitrement of Private Persons and you had better herein have acquiesced in her Determinations than in your own Elections for what have you gain'd by extorting this Cup but instead of a Cup of Salvation a baneful Potion your departure and Schism from the Church tainting your very Sacraments and poisoning the very Springs of your Holy Actions Omnia Sacramenta Christi non ad salutem sed ad judicium habentur sine charitate unitatis August Lib. 3. Con. Literas Petil. Neque sides neque Sacramenta ullis nisi persistentibus in Ecclesiae unitate sunt salutaria De Vnit Eccles Quid prodest homini vel sana fides vel sanum fortasse fidei Sacramentum ubi lethali vulnere Schismatis perempta est sanitas Charitatis De Baptismo con Donat. Lib. primo CHAP. VI. Concerning Publick Prayers in Latin and of several other Points THe Fourth Point by which you would prove the Roman Church guilty of Paternal Schism is her Publick Prayers in Latin This Point is highly opposed and fancied to be against the Word of God as contrary to the Sense of the 1 Corinth 14. which is generally brought against it and fully believ'd by your Flock tho' if rightly understood nothing to the purpose for this place do's not reprove the Practice of the Roman Church in having her Liturgy in Latin but prohibits Extemporary Prayers in Publick Meetings in an unknown Tongue according to the Inspir'd infus'd Devotion of the Speaker Here is not a Word concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common Liturgy which hath set known Offices for every Day If there were it would be an admirable place for you to confute Fanaticks and to establish your Common-Prayer against Sectaries I know no reason why the Western Church should not have the liberty to make use of the Latin in her Religious Worship which is her Sacred and Learned Language and in her extent the most generally known as well as the Jews use the Hebrew or the Eastern Churches the Greek which altho' consisting of several Nations that speak Languages as much different from Greek as ours is from Latin Nay altho ' the Grecians have lost their own Language which is now no more resemblant to the Learn'd Greek than French is to Latin yet they retain their Liturgy unalter'd in the pure Language of Chrysostom not understood but by the Learned St. Hierom in his Preface in Paralip says That in those Days all those Churches were serv'd in Greek using Basil's Liturgy And Alexander Ross will tell you in his Review of Religion That the Copthies Jacobites Georgians Circassians and others to whom you will give the Right-hand of fellowship use not their vulgar Language but an unknown Tongue to the Vulgar in their Divine Service Now you must understand that it is no Position of the Catholick Church that the Publick Service should be in an unknown Tongue but it being Compos'd at first ever since the Apostles days in Latin in the Western Church the Church did not think it expedient that it should be turn'd into the Vulgar Barbarous Language of every Nation This was not Englands case alone but France Spain Germany Poland c. far'd no otherwise nay most part of the World according to St. August in his Book de verâ Religione Quotidie per orbem universum humanum genus unâ pene voce respondet sursum corda se habere ad Deum And that the Divine Service was in Africa perform'd in the Latin and not in the Punic
Language is evidently to be prov'd out of the same Father in his Second Book de Doctrina Christ and in his Exposition on Psal 123. But if you had a mind to quarrel with the Church for this it might have been begun several hundred Years past for it can be prov'd that this Nation us'd Latin in her Publick Service above Nine hundred Years ago as is evident out of the Council of Cloves Hoviae under Archibishop Cuthbert But that which gives me full satisfaction herein is that our Apostle St. Austin who made us Christians taught us to serve God in that Language and this seems not to be only out of high respect to God Almighty to serve him in Publick Liturgies not in the Common Profane Vulgar Tongue but in the most Pure Sacred Language but it seems likewise to denote Unity that the Church which is united in the same Faith should join as much as possible in the same Language by this means any one of her Communion may join in her Liturgy in any part of the Jurisdiction of the Western Church a German if in Italy a Frenchman if in Poland an Englishman if in Spain c. Neither are the People so ignorant of these Prayers as you would persuade your Party for the Liturgy having set Offices for every day and being in one set Language they by vertue of their Catechisms Manuals Prayers and Psalters in the Vulgar Tongue where the Prayers used by the Church are found and likewise Psalms and Hymns proper to every day have several other Books Expounding the Churches Service to the meanest capacity Besides the Priests are very solicitous herein assisting them by their private Instructions so that the Sense of the Churches Liturgy is well understood even by Women and Persons of ordinary Capacity But this Practice of the Church in having her Liturgy in Latin being no Article of Belief but rather a Point of Church Discipline and as such not indispensable but changable whereas Articles of Faith are unalterable you who knew 't was in the Power of the Church to gratify you herein should have fairly requested it before you made the breach and took upon you to tamper with Articles of Faith before your expelling and deposing your Spiritual Guids It may be the Church to prevent a greater inconvenience might have humour'd you condescending to what might have seem'd most expedient for long ago it was permitted to other Nations in her Communion as to the Sclavonians by Pope John the Eighth and to the Chineses by Paul the Fifth to make use of their own Languages in their Divine Worship the Church do's not hold it as unlawful but as not expedient every where to celebrate in the Vulgar Tongue as she declares in the Council of Trent The Fifth Point is St. Peters Supremacy This is I must confess an Article which all Catholicks are oblig'd to believe and because it is of high import being the Basis of Papacy I intend to Discouse of it at large and to establish it The Sixth Point c. Is the Bishop of Rome his Supremacy This flows naturally from the Fifth Jure successionis St. Peter being the First Bishop of Rome invested with Universal Jurisdiction The Seventh is the Popes Infallibility to which I shall say nothing till you can prove it to be an Article of Faith to believe the Pope Infallible separated from a General Council As for his granting Indulgences to break Gods Law as you accuse him of that is a false Crime of your own hatching for we deny any thing of that Nature knowing his Power to be conversant in things indifferent As for his absolving Subjects of their Allegiance to their Princes when 't is acknowledged as an Article of Catholick Faith I shall Discourse of it in the interim I will only hope that no Person will absolve you or that you will absolve your self of your Allegiance and herein we shall desire no more of you than that you be as good Subjects to this present Prince and stand by him with your Lives and Fortunes as we did by his Royal Brother and Father Your ensuing Discourse is to prove the Roman Church guilty of Fraternal Schism for this you have Three strong Reasons The First is because she renounces Communion with other Churches c. As to this I must needs tell you that it is an high piece of injustice in you wilfully to revolt from her and then falsly to accuse her of renouncing Communion with you 'T is clear enough that she rejects no Church that hath not Schismatically fallen off from her and so found guilty of Schism and Heresie The Second is Because she denounces all damn'd who submit not to her This you look on as very hard and uncharitable tho' the Church herein is not blamable but those who dis-join themselves from her and stand in opposition to her she can do no less than acquaint them of their unhappy Estate this she do's out of kindness rathan severity that they being thereby made sensible of their desperate condition may return to her Bosom and so avoid that Condemnation which attends those who depart this life unreconcil'd to her Her plain dealing in this case has much more of tenderness than your Latitudinarian Indulgence which flatters poor Souls with false hopes of Salvation and then consigns them into the Hands of Perdition cheating their baffled expectancy of their imaginary Paradise If you accuse the Roman Church of rigidness herein you may bring the same Indictment against all the Fathers there being not one Point in which they are more positive than concerning the Unity of the Church and that out of its Pale Eternal Life is unattainable Nemini salus nisi in Ecclesia Cyprian 62 Epist ad Pomp. and St. August in his 204 Epist to Donatus says Foris ab Ecclesia constitutus aeterno supplicio punieris etiamsi pro Christi nomine Vivus incendereris The Fathers are so strict herein that they look on that Person who separates from the Catholick Church to be in a damnable state tho' he leads a Religious Devout and Vertuous Life Quisquis ab hac Catholicâ Ecclesiâ fuerit separatus quantumlibet laudabiliter vivere se existimet hoc solo scelere quod a Christi unitate fuerit sejunctus non habet vitam sed ira Dei manet super ipsum says St. Austin to Donatus the Reason is because being separated from the Catholick Church he is consequently separated from Christ who is the Head to that Mystical Body Another Reason is Quia in unâ Catholicâ Ecclesia vera hostia redemptionis immolatur The Third Reason may be Quia sola est per quam Sacrificium Dominus libenter accipiat as I find it St. Aust Serm. 181. de temp He has one Reason more in his 50 Epist Quia extra hoc Corpus neminem vivificat Spiritus Sanctus Your Third Reason to prove Rome guilty of Fraternal Schism is Because she sends her Emissaries into the known
Matrem Primatemque recognoscat veneretur King James the First was not ignorant of this Truth when in his Speech to the Parliament he acknowledged the Church of Rome to be our Mother And well she may be call'd our Mother not only in point of Dignity but Kindness having twice planted the Gospel in this ungrateful Nation Next you seem dissatisfied that I should take so much pains to answer those Papers you sent my Brother hazarding the Shipwrack of his Faith in my Paper-boat under the notion of St. Peters Bark As to the first part you could not possibly imagine that a Person of his green and verdant Years should be qualified to answer your Composures But this I must needs say of him That having perused them he did much question their Truth and your Honesty in framing them looking on them as beset with Adulterous Gems The truth on 't is you had made them very plausible and winning their Superficies being sprinkled with Scripture and Fathers but Deceit and Cosenage lay at the bottom and they may well be compared to those Vessels with which Hannibal cheated the Gortynians Amphoras complures complet plumbo Summas operit auro argentoque this made me endeavour to rescue my Brother from being a Prey to these Nets you had spread for him and to answer your Papers as Nodus vindice dignus not intending hastily to cut it as Alexander did the Gordian knot but leisurably to unty it As for my being accus'd by you for hazarding the Shipwrack of his Faith in my Paper-boat under the notion of St. Peters Bark I must tell you that by my keeping him in St. Peters Ship I preserv'd him unspotted of two dangerous Sins Heresie and Schism and I question not but whatever your Opinion be through the Infinite Mercies of his Redeemer he is safely arriv'd at the Haven of Eternal Bliss for as St. Ambrose Serm. 11. affirms Hanc solam Ecclesiae Navim adscendit Dominus in quâ Petrus Magister est constitutus dicente Domino super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Sicut enim Arca Noe mundo naufragante cunctos quos susceperat illaesos reservavit ita Petri Ecclesia conflagrante saeculo omnes quos amplectitur repraesentabit illaesos 'T is usual with the Fathers to assimulate the true Church to a Ship Epiphanius in his Second Heresie says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church of God is like to a Ship And St. Ambrose Lib. 3. de Virg. Navis Ecclesia est quae pleno Dominicae crucis velo Spiritus Sancti flatu in hoc bene navigat Mundo And again Hi igitur de Synagogâ ad Navim Petri hoc est ad Ecclesiam convenerunt But in Serm. 15. he may be said to come nigh your Fancy styling it a Bark Nautellam istam fratres cogitate Ecclesiam turbulentum mare hoc saeculum This Bark I question not will ride Admiral in spight of any Fleet you shall be able to set out against her and if you dare to embarque your self in such an Enterprize as to board her I question not but that she is strongly enough Mann'd to defend her self Your following Accusation rear'd against me is of rashness and you tell me That a Matter of this Nature ought to have been deliberately manag'd But how you should know what Authors I have perus'd or what time I have impended in Matters of Religion I cannot conjecture This I am sure of that I have not credulously surrendred my self into the Hands of any Opinion neither have I omitted a competent ventilation of my Religion otherwise I had never been able to throw off the prejudice I once had against it by a contrary Education but have fully satisfied my Curiosity Judgment and Conscience and do no more foster any doubts concerning the truth of Catholick Doctrines than I question the certitude of Christianity After all this you seem to take it amiss that I did not consult with your Oracular Tripus But if you will promise me not to be offended at my open and free discovery I will acquaint you why I look'd on you as an unfit Person to advise with in this case 'T is too evident to all that know you that you have all along been appassion'd prejudic'd and scurrilous against Catholicks endeavouring to blast their Repute by defamatory Aspersions and slanderous Obloquy taking all occasions to injure them in the Pulpit and out of it both in their Morals and Religion both in reference to their God and King continually reviling and barking at them as if you had been related to those sorts of Indians which Pliny mentions in his Seventh Book to be Genus hominum capitibus caninis pro voce latratum edere And how peccant you have been in your perverse disfiguring of Catholick Doctrine and what purulent stuff you have rais'd from your exulcerated Lungs against the Bishop and See of Rome can be attested by multitudes So I could not but look on you as an unfit Oracle to give Responsals herein Had you not been so much tinctur'd with prejudice and so strongly overbiass'd 't is likely I might have resorted to your Infallible Cortina You may be so good an Oculist as to know that the Christalline Humor wherein the visive Power sways is not colour'd I leave the Application to you whose Function renders you most qualified for it I would not have you fancy that I rip up these past things with a design to accuse you my only intent herein is if possible to stir you up to consult with your Second Thoughts and to make Sedate and Calm Reflections on what you have passionately and unadvisedly committed By this Method you may be induc'd to repent of them and for the future to suppress such Ebullitions of Gall and Rancorous Defluxions which tho' like a pleasant Potion may be imbib'd by the uninquisitive and prophane Herd Densum humeris bibit aure vulgus yet to the Politer sort they must needs be nauseous and like the drops that fall nigh the Line leave a putrid and corrupt steam behind them I am the more free and affectionate to you herein because you were so kind as to afford me your wholsome Advice I fancied I could not better correspond with your favours than to prompt your Memory to ruminate on your past transactions and to shew you how grateful I am for your good Counsel I return you mine in its lieu that if ever you hope to obtain pardon for your miscarriages against the Catholick Church you would endeavour Ad Ecclesiae Catholicae unitatem scissi Corporis membra componere Christianae Charitatis vinculo copulare and effect as much as in you lies a Redintegration of the Primary Union a Re-piecing the unwoven Garment of Christ miserably torn asunder by your Schism Consider what a generous Action it would be to leap into this Gulph and thereby close the unhappy Clefts and Breaches of Separation Perpend how much more Christian-like it would be to moderate
and reconcile Differences rather than by abusive Expressions and false Representations to exasperate and widen them Think how ingenuous it would be in you who are so influential and leading to the rest of your Flock candidly to acknowledge your Errors having been convinc'd of them disabuse them of their false pre-occupations rescue them from the Chains of their Erroneous Education dispose them to a right conception of Catholick Doctrine Shed no more Cockle amongst 'em as knowing your self responsible for the pernicious Principles you infuse into them Teach them sound Catholick Verities gratifie their distempered Stomachs with no more unwholsome viands humour their prurient itching Ears with no more empty gingling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deluding their dainty Ears with the Magick of the Tongue When you have exerted your best endeavours herein you may with some ground hope for Remission from Propitious Heaven otherwise you may justly fear that those Darts which you have thrown against the Catholick Church should beat back and reverberate upon your self for as St. Basil observes in his Hom. of Envy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those Darts which are flung with violence if they light on any firm and obdurate Matter recoil upon him that threw them But I shall now decline things of this nature and return you my Thanks for the long Bedroll of Authors which you have recommended to me Jewel is the First and indeed you did well to place him in the Front as being most bold and frontless after him comes Whitaker Abbot Hall White Laud Hammond c. these you desire me to peruse not questioning but by an impartial reading of them I may be reduc'd from the strangers Lap into the Bosom of my True Chast Mother I shall not go about to extenuate the Credit of these Men but shall pay a just Deference and Respect both to their Quality and Parts But I shall not so overvalue them as to grant them the Prelation to the Catholick Church Councils and Fathers nay I shall not equalize them with Cardinal Bellarmine Perròn Baronius or multitudes of others in the Roman Communion I will grant you that they have wrote as well as possibly could be in your behalf and had your Case been desensible they had maintain'd it but it was their misfortune to be engag'd in a wrong Quarrel which they presuming to be true have bent all their endeavours and distended every Nerve to support Error and obscure Truth 'T is pleasant to observe how these cunning Fencing-Masters shift their Weapons when they fight against Sectaries in defence of Episcopacy one would swear they were perfect Catholicks Brandishing Glittering Weapons drawn from the Armory of Antiquity Tradition Practice of the Church Councils and Fathers but when they grapple with Catholicks the Case is altered Then Scripture is the only Rule Councils may err and the Church Apostatize and the Fathers guilty of mistakes making use of all the shifting evading ways imaginable to avoid the dint of the Argument But as soon as I came to understand the vast difference amongst them in their Disputings with Catholicks I did conclude their Case very bad Whitaker in his Answer to Campians Reasons appeals to the first Six hundred Years after Christ which Jewel likewise did in his Ostentatious crack at St. Paul's Cross but Dr. Humphrey in the Life of him do's much reprehend him for his bold appealing to the Fathers as if he had thereby spoil'd himself and his Church in giving the Catholicks too large scope Bishop Laud being sensible of Jewels rashness lops off very fairly Two hundred Years contracting the time to a narrower compass to the Fathers of the first Four hundred Years as appears in his Forty eighth Sect. The Protestants offer says he to be try'd by all the Antient Councils and Fathers of the Church within the first Four hundred years and somewhat further Dr. Hammond who I conceive to be much more Learned than the two foregoing finding Bishop Laud's Four hundred Years not to hold Water abates One hundred of them in his Eighth Chapter of Schism For the particular Doctrins saith he wherein we are affirm'd by the Romanists to depart from the Vnity of the Faith we make no doubt to approve our selves to any that will judge of the Apostolical Doctrins and Traditions by the Scriptures and consent of the first Three hundred Years or the Four General Councils This pruning of Antiquity and shrinking it from the Sixth to the Fourth and so to the Third Century seem'd to me the most foul and unreasonable thing imaginable for by this means most of the chief Fathers whose Works are most Copious were excluded from attesting the truth of the Churches Doctrin and very few admitted only those who had wrote little or nothing of our differences but some small Treatises Epistles and Apologies against Heathens and Exhortations to Martyrdom the Church being then under perpetual Persecutions But to answer you concerning your Catalogue of Authors I have perus'd those parts of their Works which relate to the Catholicks but they are so far from removing me out of the Strangers Lap that they have much contributed to my fixing my self there But pray what makes you call the Roman Church a Stranger don't you know that she is the Origin and Center of Unity and that all true Christians are oblig'd to Communicate with her Don't Irenaeus to whom I shall give more credit than to all your List of Authors affirm That all the Faithful are oblig'd to have recourse to this Church for its more powerful Principality Do's not St. Hierom say That he is profane who Eats the Lamb out of this House This is the place where God planted his only Altar and here is fix'd that Cathedra against which whoever erects another is as Optatus affirms Schismaticus peccator 'T is clear that St. Hierom tho' in reference to local distance he was much remote from Rome as he acknowledges in his Fifty seventh Epistle to Damasus Neque vero tanta vastitas elementi liquentis interjacens longitudo terrarum me à pretiosae margaritae potuit inquisitione prohibere yet notwithstanding this in the same Epistle he says Cathedrae Petri Communione consocior The same happy state I heartily wish you and all other Schismaticks well knowing how deplorable a thing it is to die out of that Communion I shall therefore conclude this Point with St Cyprian's Advice Ad Matrem revertimini unde prodistis The End of the First Part. THE SECOND PART CHAP. I. The Preface to St. Peter 's Supremacy and whether St. Andrew knew Christ's Divinity before St. Peter WHAT I have hitherto wrote may resemble a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a light Skirmish it being but Prefatory and Introductive to that main design I am at which is the Vindication of St. Peter's Supremacy a Point of so high Import being the Common Center and Origin both of Catholick Unity of Sacerdotal Dignity and Ecclesiastick Jurisdiction but withal so strangely snarl'd
Christi periculis by repressing the Hereticks Caelestius and Pelagius infecting Africa and Palestine with their false Doctrin in this case why did they not write to the Patriarch of Jerusalem or to the Primate of Africa The Reason given is because they concluded those Hereticks would with more ease yield to Innocentius as to one whose Authority was drawn from the Scripture Now this Power which they did desire him to shew was neither his Diocesan nor Patriarchal but his Papal Power for Palestine was no Limb of the Western but Eastern Patriarchate and consequently out of his Jurisdiction as he was the Occidental Patriarch This Power of his which they desire him to make use of they acknowledg'd to be drawn out of the Scripture which cannot be made out but by what was spoken by Christ to Peter And this is the Method St. Bernard uses in his Book of Considerations to Eugenius who having attributed high things to him proves what he says ex dictis Domini I shall now come to take a view of the words which the Fathers in the Milevitan Council of which Austin was one used to Innocentius which in Epist 92. of St. Austin I find were these Arbitramur adjuvante misericordiâ D. N. J. Christi Authoritati sanctitatis tuae de sacrarum literarum authoritate depromptae facilius eos qui tam perversa perniciosa sentiunt cessuros The words are very plain and clearly discovering their Opinion that his Authority was from Scripture but because this is a truth that must be suppress'd 'T is very pleasant to see how 't is deprav'd by Expositors Cedent authoritati tuoe de scripturarum authoritate depromptae that is says Chamier Tibi veram doctrinam a Scripturis expromenti But the intent of these words is not that Innocentius should make them yield by quoting of places out of the Scripture and so confute their Heresies that the African Bishops themselves or any other might have done if they had pleas'd but by vertue of his Supreme Ecclesiastick Authority to which the Fathers imagin'd these Heretick would more readily submit as grounded on Scripture This is the genuin Sense of those words but I shall add no more on this Matter but confine my following Discourse chiefly to St. Peters Supremacy First You must understand that I do believe as firmly as you do that Christ is the Primary and Principal Foundation of the Church the Lapis summus angularis a nullo alio dependens the Lapis fundamentalis cui totum innititur aedificium on whom not only every true Christian but the Apostles and Peter himself is Mystically superedified as St. Austin affirms Petra erit Christus super quod fundamentum etiam aedificatus Petrus And accordingly St. Cyril in his Notes on Isaias Lib. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For Christ is the Foundation and unmovable Basis of all containing and strengthening all to the end they be well supported for we are all of us built on him Thus you may perceive that we do not go about to despoil our Savior of his due Honor and invest Peter with it as you traduce us with for if he be the Rock of Church much more Christ is to deny which would be Antichristian But Peter is not hereby excluded notwithstanding this but is likewise the Rock but in Subordination and Inferiority to Christ And thus St. Basil Hom. 28. de Paen. makes this distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if Peter be a Rock he is not such a Rock as Christ sed sicut Petrus Petra est whereas Christ is really and of himself a Rock unmoveable Petrus autem propter Petram Thus I conceive Christ to be the Primordial Absolute and Independent Rock the Petra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by virtue of his own Strength Authority and Divinity whereas Peter is a Rock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subordinate Vicarious Ministerial by Commission and Derivation from him laid by Christ's own Hands the glorious Architect of his Spiritual Fabrick next to himself as Theophyl observes on Luke 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 introducing Christ speaking to St. Peter This thing belongs to you says he as one who after me are the Rock and Strength of the Church Hence you may easily perceive that things Subordinate combate not one with another but suppose one another therefore to say Christ is the Foundation of the Church and Peter is the Foundation are no repugnant duelling Propositions but friendly and compatible And thus as it was observ'd by Cardinal Perron Moses saying That God guided the Israelites in their Travels from Aegypt to the Promised Land and Stephen affirming Moses to have conducted them in the Wilderness are not Contrariant or Antistoichal one to the other God doing it by the strength of his Omnipotent Arm and Moses by Order and Authority from him as his Lieutenant With the same facility this our Discrepancy may be sodered for I affirm not Peter to be Fundamentum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel aliud from Christ but Fundamentum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel alterum not alterius generis as in opposition to Christ but Christo subalternum for as Salmeron well observ'd Respectu Christi non est fundamentum sed aedificatio nec caput sed membrum praecipuum tamen respectu nostri caput fundamentum This distinction of a Principal and Inferior Foundation you must allow to be deducible from St. Paul or else you must grant a Contradiction For as in one place he affirms that Christ is the only Foundation and that no other can be lay'd He in another place calls the Prophets and Apostles Foundations Now this difference cannot be reconcil'd but by admitting a Primary and Secondary Foundation Hence 't is that Austin in Psalm 86. entitles Christ the Foundation of Foundations Fandamentum Christus primum maximum c. Si Sacramenta cogites Christus sanctus sanctorum si gregem subditum cogites Christus pastor pastorum si fabricam cogites Christus fundamentum fundamentorum Thus it seems to be in the Church as in the State For as in the State notwithstanding God by his Omnipotency and Wisdom tempers and disposes all things as King of Kings and Lord of Lords Yet has he establish'd here on Earth Principacies into whose Hands he has committed the Sword whom we are in duty oblig'd to obey so tho' Christ be the Moderator and Foundation of the Church and do's rule and direct it by his Internal Influxes yet has he establish'd a Visible Monarchick Government in it with which he invested St. Peter propagating it to his Successors Now tho' Christ did build his Church on Peter he himself is the main Basis of the Structure and as Christ is the Head of the Church God is the Head of Christ who by his Omnipotent Power supports and sustains the vast pile of the Catholick Church I shall next give you some Testimonies of the Fathers who notwithstanding their affirming Christ to be the Rock disrobe not St.
same place he calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The firm Rock of the building the Foundation of the House of God In his Ancorat he says thus of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who was assisted by the Father in laying a firm Foundation of Faith And in the same place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In all respects Faith was establish'd and confirm'd in him St. Cyril who in his 4th Book de Trinit says Petra opinor per agnominationem aliud nihil quam inconcussa firma Discipuli fides c. Do's not take his Faith apart from his Person but confesses the Church to be built on him as well as on his Faith Lib. 2. Cap. 3. in Johan In Petro tanquam in Petra Lapide firmissimo Ecclesia aedificata est And in Lib. 2. Cap. 12. in Johan Nec Simon fore nomen sed Petrum dixit vocabulo ipso commodè significans quod in eo tanquam in lapide firmissimo suam esset aedificaturus Ecclesiam And on the First of St. Johan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vpon him he destin'd to build his Church My next employ shall be to consult with St. Ambrose concerning this Point whom I find Lib. de Incarnat Dom. Sacram. Cap. 5. to make Faith the Foundation of the Church his words are these Fides est Ecclesiae fundamentum non enim de carne Petri sed de fide dictum est quia portae mortis ei non praevalebunt sed confessio vincit Infernum These words were so pleasing to Dr. Whitaker that having cited them to Cardinal Bellarmine he triumphantly cries out Audin ' Jesuita Yet notwithstanding this imaginary ovation the words of St. Ambrose are easily answered For first no Catholick do's affirm the Church to be built on Peters Flesh so that he should support it as Caelifer Atlas do's the Heavens by virtue of a strong robust Back and a pair of broad Shoulders neither do we affirm it to be built on his Soul but on his Person consisting of Body and Soul Next I shall prove out of Ambrose that altho ' he calls Faith the Foundation he do's not deny Peters Person to be so likewise as is well known by those celebrated Verses of his which St. Austin quotes wherein he acknowledges Peter to be Petra Ecclesiae And in Lib 4. Lucae Non turbatur ista navis quae Petrum habet turbatur illa quae Judam habet quemadmodum turbari poterat cui praeerat is in quo Ecclesiae firmamentum est Et de Incarn Lib. 4. Hic est Petrus qui respondit pro caeteris imo prae caeteris ideo fundamentum dicitur And Lib. 4. De fide Quem cum Petrum dicit firmamentum Ecclesiae indicavit St. Basil tho' he is pleas'd to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on 2d Isaiae The sublime Soul of blessed Peter is called the Rock because it is firmly rooted in Faith Yet do's he not offer to depose his Person as appears in his 6th Book against Eunomius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peter for the excellency of his Faith was entrusted with the Church which was built on him The rest of the Fathers do perspicuously acknowledge the Church to be built on Peters Person St. Hierom. in Cap. 14. Ezechiel Apostolus Petrus super quem Dominus Ecclesiae fundamentum solidavit And on Matt. 16. aedificabo Ecclesiam meam super te And in the same place Petro illam beatitudinem potestatem aedificationem super eum Ecclesiae in futuro promissam St. Cyprian is very positive in affirming the Church to be built on his Person Petrus super quem Ecclesia Domini dignatione fundata De bono patientiae Petrus super quem aedificata a Domino fuerat Ecclesia 52. Epist Petrus cui oves suas Dominus pascendas tuendasque commendat super quem posuit fundavit Ecclesiam De Disciplina Virg. Petro primum Dominus super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam unde unitatis originem instituit c. Epist 70. Baptisma unum Spiritus Sanctus unus una Ecclesia a Christo Domino super Petrum origine unitatis ratione fundata in the same Epistle Tertullian who in his Book de Pudicitia says concerning Peter In ipso Ecclesia extructa is pleas'd to explain himself thus id est per ipsum In the same Book affirms the Church to be built not on Peters Faith but on his Person Manifesta Domini intentio personaliter hoc Petro conferre super te inquit edificabo Ecclesiam meam tho' he denies it to belong to his Successors being when he wrote that Book infected with the Heresie of Montanus And in his Prescriptions Petrus aedificandae Ecclesiae Petra dicitur And again in Monog Petrum solum invenio maritum per socrum Monogamum praesumo per Ecclesiam quae super illum aedificata est CHAP. VI. Concerning the other Apostles being Foundations Of Peters new Name given him by Christ Peter the Rock of the Church Of Origens Interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all one The Inconvenience of Expounding Christ to be the Rock in this place MY following Province will be to treat of the rest of the Apostles whom to lessen and extenuate St. Peters Glory you would equalize with him that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Foundations I concede to you Oecomenius on the Apocalyps gives the reason of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because they laid the first ground-work of Faith in Christ And accordingly St. Hierom in Psalm 86. In illis erant fundamenta ibi primum posita est fides Ecclesiae They in reference to their Apostolick Power had equal Authority of founding Churches in any part of the World In relation to their Doctrin they were equally Orthodox and Infallible And what concern'd their Writings they being directed and influenc'd by the same Spirit they were alike Canonical and what appertain'd to the Government of all other Christians they were equally Pastors Heads and Rectors And in these Considerations the Church may be said to be built ex aequo as St. Hierom says on all of them Now notwithstanding they were all equal Foundations in these Aspects St. Peter was here the only sole Rock on whom Christ promis'd to build his Church which did consist not only of all Christians whatsoever but even of the Apostles themselves If they were Foundations so was St. Peter and the Prophets if they were Foundations they were Sub Petro post Petrum whom our Savior to preserve Unity chose out of the Apostolick Colledge and with his own Hands laid next to himself as Theophyl affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now that Peter was the only Rock of the Universal Church will appear evident if we consider that Christ did here engage himself by promise solely to him to build his Church on him upon his peculiar Confession of his Divinity which the other Apostles till they had learn'd it of him were ignorant of this I have already prov'd Now what our
v. 1. Videt Johannes Angelum habentem Clavem Abyssi And accordingly it was antiently us'd in Orphicis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus you may see I need not be beholden to that Passage in Isaias to prove Peters Power granted him by the gift of the Keys but because I mention'd it as an Argument I shall say a little in its defence and make some Reply to your Objections First you say That it cannot be prov'd that Sobna or Eliakim were of the Priests Order To this I answer that you cannot disprove but that they were This I am sure of that I have better Authority which avouches they were than you have that they were not As for your Pretensions to the Hebrew Tongue should I grant them just and permit you to pass Muster for a Rabbi yet it do's not at all follow that I should be so conceited of you as to equalize you to St. Hierom whose knowledge in that Language was so great as all ought to veil to him So I judge it my safest way not to exorbitate from his Translation impress'd by the stamp of the Catholick Church But to keep to the Point the Hebrew word Sochen which is no novelty in that Language is liable to different meanings But I find St. Hierom to translate Ingredere ad Sochen thus Ingredere ad eum qui habitat in Tabernaculo ad Sobnam Praepositum Templi The Septuag says thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was a place in which the Priests did abide whilst they serv'd in the Temple thence they were called Pastophori Pastus signifying either the Sacerdotal Pall or Lodging And thus St. Cyril on Book 2. Comments on Isaias upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place is in the Temple Hence this Sobna is called Praepositus Templi and the Prophet deters him from the excision of his Sepulcher because God would transplant the Priesthood Thus v. 18. 't is said Coronans te coronabit c. which Corn. a Lapide observes is rendred in the Chaldee Auferet a te Tiaram The Septuag says Auferet stolam coronam tuam gloriosam by which is meant Corona Tiara Pontificalis And accordingly I find St. Cyril to call the Stola 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Holy Sacred And in his Second Book of his Comments on Isaias speaking of Eliakim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Sacerdotal Honor was conferr'd on him is manifest by his promising to Crown him and saying I will give you the Stola Oeconomy and Power to be able to rule the People subject to you Now as for Sobna his being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I find St. Cyril to solve that Objection in his Second Book of Comments on Isaias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He inveights against Sobna the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who had got the High-Priesthood but abus'd it Your other Argument to cut him off from being High-Priest is because he is called Praefectus Domûs scilicet Regiae as you add by which you would have him to be only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Steward of the Kings House but you must understand that the Temple was called Antonomasticè Domus and accordingly our Savior when he drove the Buyers and Sellers our of the Temple told them that his House was call'd Domus precationis c. Now if Josephus makes no mention of them as you affirm that at best is but a Negative and so inconcludent I find he is silent of several things which the Scripture makes mention of he takes no notice of Gods punishing the Israelites for their murmuring whilst the Flesh of the Quails stuck betwixt their Teeth I hope I may have the liberty to believe it tho' he be found mute herein but if his Authority be so swaying with you I shall hope you will not disbelieve Absoloms Hair to have weigh'd two hundred Sicles and that it could scarcely be powl'd in Eight days time Then you say that the High-Priests of the Jews were Types of Christ not of Peter That they were Types of Christ in some Sense cannot be deny'd so was Salomon for his peaceable Reign Christ being styl'd Princeps pacis so was Isaac carrying the Wood to burn the Sacrifice as Christ did the Wood of the Cross and Jonas for abiding Three Days and Nights in the Whales Belly as Christ was in the Sepulcher and Joseph sold by his Brothers as he was by Judas And many more Types might be mention'd but this is not worth the insisting on and it may easily be prov'd that the Jewish High-Priests were Typical of the Christian if the Point were material I am sure St. Cyprian in his Epistles Expounds those things which are said concerning the one of the other The next thing you affirm is That by the Keys in that place is not meant any Supreme Authority either in Church or State such as the Romanist's claim for Peter and his Successors for Sobna and Eliakim if Priests were subject to King Hezechias and the Kings in those Days and many Ages after were Supreme in all Causes both Ecclesiastical and Civil To this I answer that 't is not necessary to my purpose to go about to prove what is meant by the Keys mention'd by Isaias St. Peters Authority being not grounded upon that but on the words in St. Matthew Et dabo tibi Claves As for the other part of your Assertion That the Jewish High-Priests were subject to the Jewish Kings whom you affirm to be Supreme in all Causes both Ecclesiastical and Civil and to have govern'd Church Affairs both de facto de jure I find my self oblig'd to make some Reply to it as likewise of Christian Princes to whom from the Jewish you descend But I would more willingly have declin'd treating of this Point knowing how nice and dangerous it is to handle it and that now I walk per ignes suppositos cineri doloso But because you have so fairly thrown it in my way and being treating of the Keys it will seem fit to clear their Authority I cannot well avoid taking some notice of it which I shall here do making a short halt in taking up this Atalanta's Apple which you seem to have drop'd to impede my course It may appear strange that I who am of the Laity should write in favor of the Clergy and that you who are a Divine should endeavour to establish Laicocephalism and depress the Clergy robbing it of its just Rights and thereby becoming false to your own Coat But if this be well inspected there is much to be said in your Vindication for you knowing that your New Religion was begun and hitherto maintain'd by the Secular Power cannot but in gratitude and policy give it the preference however you may perhaps in this present conjuncture be willing to recal part of what you have so prodigally granted The first you mention to have govern'd Church Affairs both de facto de jure is Moses
Orbem quietum And I hope you will join with me herein not formally as when you pray for him in your Church marring your Prayer with some oblique Reflection but ex Pectore Heartily wishing him all those Benedictions which he may desire as Homo and as Caesar Which God grant him Morever I would desire you to leave off injuring your Prince in railing against his Religion in your Sermons falsly representing it to your cheated Auditory impressing them with wrong Ideas of it and thereby alienating the Affections of his Majesties Liege Subjects which is a Crime of the greatest magnitude and of most dangerous Consequences yet this freedom is taken by several who fancy they may wreak and evaporate that Passion which they dare not on his Sacred Person safely against his Religion thus slily discharging their rancour against a most incomparable Prince to whom they can ascribe no other fault but what really in it self is Glorious and deserving Acclamations namely His returning to the bosom of the Catholick Church which Action of his being render'd more noble by the violent Oppositions and Contrasts of his Enemies will maugre their spight purchase to him surpassing Glory in this World and Immortal Beatitude in that to come He who like a Generous Eagle slighting the Artillery of the Sky darting through the midst of the storm where the flashes are most astonishing and the claps most loud with an undaunted Spirit triumphantly resisted and brake through the tumultuous Rage of popular fury and stemm'd the torrent of its impetuous stream contemning those many Crowns that did attend him for his Conscience sake He has not only now his Victorious Temples adorn'd by the Justice of Heaven with a Diadem more bright than that of his Predecessors being thereby made CONTEMPTAE DOMINVS SPLENDIDIOR REI But has an innumerable quantity of Celestial Crowns beset with Stars reserv'd for him in the rich Treasury of Heaven as a suitable reward for his hazarding his Temporal ones for the sake of his GOD AND RELIGION For Thee GREAT PRINCE Praise has no proper Encomium nor COMMENDATION a fit Panegyrick nor this World an adequate Recompence nor thy Kingdoms a suitable Sacrifice but that of the Hearts of thy Subjects Too happy would this Nation be had it understanding enough to apprehend its own Good having a Prince who would not only protect them here on Earth but serve as a Pilot to conduct them to Heaven CHAP. III. Of the Keys In what Sense St. Peter may be said to answer for the Rest That what Christ reply'd was directed immediately to Peter only In what Sense 't was extendible to the Rest How the other Apostles may be said to share in the Keys An Account of the Fathers who acknowledge St. Peter Paramount in the Keys The Exposition of St. Matt. 18. v. 18. and of St. John 20. v. 21. How the Church receiv'd the Keys in St. Austin 's Sense Whether a Minister of the Protestant Church has the Power of the Keys With Advice to him IT may now seem high time to finish my intermitted Discourse concerning the Keys answering you likewise in that Point But upon perusing your Papers I find you write but little on this Subject but only offer me a rude indigested Lump of Quotations without any Method which in lieu of becoming a Clue to conduct me were a Skain of snarled Thred to perplex and involve me which made me more curious in prying into the intricacies of this matter and of acquiring satisfaction herein which I thought could not be obtain'd without reducing your Quotations into some form and then by solving them Your chief drift in them was I perceive First to prove that Peter answered for the rest of the Apostles and thence to infer that what was said by our Savior to him was spoken to the Rest By this Method you would evince the Rest to be equally concern'd with him in the donation of the Keys This in short is the Web of your Design which I shall here endeavour to unravel This kind of Argumenting I find Dr. Whitaker to make use of long before you Petrus Discipulorum omnium nomine respondit Tu es Christus c. Ergo omnium nomine audivit Tibi dabo Claves but the cunning of this reasoning will be easily detected when it is examined upon what account he may be said to answer for the Rest Dr. Whitaker says it was because they had the same Faith and he only spake for them his words are these Non in suâ tantum personâ illam confessionem edidit Petrus fuit enim communis illa fides atque confessio Petri unius ore edita But this his Opinion can never be prov'd the Revelation of the true Faith being made to him only as I have already manifested As for the Fathers who affirm that Peter answered for the Rest Salmeron says of them thus Recte intelligendi Orthodoxè interpretandi And this is good Advice for they in saying so take the Twelve as a Society and Peter as their chief and in this Sense he may be said to speak for them But then he did not speak as their Praeco but as their Princeps he spake not their Sense but what God the Father had reveal'd and suggested to him he answered what they could not answer but they by their silence approving his Confession upon his first promulging it are said to answer by his Mouth tho' properly speaking Petrus solus respondit caeteri assentiuntur Now they being Members of that Community of which he was Supreme the words may be said in an inferior Sense to be spoken to the Rest which were originally spoken to him But now if they had the same Faith as he had our Saviors rejoinder had seem'd more proper thus Beati estis quia Pater meus revelavit vobis vos estis Petrae c. But you see Christ addresses his Reply to Peter only the words Tu and Tibi shutting out all partnership And this is St. Austin's Opinion of it Serm. 5. In Festo Petri Pauli where speaking of Peter he says thus Solus inter Apostolos meruit audire Amen dico tibi quia tu es Petrus c. And herein Spalato is very honest Certè verba Christi adeo sunt arctata voculis individuantibus ad unum Petrum directa ut nefas sit ea a Petri personâ divellere directè ad alios dirigere certissimum est Christum cum Petro directè proximè loqui Now if Persons would be ingenuous it is easily discern'd when Christ grants a thing peculiar to Peter and when he grants a thing in common to them all what he designs the other Apostles should equally share in with him he evidently expresses in the Plural Number Hoc facite in mei commemorationem this related to the Sacrifice and concern'd them all jointly as Priests What appertain'd to Preaching and Baptizing was deliver'd in common to them all Euntes docete omnes Gentes Baptizantes
limited to his Person but derivable to the Governors of the Church even to the consummation of the World One thing I shall add more which tends much to Peters Glory which is that in St. Austin's Judgment none of the Apostles represented the Church but he De Agon Christi Non sine causâ inter omnes Apostolos hujus Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustinet Petrus c. And in Serm. 49. in Evang. Johan Dicit Petro in quo uno format Ecclesiam c. And in Serm. 13. Evang. Matt. In illo ergo uno Apostolo id est Petro in ordine Apostolorum primo precipuo in quo figurabatur Eccclesia He then only of all the Apostles representing the Church was entrusted not only with the Keys of Heaven but with the Keys of the Church as St. Austin affirms Serm. 124. de temp Credendae erant Petro Claves Ecclesiae imo creditae sunt ei Claves Regni Coelorum He then may be said to have receiv'd them in their largest latitude and extent and in their Independent Jurisdiction as Head of the Church and of the Apostolick Quire the Rest receiv'd them in a lower narrower acceptation as Members of that Society He receiv'd them immediately 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From our Lord himself from our Lords own Mouth as Chrysostom affirms They receiv'd them by a Proxy or participatively either by him or as Photius thinks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Person of their Prince 'T is most certain he first receiv'd them and as Tertull. de pudic affirms he first made use of them Primus in Christi baptismo reseravit aditum Coelestis Regni Optatus con Parm. says The Keys were given to him only to preserve Unity Stant tot innocentes peccator accipit Claves ut unitatis negotium formaretur but then he acknowledges they were to be communicated to the Rest but withal grants Peter the preference herein De Schism Lib. 7. Praeferri Apostolis omnibus meruit Claves Regni Coelorum communicandas coeteris solus accepit If you do believe thus much I shall hold no further Dispute with you about the Keys Now tho' I have already said something to your Quotation in St. Matt. 18. 18. I shall here make some addition That the Fathers did not attribute an equality of Power in the Keys to the rest of the Apostles with Peter by vertue of that place is evident by their Expounding it of Fraternal Correption giving by these words to the injur'd party Power of binding and loosing the Offender This is St. Chrysost Sense of this place And St. Hierom likewise In qualibet causâ nos frater loeserit demittendi habemus potestatem And St. Ambrose says Cum concordaveris cum fratre solvisti eum Peter also seems to take it in this meaning for presently upon Christs saying Whatsoever ye bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven He asks him Domine quoties peccabit in me frater dimittam ei Origen comes nearest the point of any and do's clearly decide it in his Notes on St. Matt. where he says that those words Whatsoever ye bind on Earth shall be bound on Heaven were common both to Peter and those that did admonish their Brothers But as for the words Dabo tibi Claves he says they were deliver'd separate apart to him that he might have something peculiar and egregious above the Rest his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the same place he do's acknowledge that what was spoken apart to him did far exceed what was spoken in common to the Rest those words do really appear more Authoritative and Extensive than the Power of binding and loosing granted the Rest which contains not the total but partial Acts of the Keys for they besides their including Power of Solution and Alligation are Badges of Dominion This made our Savior when he gave his Apostles the Power of binding and loosing to make no mention of the Keys reserving that Honour for St. Peter As for your Citation out of St. John 20. v. 5. here is likewise no mention of the Keys Christ did by virtue of these words give them all full Jurisdiction and Authority over the Universe In this their Apostolick Commission they were all equal but this was granted them not in reference to one another but in relation to the whole World of which they were all Princes and Heads whereas Dabo tibi Claves was spoken to Peter apart after a particular manner not competent to the other with a particular Blessing sprung from a particular Act of his confessing Christ his Divinity Christ alluding to his Name and declaring to him his Fathers Name and this was done in the presence of the Rest to shew them he design'd him their Head and Prince The next thing I am to remark is your Quotation out of St. Ambrose Claves illas Regni Coelorum in Beato Petro cuncti suscipimus Then you give me a check for saying they receiv'd them à Petro whereas you say it was in Petro. I shall not concern my self in the defence of this Criticism I know there is much to be said for either of the Opinions as you may see in Salmeron some say à some in and some per Petrum as you may see in Tertull. Scorp Nam si adhuc clausum putas esse Coelum memento Claves ejus hic Dominum Petro per eum Ecclesiae reliquisse And accordingly Greg. Nyss de Cast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He gave to the Bishops the Key of Caelestial Honors per Petrum St. Ambrose Lib. Sacerd. dign says Cum Petro cum illo suscipimus omnes but I shall wave these niceties and come to your Quotation Claves illas Regni Coelorum in B. Petro cuncti suscipimus And here you left out a very material word Sacerdotes The Fathers did not mean by this saying a Minister of a Separate Reform'd Church but a Priest of the Catholick Church and the word Priest doth imply both Altar and Sacrifice Having thus gloss'd upon the words I grant them to be true The Master of the Sentences acknowledges every Priest to receive the Keys with his Sacerdotal Order Lib. 4. Distinct 19. Cum enim recipit ordinem Sacerdotalem simul has Claves recipit Now tho' every Parish Priest has the Keys as really and as truly as a Bishop or Primate yet he has them not in so ample and full a manner as they have but in a Circumscrib'd limited Sense he having no power to use them but on such as are in subjection to him which are fewer in number than they who are under a Bishop But upon examining this Author out of whom you have quoted so much I find him to ascribe the Power of the Keys only to the true Church Jus ligandi atque solvendi solis permissum est Sacerdotibus recte ergo Ecclesia hoc sibi vindicat quae veros habet Sacerdotes Haeresis vindicare non potest quae veros non habet Sacerdotes
Lib. 4. Dist 18. And now it will seem a very fit time for you to look about you for your Case is very dubious and I must confess I cannot see what Title you have to the Keys You who who are no Priest of the Catholick Church but only a Minister of a Particular one fallen off from her You who Write and Preach against Catholick Doctrin and Unity in Justification of your Schismatical Defection You who have so much distended your Nerves in injuring not only Peter whom our Savior entrusted with the Keys but likewise in abusing his Successors who possess them after him You who by Excommunication are sever'd from the Body of the Catholick Church as Sarmentum Ramale emortuum how you should have them I cannot imagin And I may ask you as Optatus did the Donatists Lib. 2. Cont. Parm. Vnde est quod Claves Regni vobis usurpare contenditis qui contra Cathedram Petri vestris praesumptionibus audaciis militatis St. Cyprian will tell you in his Epist 73. Foris nec ligari aliquid posse nec solvi And in his 6th Epistle Dicimus omnes omnino Haereticos atque Schismaticos nihil habere potestatis ac juris But on the other side Theophyl says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They have power to loose and bind who are honor'd with Episcopal Grace according to Peter But before I quit this Point I shall very seriously recommend to you the Saying of St. Hierom in his Comments on Matt. 16. where speaking of the Power of the Keys he acknowledges Peter to have receiv'd it Speciatim especially particularly Quod quicunque ab unitate fidei Societate Ecclesiae se separaverit nec a peccatis solvi nec Caelum possit ingredi By this you may apprehend your deplorable condition being separated from the Unity of the Catholick Faith and from the Society of the Catholick Church Be so indulgent to your self as not to use any Sophistry in gulling your self Permit this Saying of St. Hierom not to float like a Buoy on the Surface of your Brain but to subside to your interior and deepest consideration Be so kind likewise to your Flock whose Opinion of your Learning and Orthodoxy has made them ductile to your Guidance and recipient of your Impresses as to impose no more false Tenets on their obvious credulity 'T is your Duty to instill into them saving Truths and not to infect them with pernicious Doctrin Pliny makes mention of a Poisonous Fountain in Arabia where the Shepherds pay the price of the Sheep that drink thereof and perish what punishment would that Shepherd deserve that should poison his Flock himself and how far more he who having the care of Rational Sheep committed to him should in lieu of feeding them with the sincere Milk taint them with destructive Principles You know very well how often you have preach'd over those Papers you sent me and how unsuspectedly they were imbib'd by your greedy Auditory Having now laid open those many Errors contain'd in them you would shew your self an ingenuous Person if you would uncurtain to them those many falshoods you have vented under the fallacious Mantle of sound Truths By such candid an Action as by a piacular Victim you might efface that guilt you have contracted by your slanderous reviling the Catholick Church and injurious Representations of her Doctrins I cannot imagin but that you must needs be conscious to your self of your great miscarriages herein and that a Person of your Reading must know better things and can teach too if you please but whether a long Habit or Interest retards you herein I 'll not pretend to define I shall only tell you what the Shepherds in Hesiods Theogonia say of themselves and so conclude this Point leaving it to you to make Application 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lies that resemble Truth we know to teach And if we please the ancient Faith can preach CHAP. IV. Of St. Peter 's being call'd Satan And of his Denial IT will not now seem incongruous to say something of Christs calling St. Peter Satan not long after he had told him that he would build his Church on him and had promis'd him the Keys For this I find objected by several as if by calling him so Christ had evacuated what he promis'd him before But it is to be consider'd that this happen'd betwixt the time of the Promise and Performance which was not exhibited till after Christs Resurrection St. Hierom on his Comments on Matt. 16. seems with this solution to satisfie the Objection Prudens lector inquirat quomodo post tantam beatitudinem c. nunc audiat Vade retro me Satana aut quae sit tam repentina conversio ut post tanta praemia Satanas appelletur Sed si consideret qui hoc quaerit Petro illam beatitudinem potestatem aedificationem super eum Ecclesiae in futuro promissam non in praesenti datam intelliget Aedificabo inquit super te Ecclesiam meam Portae Inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam dabo tibi Claves Regni Coelorum omnia de futuro quae si statim dedisset ei nunquam in eo pravae confessionis error invenisset locum And accordingly Theophyl 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word Dabo signifies the time to come to wit after his Resurrection But if that for which he is check'd be well inspected you will find two things which much extenuate his fault the one is his great Love and Tenderness to Christ declar'd in these words Propitius esto tibi Domine the other is his ignorance of Christs design in coming into the World Now he is called Satan not as if he willingly or malitiously did go about to hinder the Salvation of Mankind but because he out of ignorance of Gods Eternal Decree gave Christ that Advice of favouring himself which had it been follow'd would have obstructed our Redemption which was design'd us by the Bloody Sacrifice of the Cross St. Austin on his 49th Tract Johan do's acquit him of any Crime herein Nec Petro tamen humana ignorantia proficit ad crimen non enim ei Pater adhuc omne passionis Mysterium revelaverat voluerunt consilium dare Domino ne moriretur qui venerat mori ne ipsi morerentur The next thing of this nature which I shall insist on is his Denyal which by several is highly exaggerated as if all his Dignities had thereby been forfeited and lost but in this his fault it is likewise to be consider'd that it was committed before his installment in his Supreme Power which was not solemniz'd till Christ return'd Victorious from the Grave It was before he was virtute indutus ex alto it was before he had receiv'd the Holy Ghost by Christs Insufflation Timore Petrus ter negavit nondum enim acceperat Spiritum Sanctum accepto postea Spiritu Sancto cum fiduciâ caepit praedicare qui ad vocem ancillae ter negaverat accepto
unnecessary and I may very well wave it as undeserving any notice should be taken of it what I said was this That our Savior asked Peter thrice suitable to his trine denial as St. Austin observ'd Additur trinae negationi trina confessio whether he lov'd him c. This seems not at all amiss or obnoxious to any exception but you had a mind to carp at every thing Now tho' such parvitudes as these are not worth the defending yet because you Cavil at them I shall not desert them as undefensible for I believe I can produce better Authority to maintain them than you can to impugn them Ter me negasti timendo Ter me confitere amando Ambros Psal 90. Enarrat And in his Apol. David Cap. 9. Vt trinae lapsum negationis professio Charitatis toties repetita deleret St. Austin Serm. 50. Secund. Johan Vt trinâ confessione amoris deleret trinum peccatum negationis Theophyl on John 21. gives two Reasons of our Saviors asking thrice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both manifesting what a great care he took of the Faithful and withall by a trine Interrogation and Confession he cures his trine Negation The next that encounters my view is your Quotation out of St. Austin by which I perceive that the drift and scope of your design is to prove the words Pasce Oves meas to be spoken to the Rest as well as to Peter This is the White at which you level the words are these Cum illi dicitur ad omnes dicitur si amas me pasce c. This is all you quote but upon examining the place out of which these words were taken I find the foregoing words to be these Non sine causâ inter omnes Apostolos hujus Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustinet Petrus huic enim Ecclesiae Claves Regni Caelorum datae sunt cum Petro datae sunt cum ei dicitur omnibus dicitur Pasce Oves meas August de Agone Christianâ Here you are to understand that in his Judgment Peter only of all the Apostles personated the Catholick Church and that the Keys are said to be given to her when they were given to him namely as to its Head Primate and Rector as I have already prov'd out of his Writings In this only Sense I have already fully prov'd that those words which were originally and immediately spoken to Peter are said to be spoken to the Rest they being all Epitomiz'd and compriz'd in him as their Chief In this Acceptation I grant that Pasce Oves meas might be spoken to all the Disciples and in no other aspect Now this do's not at all hinder but that these words were spoken primordially to Peter solely and this is acknowledg'd by St. Austin himself in his Book de Pastoribus where speaking of our Savior Tunc ideo commendavit Oves quia invenit Petrum imo vero in ipso Petro unitatem commendavit multi erant Apostoli uni dicitur Pasce Oves meas And again in the same Book Petro dixerat Pasce Oves meas quid ergo faciemus Cum Petro commendantur Oves non ibi dixit Dominus Ego pascam Oves meas non tu sed Petre Amas me Pasce Oves meas And again Sic certe a Domino ad Beatum Petrum dicitur Petre Amas me ille tu scis Domine quia amo te Et cum tertio fuisset interrogatus trinâ responsione fuisset subsecutus repetitum est a Domino tertiò Pasce Oves meas Your following attempt is to prove those words to be spoken to all Pastors as well as to Peter by your Saying cited out of St. Basil Consequenter omnibus Pastoribus dictum est c. But this your Quotation do's you no Service at all it amounting to no more than what I frankly grant for I do as well as you believe the words to be consequently derivatively extensively spoken to every Pastor all being Figured and Represented in the Supreme Pastor St. Peter as Austin avouches in festo Petri Pauli In uno Petro figurabatur unitas omnium Pastorum sed bonorum Now the most inferior Pastor is as really one as a Bishop tho' his Sheep be not so numerous nor his Fold so large and I grant that these words were in a subordinate secondary Sense spoken not only to the other Apostles but to all lawful Pastors for Peter tho' he were the Chief was not the Sole Pastor Pastor bonus Christus quid Petrus Nonne Pastor bonus Quid Paulus quid caeteri Apostoli quid Beati Episcopi Martyres quid Sanctus Cyprianus nonne omnes Pastores boni non mercenarii as St. August affirms in his 50th Serm. Evang. Johan Neither did he feed the Flock alone but had the Apostles his Coadjutors and Compresbyters whom he exhorts to feed the Flock not the Universal but the Particular one Pascite gregem qui in vobis the Prerogative of feeding the Universal Church including both the Apostles and other Christians being delegated to Peter only as Supreme Pastor of the Church I therefore affirm that the words were principally immediately and initially spoken to him alone but I acknowledge likewise that in a Proportion'd Adequate Sense In quodam Modo they suit and quadrate with all true Pastors For as Salmeron affirms Quod summo Pastori dicitur id suo modo proportione servatâ aliis minoribus Pastoribus dictum est Because they who are called as Fellow-Labourers into part of the Pastoral Function and Solicitude are to exscribe and imitate the Form that Peter used in Feeding Loving Cherishing and Defending his Flock But I shall now come to your Quotation out of St. Basil which I found to be in his Book de Vita solit Cap. 23. and upon my examining it taking in those words which were Introductive to it I discover'd it to be the most destructive and fatal thing to your purpose that was imaginable the previous words which you suppress'd making wholly against you they are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For a Governor is nothing else but one that represents the person of our Savior and this we are taught by Christ constituting Peter the Pastor of his Church after himself for he says Peter do yon love me more than these Feed my Sheep Here St. Basil do's remarkably affirm what I go about to prove namely That Christ created Peter the Pastor of his Church after himself by vertue of these words But what shall I think of your concealing these Lines Certainly the Action was unworthy and disingenuous especially in you who pretend so much to Truth and Honest dealings and you could herein have no Reverence for the Author or Kindness for me whom by such deeds you cannot pretend to instruct but impose on I do not wonder to see the Fathers so copiously quoted by you now I see 't is your practice to Cull out here and there a Line without perpending its relation either to the foregoing or following Matter