culpable Schismaticall and damnable 2. Secondly that He represents the case so as if some of the Reformed Churches onely did forbeare all Communion with them 3. Thirdly That the grand occasion of the differences betwixt those of the reformed religion and the Papists was that the Bishops of Rome did assume an Infallibility and a Soveraigne dominion over our Faith 4. Fourthly That notwithstanding this usurped infallibility of the Bishops of Rome their assuming a soveraigne dominion over our Faith yet we may give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient and famous a Church and to decline this is to run into an extreame 5. Fifthly That the Church of Rome according to its present establishment and under that constitution wherein the first Reformers found it may be denominated a Church Ancient Famous and that upon those accounts for none other are mentioned possibly there doth belong a respect unto it or an obligation to communicate therewith 6. Sixtly That such a respect or exterior communion may be entertained with Rome and yet we incurre no danger of Superstition The first Proposition is Impious Blasphemous and Offensive to all Protestant eares It condemnes the Reformation carryed on by the Evangeliques abroad and in the Church of England as culpable guilty of an extreame and there is so much of Schisme justly charged on us as there is of extremity in our procedure It subverts all those Laws which are now in force whereby all Communion with Popish Offices and Sacraments celebrated in a different way from that of the Church of England is prohibited to us upon penalty of being imprisoned six months without bayl for the first offense for the second twelve months and for the third during life upon 5 and 6 Edw. 6. cap. 1. 3. The second Proposition is notoriously false there being no Reformed Church no not of the Lutherans but hath constantly held themselves obliged to forbear all Communion with the modern Bishops and Church of Rome Besides it carries a most dangerous insinuation in it as if the Reformed Churches were divided upon this point the contrary whereof is manifest out of the Harmony of Confessions so that such as abet this Popish compliance want not their Assertors even to the repute of most of the Reformed Churches and such as disclaim it are the lesse considerable for number and authority having onely the concurrence of some of the Reformed Churches How pernicious an intimation this is amongst ignorant persons and such as are unacquainted with the state of Religion a study much out of fashion now let any man judg and withall remember that the Church of England is of the number of those reflected upon here Who are they that pretend to forsake the Churches corruptions and not her external Communion Some there be that say they have not left the Church but onely her corcorruptions some that they have not left the Communion but the corruptions of it meaning the internal communion of it and conjunction with it by faith and obedience which disagree from the former onely in the manner of speaking for he that is in the Church is in this kind of Communion with it and he that is not in this internal communion is not in the Church Some perhaps that they left not your external communion in all things meaning that they left it not voluntarily being not fugitivi sed fugati as being willing to joyn with you in any act of piety but were by you necessitated and constrained to do so because you would not suffer them to do well with you except they would do ill with you Now to do ill that you may do well is against the will of God which to every good man is an high degree of necessity But for such Protestants as pretend that de facto they forsook your corruptions and not your external communion that is such as pretend to communicate with you in your Confessions and Liturgies and participation of Sacraments I cannot but doubt very much that neither you nor I have ever met with any of this condition Postremò addit Rex magnum se quidem crimen judicare defectionem ab Ecclesia sed huic crimini affinem se esse aut Ecclesiam suam penitus pernegat Non enim fugimus aiebat ejus Majestas sed fugamur Scit verò tua illustris Dignitas ut qui optimè quà m multi quà m praestantes pietate ac doctrinâ viri ab annis minimùm quingentis Reformationem Ecclesiae in capite membris optârint Quà m graves bonorum Regum ac Principum quaerelae sint saepe auditae statum Ecclesiae suis temporibus lamentantium Quid profuit â—ihil enim eorum ad hanc diem videmus esse emendatum quae correctionis egere cum primis censebantur Quare non veretur Ecclesia Anglicana nè candidis aestimatoribus in hac separatione Donatistis simile quid fecisse videatur Illi gratis sine ullâ causâ Ecclesiam Catholicam gentium cunctarum assensu comprobatam cujus neque fidem neque disciplinam culpare poterant deseruerunt Angli ab ea Ecclesia NECESSITATE DIRA COGENTE Secessionem fecerunt quam innumeri populi Christiani veram Catholicam universalem esse non concedunt ut modestissimè dicam quámque in dogmatis fidei disciplinae formâ multùm variâsle ab antiquâ multa assuisse nova vetustis mala bonis etiam è vestris Scriptores quà m plurimi ingenuè dudum sunt confessi verò notius jam est universo mundo quà m ut possit quisquam vel negare vel etiam ignorare Adde quod jugum Romanae servitutis ita durum per aliquot retro secula erat experta Ecclesia Anglicana novis subinde vexationibus inauditis angariis atque exactionibus supra hominum fidem cruciata ut vel illa sola causa apud Judices non iniquos à Schismatis suspicione ut loquitur Augustinus de Donatistis iniquae discissionis posse videatur ipsam liberare Non enim proâ—ectò Angli à charitate fraternâ animi causâ dissilierunt ut Donatistae neque ut decem tribus populi Iudaici metu impendentis mali quod nondum premebat sed post plurium seculorum patientiam post exantlatas inenarrabiles aerumnas onus intolerabile cui ferendo pares ampliùs non erant neque permittebat conscientia subductis cervicibus tandem excuslerunt From hence as also from our Laws our Thirty nine Articles and Homilies t is manifest that the Church of England is in the number of those that separate from the communion of the Church and Bishops of Rome and that for such important reasons as justifie the action from being causelesse or culpable though amongst all the Reasons alledged by K. Iames in that Letter of Causabon's or in our Laws or other Controvertists I do not find that reckoned for any motive of that great rupture much lesse for the principal or sole one which is
A CENSVRE UPON CERTAINE PASSAGES Contained in the HISTORY OF THE Royal Society As being Destructive to the ESTABLISHED RELIGION and CHURCH of ENGLAND Parque novum fortuna videt concurrere Bellum Atque virum Oxford Printed for Ric. Davis A. D. 1670. TO THE REVEREND Dr IOHN FELL D. D. Dean of Christ-Church SIR I Offer these Papers unto you not to implore your Patronage but to acknowledge your Favours Had my leasure or abilities qualified me for a greater performance it had been tendered unto you with the same readiness This veneration I bear not to the Ranke you hold in the Church or University but to your Merit and in you I at once honour a Learning above this age and a Piety becoming the best Permit me to be just to so real worth and grateful for your constant civilities to me and I shall no way Interest your Person in this Quarrel 'T is enough that I defend Truth and the Church of England and that whatever else I have atchieved I intermedled with nothing but what 't was necessary to be undertook by some body This none can dispute who understands the Politicks of our Nation upon what foundations the publick Tranquillity is suspended Let them that will question the prudence of this action I am satisfied in the profession of a Wisdome that is first pure and then peaceable I am perfectly Your humble Servant HENRY STUBBE Warwick Feb. 16. 1669. A Censure on certain passages in the History of the Royall Society It is Naturall to mens minds when they perceive others to arrogate more to themselves then is their share to deny them even that which else they would confesse to be their right And of the truth of this we have an instance of farre greater concernment then that which is before us And that is in Religion it selfe For while the Bishops of Rome did assume an Infallibility and a Sovereigne Dominion over our Faith the Reformed Churches did not only justly refuse to grant them that but some of them thought themselves obliged to forbear all communion with them and would not give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient and so famous a Church and which might still have been allowed it without any danger of Superstition BEfore I come to resolve and parcell out this impious and pernicious paragraph into severall Propositions it is requisite that I premise two Observations the first is that by Communion here is not meant Civill commerce and the performance of those mutuall offices by which societies in generall or Trading is carried on or Humanity alone is relieved no Reformed Church ever denyed this to the Romanists But the Communion here treated of is Ecclesiasticall and consists not only in the acknowledging of such as are communicated with to be members of the universall Church of Christ built upon a right foundation and holding either no errours or such as do not overthrow the fundamentals but in resorting to the same Church assemblies and celebrating devoutly the same offices or Prayers Ceremonies and Sacraments and this is to be done interchangeably so that each upon occasion resort unto the Churches of the other joyn in the celebration of the same Liturgies or publike prayers participatiō of the same Sacrament of the Lords Supper which is more particularly termed the Cōmunion was alwaies accounted the tessera or mark of Church-fellowship The truth of this Observation appeares from that notion which all ages have had of church-Church-communion which is agreeable hereunto To owne any number or association of men to be a part of the Church Catholique and yet not to resort to the same religious offices amounts not to church-Church-Communion since All Excommunication cuts not off from the body of Christ but from outward or exteriour Communion with a visible Church thus when Chrysostome separated himselfe from the followers of Meletius and of Paulinus though he did acknowledge both Churches to be Orthodox yet is it said that He communicated with neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither doth it amount to an Ecclesiasticall communion if a man be present at the religious Assemblies and offices of another Church if so be he do it not upon a religious account nor devoutly joyne therewith thus when Elijah was present at the Sacrifice and worship of Baal he did not communicate with those Idolaters 1 Kings 18.26 27. Thus Lyranus Cajetanus and other Casuists excuse Naaman for bowing upon a Civill account in the house of Rimmon and allow the case of a Christian slave which waited on her Mistresse to the Sarracen worship and bore up her traine but did not joyne in the Mahometan Service thus the Protestant Divines as Sleidan and the History of the Council of Trent informe us resolved that it was lawfull for the Protestant Princes to pay a civill attendance on the German Emperour even at Masse in the Royall Chappell These things therefore amount not unto Church-communion But the joyning religiously in the same Church-worship and particularly in celebrating the Lords Supper together and this is to be done interchangeably for otherwise onely the one side can be said to communicate with the other not vice versâ Thus when the Papists did resort to our Churches in the beginning of the Reigne of Qu. Elizabeth and joyned in the same prayers and participation of Sacraments with the Church of England it might justly be said that they did hold communion with us but since the Lawes then in force did prohibit the Protestants to be present at or joyne in any publique Service or administration of Sacraments where other ceremonies then what were inacted by the Church of England should be used it is manifest that the Church of England did not communicate with the Papists The second Observation is that our Historian in this Paragraph doth make use of the words communion and respect as equipollent and Synonymous otherwise there is no apodosis no sense in the saying Some of them thought themselves obliged to forbear all communion with them and would not give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient so famous a Church If respect be a terme of a lesser import then communion then might those Reformed Churches decline all Exteriour communion with the Church of Rome justly and without blame and yet retain a respect and kindnesse such as Christians may and ought to beare to the excommunicate to the Heathens and Publicans and in which there is no danger of Superstition though in this Exteriour communion there be evident perill not only of Superstition but Idolatry 1. These things being premised my first Animadversion shall be That the Comparison betwixt men denying to such as usurp too much even their due rights and those that separate in case of religious usurpations is so carryed on by the Historian that to forbeare all communion with the Church and Bishops of Rome is represented as an extreame opinion and consequently as
do grant it Hart. They grant that the Pope may be an Heretick perhaps by a supposal as many things may be which never were nor are nor shall be For you cannot prove that any Pope ever was an Heretick actually though possibly they may be whereof I will not strive This point of the fallibility of the Pope and his subjection to a Council is so notorious with every man that is acquainted with the more ancient and modern Writers so known to any one that hath either read the determinations of Bishop Davenant qu. 5. or the defense of the Dissuasive of Bishop Taylour pag. 40. or the Review of the Council of Trent written by a French Catholick from whom the Disswader borrowed his allegations or that hath so much as read over the History of the Council of Trent that I need not insist on it any longer Notwithstanding the earnestnesse of the Iesuits under Laynez in the Council of Trent yet neither was the Pope's superiority over a Council nor the Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome defined there directly as appears out of the Review of that Council lib. 4. c. 1. and out of the English History pag. 721 722. Neither is there to this day amongst the Papists any thing enacted or determined in that Church which obligeth a man under pain of Excommunication to hold any such thing as the personal Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome the contrary being daily maintained there by more than the Iansenists much lesse is there any Sovereignty in matters of Faith ascribed unto them at this day All books of the Papists are subjected to the judgment of the Church not to the Arbitrement of the Pope The fides Carbonaria or Colliers faith so famed amongst the Papists was not established upon the infallibility or sovereignty of the Bishops of Rome no he told the Devil that He believed as the Church believed and the Church as He. And how necessary soever they make the communion with the particular Church of Rome how great influence soever they ascribe to the Pope over Councils yet the Decrees of the Council of Trent run in the name of the Holy Synod not Pope and there it is determined sess 4. that none dare interpret Holy Scripturs against the sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held or does hold If you enquire in-the doctrines of M r White D r Holden Serenus Cressy and such others as endeavour at present and that with great shew of wit and artifices to seduce the English to that Apostaticall Church there is not one of them that I knowe of who attributes any infallibility to the Pope or submitteth his faith to the Sovereigne decisions of the Bishop of Rome As for Serenus Cressy he very judiciously deserts the School-terme of Infallibility for that of the Churches Authority and saith that the exceptions and advantages which the Protestants have against the Roman Church proceed only from their mis-understanding of her necessary doctrines or at most that all the efficacy they have is onely against particular opinions inferences made by particular Catholique writers He shews that D r Stapleton asserts that the infallible voyce and determination of the Church is included in the decree of the Church speaking in a Generall Council representatively In which the Church is infallible with this restriction viz in delivering the substance of faith in publique doctrines and things necessary to salvation Other Catholiques and namely Panormitan teach that the decrees of Generall Council are not absolutely and necessarily to be acknowledged infallible till they be received by all particular Catholique Churches because till then they cannot properly be called the faith of the universall Church or of the body of all faithfull Christians to which body the promise of infallibility is made And this was the Doctrine of Thomas Waldensis and some other Scholmen c. An opinion this is which though not commonly received yet I do not saith S. C. find it deeply censured by any yea the Gallican Churches reckoned this among their chiefest priviledges and liberties that they were not obliged to the decisions of a Generall Council till the whole body of the Gallican Clergy had by a speciall agreement consented to them and so proposed them to the severall Churches there And to this last opinion doth S. C. incline and his book was approved at Paris as consonant to the Catholique faith He guides himselfe by the Authority of received Councils he acknowledges that to be onely necessarily accounted an Article of Catholique faith which is actually acknowledged and received by Catholiques and since contradictions cannot be actually assented unto it will follow that whatsoever decisions of Councils may seem to oppose such articles are not necessarily to be accounted Catholique doctrines and by consequence not obligatory He denies that Generall Councils can make new articles of faith they are witnesses of what hath been delivered not Sovereigns to determine of new truths either by way of addition to the former or in opposition thereunto Their Infallibility is limited to Tradition and spiritually assisted in the faithfull reporting of what hath been delivered what ever reports or decrees they make of another nature they are to be received with a different assent from what is Catholique faith There is a double obligation from decisions of Generall Councils the first an obligation of Christian beliefe in respect of doctrines delivered by Generall Councils as of universall Tradition the second onely of Canonicall obedience to orders and constitutions for practice by which men are not bound to believe those are inforced as from Divine authority but onely to submit unto them as acts of a lawfull Ecclesiasticall power however not to censure them as unjust much lesse to oppose and contradict them Much more doth the same Author adde which give little countenance to that state of the controversie which our Author forms unto us No Soveraigne dominion over our faith is by him ascribed to the Bishop of Rome or Nationall or Generall Counâ—ills and as to Infailibility which Mr Chillingworth had impugned he thus acquits himselfe I may in generall say of all his Objections that since they proceed only against the word Infallibility and that word extended to the utmost heighth and latitude that it possibly can beare Catholiques as such are not at all concerned in them seeing neither is that expression to be found in any received Council nor did ever the Church enlarge her authority to so vast a widenesse as Mr Chillingworth either conceived or at least for his particular advantage against his adversary thought good to make show as if he conceived so As to the subject wherein Infallibility or Authority is to be placed since Catholiques vary as to that point he sayes 't is evident thereby that they are not obliged to any one part of the Question only they are to agree in this Tridentine decision Ecclesiae est judicare de vero sensu Sacrae
Scripturae It belongs to the Church to judge of the true sense of holy Scripture Dr Holdens booke is Licensed and highly commended by the French Divines and he himselfe a Doctor of the Sorbonne and he thus delivers himselfe Statuendum est quod quicquid à Theologis Catholicis in utramque partem etiam cum maximâ acerbitate disseritur ac disputatur dum vel propriis suis adhaerent nimis Sacrarum Scripturarum interpretationibus vel patronorum suorum opinionibus vel tandem consecutionibus deductis ex fidei principiis certissimum est neutrum contentionis seu concertationis extremum posse Divinae Catholicae Fidei rationem habere Quo sequâ—tur Summum Pontificem nullatenus posse in suâ solâ personâ disceptatas hujusmodi quaestiones ita decernere ut vi solius sui decreti pars definita sit fidei divinae Catholicae articulus Disputant siquidem Theologi an si quando Summi Pontifices hujusâ—emodi argumenta in Scholis utrinque agitata definiverint sintne eorum decreta ex institutione Christi ab omni errere libera Imò an Decretum aliquod à solo Pontifice Summo emanans sit ex hoc tantùm capite divinitùs infallibile Haec inquam in utramque partem ventilata videmus à piissimis quamplurimis doctissimus Catholicis Autoribus tam antiquioribus quà m recentioribus quorum neutram partem audivimus unquam fuisse Censuris aliquibus authenticis prohibitam aut improbatam Quapropter evidentissimè constat Catholicum neminem astringi aut huic aut alteri part adhaerere tanquam Fidei Catholicae divinae articulo tametsi Summorum Pontificum definitionibus debitum obsequium sit praestandum Out of all this precedent discourse 't is manifest that Infallibility and Sovereigne dominion over our faith usurped by the Bishops of Rome neither was nor could be upon Catholique principles and amongst men of common understanding the cause of Separation betwixt the Reformed Churches and the Romanists since neither the one nor other branch of that assertion is defined in that Church or so censured as not to be held upon paine of Excommunication The fourth Proposition as it is conjunctive or copulative to which it is necessary that both parts be true must admit of a distinction before it be censured To assert that we may hold coÌ„munion with any one that is account him of the same Church in generall with us and joyne with him in the celebration of the same Church worship and participation of Sacraments 't is necessary that we consider what it is He professeth and what it is wherein he and we communicate and what relation we stand in in relation to the Actings of our Superiour Governours that may have influence upon the case As for Example if the King by an Act of Parliament shall forbid us exteriour Communion with the Pope whatever charitable opinion I might be induced to have otherwise of him yet I should not thinke fitting to do it or that such my procedure were Schismaticall Thus Obadiah and the seven thousand incorrupt Iewes together with Elijah and Elisha did not resort to the Temple-worship at Ierusalem by reason of the prohibition by Ieroboam 1 Kings 12. Thus the English Papists complyed in England with the Actions of H. 8. Now 't is notorious that by our Laws the English are forbid in England to be present at any other rites or communion then what are authorised by the Church of this Nation and that upon penalties very great upon 5. and 6. Edward 6. and 23. Eliz. 1. so that in reference to this particular the Assertion of our Virtuoso is contrary to the Lawes of our Land charges them with injustice tends to seduce the Kings Subjects from their obedience If we abstract froÌ„ this consideration and reflect upon the persons to be communicated with and the things wherein the communion is held I say it is a difficult thing to determine what those tenets are which cut a man off from the generall communion of Christians provided that the matters wherein the communion consists be innocent and blamelesse I finde the Apostles to communicate with the Iewes in the Temple-worship and in their Synagogue-worship I finde the Communion not interrupted by the Assertions that the Observation of the Leviticall Law was necessary to a Christian Act. 21.20 Thus though S. Paul found very enormous errours and such as would now be called Fundamentall a ground for Anathema's in the Churches of Corinth Galatia and Colossi yet did he speake honourably of them calls them Churches communicates with them but not with their errours and heresies I finde the Arians and the Orthodox to communicate together at first in the same worship scarce to be distinguished one from another till the Gloria Patri came to be said and after the determinations of Nice when the Arians had gained the advantage at Ariminum though there were some Catholiques so scrupulous that they would have no communion with such as received the Council of Ariminum yet S. Hilary thought it best to converse with them and to call them to such Councils as were frequently held in France upon such occasions And where this sort of communion is to be carried on and when to be interrupted I am not learned enough to understand out of Antiquity It appeares to mee that the bare pretense of an Infallibility is not enough to cut off Communion if the Infallibility be restrained to some limitations and explications for as the naturall man may say he is sometimes infallibly assured of sensible objects and consequently be so farre infallible so the Spirituall man may be in many things infallibly assord certitudine fidei cuÌ„i non potest subesse falsum by the grace of God and the special assistance of the Holy Ghost so as that he is so farre infallible Rom. 8.16 1 Iohn 5.13 Iohn 14 20. 2 Cor. 13.5 1 Cor. 2.11 12. And this circumstantiate Limited infallibility if it extend it selfe to some things past whether of a morall or spirituall nature is not alwaies blame worthy much lesse a sufficient ground for to rescind Exterior Communion It remaines then that we inquire into the nature of the pretended infallibility what it proceeds upon and what it interferes with For any man to assume to himselfe an absolute and essentiall and unconditionate infallibility is blasphemy if not madnesse in an humane creature and undoubtedly rescinds all communion if it do not rather entitle to Bedlam For any man to assert that he is by the particular favour and promise of God infallible either in omnibus quaestionibus tam facti quam juris which some Iesuites avow of the Pope or in matters of faith only however that tenet be explicated either in relation to the determining of what hath been taught by the Church of Christ or as to additionall decisions that the profession of such infallibility provided it do not extend to the preaching of any knowne fundamentall errour
nor impose on the communicants the beliefe of and assent unto the reality of such infallibility perhaps it is not enough to breake off an Exterior communion But if such infallibility be made use of to the establishing of or introducing impious blaspemous and Idolatrous practises if it frustrate the tenure of the Gospel and render the Word of God as suspended upon that Authority of none effect as to being the rule of our faith and the finall Iudge of controversies I do thinke that although the errours and Idolatries were no part of the Church Service nor imposed on the Communicants to hold yet were all Communion exteriour to be avoided with such a person and his adherents so that none ought to resort to their assemblies after sufficient due detection of that Antichristian monster But agreeably to the practice of the Church of England our indulgent mother I do think that the resort of such men to our Church-worship Communion ought to be allowed not scrupled at Thus our Lawes enacted in Parliament which with the assent of Convocation is the Supreme Judge here on earth of Heresies consequently of Legal Non-cōmunion punish Recusants for not cōmunicating with us in the Church-service yet enjoynes them not to relinquish their opinions But in case such Infallibility in matters of faith be pretended to by any or owned as introduceth Blaspemy Idolatry errour and superstition into the publique Offices of Divine Service a Protestant cannot lawfully and with any good Conscience joyne with Him or Them in such worship viz No Protestant can out of Devotion which is requisite to Prayer joyne with the Papists in the blaspemies and Idolatries of the Masse as any man knowes that hath but lightly inspected their Missall or receive the Sacrament in one kind contrary to the divine institution as an Expiatory sacrifice availing the quick and the dead which is repugnant to the primary intention of Christ and this paying a religious veneration to the grosse elements and breaden god This judgement I am much confirmed in by Mr Chillingworth where he sayes that the causes of our separation from Rome are as we pretend and are ready to justifie because we will not be partakers with her in Superstition Idolatry impiety and most cruell tyranny both upon the bodies and soules of men you mistake in thinking that Protestants hold themselves obliged not to communicate with you only or principally for your errours and corruptions for the true reason is not so much because you maintaine errours and corruptions as because you impose them and will allow your Communion to none but such as will hold them with you and have so ordered your Communion that either we must communicate with you in these things or nothing Thus much may suffice for that part of the Proposition that notwithstanding the usurped Infallibilitie of the Bishop of Rome yet ought we to hold exteriour Communion with that ancient and famous Church For supposing the case to be as I agreeably to the Church of England have stated it the Antiquity Grandeur and Fame of the Church of Rome are too extrinsecall and weake Arguments to sway us into an impious Communion Nor is the imputation of Schisme so horrid nor exteriour communion so amiable and inviting that to pursue that we should either abandon or endanger the truth So King Iames in his reply Neque ignorat Rex multa saepè veteris Ecclesiae patres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fecisse pro bono pacis ut loquebantur id est studio conservandae unitatis ac mutuae communionis abrumpendae metu Quorum exemplum se quoque paratum esse profitetur aemulari sectantium pacem vestigia persequi ad aras usque hoc est quantum in hodierno statu Ecclesiae per conscientiae integritatem licet Nemini enim se mortalium cedere aut in dolore quem capit gravissimum é membrorum Ecclesiae distractione quam pii patres tantoperè sunt abominati aut in cupiditate qua tenetur communicationem habendi cum omnibus si possit fieri qui membra sunt mystici corporis Domini nostri Jesu Christi Haec quum ita sint existimat nihiloseciùs Rex justissimam habere se causam cur ab iis dissentiat qui simpliciter sine ulla penitus distinctione aut exceptione hanc communionem sine fine urgent Inter proprias Ecclesiae notas hanc fatetur esse cum primis necessariam non esse tamen autumat veram ipsam Ecclesiae formam quod Philosophus appellat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Didicit Rex é lectione Sacrae Scripturae neque aliter Patres olim sentiebant ad unum omnes veram 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae formam esse ut audiant Oves Christi vocem sui Pastoris ut Sacramenta administrentur ritè legitimè quomodo videlicet Apostoli praeiverunt qui illos proximè secuti sunt Quae hac ratione sunt institutae Ecclesiae necesse est ipsas multiplici communione inter sese esse devinctas Uniuntur in capite suo Christo qui est fons vitae in quo vivunt omnes quos pater elegit pretioso sanguine ipsius redimendos vitâ aeternâ gratis donandos Uniuntur unitate fidei doctrinae in iis utique capitibus quae sunt ad salutem necessaria unica enim salutaris doctrina unica in coelos via Vniuntur conjunctione animorum verâ charitate charitatisque officiis maximè autem precum mutuarum Uniuntur denique spei ejusdem communione promissae haereditatis expectatione gnari se ante jacta mundi fundamenta praedestinatos esse de electis loquor ut sint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod divinitus ait Apostolus Sed addit Rex eandem tamen Ecclesiam si aliquod ejus membrum discedat à regula fidei pluris facturam amorem veritatis quà m amorem unitatis Scit supremam legem esse in domo Dei doctrinae coelestis sinceritatem quam si quis relinquat Christum relinquit qui est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam relinquit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 atque eo ipso ad corpus Christi desinit pertinere Cum hujusmodi desertoribus nec vult nec potest verè Catholicus communicare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fugiet igitur horum communionem Ecclesia dicet cum Gregorio Nazianzeno 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nec dubitabit cum eodem beato Patre si opus fuerit pronuntiare esse quendam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod autem in Ecclesia futura esset aliquando necessaria hujusmodi separatio cùm aliis sacrae paginae locis clarè docemur tum illa apertè declarat Spiritus sancti admonitio non temerè profectò Ecclesiae facta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inquientis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quaenam sit illa Babylon unde exire populus Dei jubetur non quaerit hoc loco Rex neque super eo quidquam
pronunciat Hoc quidem res ipsa manifestissimè ostendit sive privata quaedam Ecclesia eò loci intelligitur appellatione Babylonis sive universae pars major eam priùs fuisse legitimam Ecclesiam cum qua pii piè communicarent postea verò quà m longiùs processit ejus depravatio jubentur pii exire communionem abrum pere ut facile fit vobis intelligere non omnem communionem cum iis qui de nomine Christi appellantur fidelibus esse expetendam sed illam demum quae sit salvâ doctrinae coelitus revelatae integritate Out of which words and they seem to be the words not of Casaubon or K. Iames but the Church of England if I am able to deduce any consequence I am sure this is one that it is not at any time lawful to hold with any Church a communion with her ènown defaults and impieties and that how desireable soever Unity be yet the regard thereto ought never to transport us so far as to mix the service of God with that of Belial that some circumstances do legitimate an holy war and that a bad agreement is not to be chosen before a contest and separation in the behalf of real Godlinesse I am sure I am by the tenor of that Letter justified if I dare not joyn with a Church service wherein Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the Masse and prayers for the dead and to the Saints not to mention the mutilation of the Communion and Image-worships must be owned or hypocritically complyed with to the dishonour of God 1 Cor. 10.20 21 22. the detriment and offense of the weak Christians 1 Cor. 8.10 11 12. and the strengthning of the party communicated with in those errors and Blasphemies How far further I am warranted by that Letter and the practice of the primitive fathers to rescind a Communion not otherwise erroneous or faulty upon the account of errors Idolatry or conceived Blasphemy in the practice or speculative tenets of a Church or person what private men what a particular Bishop or national Church may do I shall not entermeddle with as having alledged enough in opposition to what our Virtuoso layes down I should proceed now to enquire whether that we may hold communion with the Bishops of Rome supposing that they challenge a Sovereign dominion over our faith But since there was no such thing pressed upon the English Church to occasion the first rupture the generality of Christendome being then and at the first calling of the Council of Trent inclined to the contrary tenet of the Pope's being inferiour to a Council General denying his Sovereignty and Dominion over the faith of the Church and his personal Infallibility being an opinion scarcely to be mentioned or insisted on much lesse authenticated in those dayes and since that now neither the one or other tenet can justly be charged upon that Church nor is a condition of their Communion at present since the Controversie would be large and intrigued with distinctions I leave the debating thereof as inutile and content my self with having sufficiently refuted our Virtuoso already in what hath been alledged though seemingly to another purpose Undoubtedly there is no conniving or complying with such a person for one that is to avoid the appearance of evill It is a dethroning of Christ whom God hath appointed to be the head of the Church and by him all the body furnished and knit together by joints and bands increaseth with the increasing of God It is the introducing of another Corner-stone and another foundation the creating of another fabrick then what is built upon Christ and the Apostles and Prophets at least it is a compliance with all such unchristian Monstrosities a silence that is equivalent to an Assent in such high cases I have learn'd it from Dr. Raynolds Seeing that to exercise this rule and dominion is a prerogative Royal and proper to the King of Kings to give it either in whole or in part cannot be a lesser offense than High Treason Fifthly that the Church of Rome according to its present establishment and under that constitution wherein the first Reformers found it may be denominated a Church Ancient and Famous and that upon these accounts for none other are mentioned possibly there doth belong a respect unto it or an obligation to communicate therewith The first part of the Proposition is false and notoriously contradicts the doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles and Homilies of the Church of England For although it be granted that even those Articles the Homilies and our Writers and I my self do bestow vulgarly the appellation of a Church yet is that an impropriety of speech and not to be justified otherwise then by professing that when the name of Church is attributed to Rome and England the predication is equivocal since that the definition of a true Christian Church which makes up the Ninteenth Article cannot be accommodated to the Romanists viz The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithful men in the which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same This Definition is asserted and enlarged upon in the second Homily for Whitsunday in these words The true Church is an universal congregation or fellowship of God's faithful and elect people built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head-corner stone And it hath alwaies three notes or marks by which it is known Pure and sound doctrine The Sacraments ministred according to Christ's holy institution and the right use of Ecclesiastical Discipline This description of the Church is agreeable both to the Scriptures of God and also to the doctrine of the Ancient Fathers so that none may justly find fault with it Now if you will compare this with the Church of Rome not as it was in the beginning but as it is presently and hath been for the space of Nine hundred years and odde you shall well perceive the state thereof to be so far wide from the nature of the true Church that Nothing can be more For neither are they built upon the foundation of the Apostles retaining the sound and pure Doctrine of Jesus Christ neither yet do they order the Sacraments or else the Ecclesiastical Keyes in such sort as he did first institute and ordain them but have so intermingled their own Traditions and inventions by chopping and changing by adding and plucking away that now they may seem converted in a new guise Christ commanded to his Church a Sacrament of his Body and Bloud they have changed it into a Sacrifice for the quick and the dead Christ did minister to his Apostles and the Apostles to other men indifferently under both kinds they have robbed the Lay-people of the Cup saying that for them one kind is sufficient Christ ordained no other Element to
be used in Baptisme but onely water whereunto when the word is joyned it is made as S. Augustine saith a full and perfect Sacrament They being wiser in their own conceit than Christ think it not well nor orderly done unlesse they use Conjuration unlesse they hallow the water unlesse there be Oyl Salt Spittle Tapers and such other dumb Ceremonies serving to no use contrary to the plain rule of St. Paul who willeth all things to be done in the Church to Edification Christ ordained the Authority of the Keyes to excommunicate notorious Sinners and to absolve them which are truly penitent They abuse this power at pleasure as well in cursing the Godly with Bell Book and Candle as also absolving the Reprobate which are known to be unworthy of any Christian Society whereof they that lust to see Examples le them search their Lifes To be short look what our Saviour Christ pronounced of the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel the same may be boldly and with a safe conscience pronounced of the Bishops of Rome namely they have forsaken and daily do forsake the Commandements of God to erect and set up their own Constitutions Which thing being true as all they which have any light of God's word must needs confess we may well conclude according to the Rule of St. Augustine That the BISHOPS OF ROME AND THEIR ADHERENTS ARE NOT THE TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST much lesse to be taken as chief Heads and Rulers of the same Whosoever saith he do dissent from the Scriptures concerning the Head although they be found in all places where the Church hath appointed yet are they not in the Church A plain place concluding directly against the Church of Rome These Homilies are of such Authority with us that the Clergy must subscribe unto them That they are a part of the Liturgy the Rubrique in the Common Prayer and the Preface to them shews and the Preface saith they were set forth for the expelling of erroneous and poysonous Doctrines More fully t is said in the Orders of K. Iames Ann. Dom. 1622. the Homilies are set forth by Authority in the Church of England not onely for the help of non-preaching but withall as it were a pattern for preaching Ministers Neither is Bishop Iewel in his Apology for the English Church any more favourable to the Pope and his Adherents Nam nos quidem discessimus ab illâ Ecclesiâ in qua nec verbum Dei purè audiri potuit nec Sacramenta administrari nec Dei nomen ut oportuit invocari quam ipsi fatentur multis in rebus esse vitiosam in qua nihil erat quod quenquam posset prudentem hominem de sua salute cogitantem retinere Postremò ab Ecclesia eâ discessimus quae nunc est non quae olim fuit atque ita discessimus ut Daniel è cavea Leonum ut tres illi pueri ex incendio nec tam discessimus quà m ab istis diris devotionibus ejecti sumus And in the conclusion that pious Bishop thus delivers himself again Diximus nos ab illâ Ecclesiâ quam isti speluncam latronum fecerant in qua nihil integrum aut Ecclesiae simile reliquerant quámque ipsi fatebantur multis in rebus erravisse ut Lothum olim è Sodoma aut Abrahamum è Chaldaeâ non contentionis studio sed Dei ipsius admonitu discessisle ex sacris libris quos scimus non posse fallere certam quandam Religionis formam quaesivisse ad veterum Patrum atque Apostolorum primitivam Ecclesiam hoc est ad primordia atque initia tanquam ad fontes rediisse I might prosecute this point with an infinity of Citations out of such Divines as were eminent Writers and Actors in the beginning and throughout the Reign of Qu. Elizabeth when the Church of England even in the judgment of Dr. Heylyn received her establishment and when her Sentiments were best known but I shall content my self with Dr. Whitaker alone Romanam Ecclesiam Catholicam quae nunc est quaeque recentioribus hisce temporibus floruit eam nos non solam Ecclesiam Catholicam sed ne omnino quidem Catholicam esse dicimus nec tantùm non Catholicam id est Vniversalem sed nè veram quidem Ecclesiam Christi particularem esse contendimus Quare deserendam esse dicimus ab omninibus qui servati volunt tanquam Antichristi Satanae Synagogam Nullam in ea salutem sperandam esse imò damnandam illam dicimus tanquam barathrum haereseos erroris Si quando ex animo de Ecclesia illa loquamur eam semper Romanam Papisticam Antichristianam Apostaticam Ecclesiam vocamus Other Elogies then these no true son of the Church of England did afford unto the Romish Church at first and they who afterwards began to speak more mildly of her in which number were Bishop Hall and Dr. Potter they allowed her the name of a Church but with those termini minuentes the additiō whereof renders all simple predications to be false those restrictions of a Schismatical Heretical idolatrous and superstitious Church They compar'd her to a man mortally wounded nothing can be argued from their Writings to condemn the Protestant separation of Schisme they make her so a Church as to interdict all communion and all peace with Her And if it be thus difficult to procure from any man that regulates his judgment according to the established doctrine of our Church any manner of grant that the Romanists are a Church I am sure it is impossible to extort from any such person a confession that the Church of Rome in that condition wherein our Reformers found it and wherein it still continues is either Antient or Famous The Homily aforerecited allowes it no greater antiquity than of about one thousand years and t is an avowed Truth that whatever is not primitive and Apostolick is an innovation The transactions betwixt the Emperour Phocas and the first of the Universal Bishops are too recent and too infamous to give unto the present Romanists any repute It hath alwaies been the profession of the Church of England and of all Protestants that they deserted the Church of Rome because she was apostatised from what was truely ancient and the Church of England is really what the Papists pretend to be this Iewell declares in his Apology more than once Nostra doctrina quam rectiùs possumus Christi Catholicam doctrinam appellare nova nemini videri potest nisi sicui aut Prophetarum fides aut Evangelium aut Christus ipse videatur novus The passage I mention'd formerly shews that we reformed our selves from their errours and impieties to conforme with the genuine Antiquity The Homily against peril of Idolatry allowes scarce of any Antiquity but within the first three hundred years Others extend a fair respect as far as the dayes of the Emperour Marcianus in whose time the
Council of Chalcedon was held Rex Ecclesia Anglicana quatuor prima Concilia Oecumenica quam ad mittant eo ipso satis declarant verae as legitimae Ecclesiae tempus non includere se uno aut altero demum seculo verùm multò longiùs producere Marciani Imperatoris sub quo Chalcedonense Concilium est celebratum tempus complecti If our Historian can shew that the present Church of Rome and the Tridentine model is so ancient as to come within this period I shall admire him and the Congregatio de propaganda fide multiply their acknowledgments unto him beyond what his present performances deserve yet really He merits very much from the Romanists in charging all the Schisme upon the Protestants who made a causlesse separation and whilst he condemnes the Pope onely for usurping an infallibility and sovereign dominion over our Faith without so much as imputing unto him any abuse of that pretended power and infallibility without fixing on him any error superstition Idolatry or other temporal retrenchments upon our Monarchy which alone would have justified a separation from the Papal Church But to resume my former Discourse I shall adde this passage out of K. Iames thereby to manifest how much more knowing our Virtuoso must be than all the Prelates of the Church of England were then if he can assert this Fame and Antiquity of the Romish Church Fatetur Rex Ecclesiam suam à capitibus non paucis ejus fidei disciplinae quam hodie Romanus Pontifex probat omnibus tuetur viribus discessionem secisse verùm eam Rex Ecclesia Anglicana non defectionem à fide veteris Catholicae interpretantur sed potiùs ad fidem Catholicam pristinam quae in Romana novis inventis fuerat multipliciter mirè deformata reversionem ad Christum unicum Ecclesiae suae magistrum conversionem Quare siquis doctrinâ hujus observationis fretus inferre ex illa velit Anglicanam Ecclesiam quia Romanae placita nonnulla rejicit à veteri Catholicâ discessisse non hoc illi prius Rex largietur quam solidis rationibus probaverit omnia quae à Romanis docentur illa praecipuè quae volunt ipsi ut necessaria ad salutem credi ab omnibus antiquae Catholicae à principio probata fuisse sancita hoc verò neminem posse facere aut unquam facturum neminem certè hactenus fecisse tam liquidò Regi constat Ecclesiae Anglicanae Antistitibus quà m Solem meridie lucere But to gratifie our Historian to yeild up the utmost of Antiquity to the Church of Rome to ascribe all that renown which so charmes our Virtuoso and which is not to be found in the Narrative of that Papacy which contains nothing almost but what is ignominious base and detestable to do all this signifies nothing to Communion unless I also grant that the Romanists are a true Church and that there is not any thing in the constitution of that Church which may give a pious Christian just occasion to avoid or rescind Ecclesiastical Communion therewith Imagine them as ancient as the Manichees Gnosticks and Simon Magus or even the old Serpent as flourishing and renowned as ever were the Arrians or Saracens all this concernes not the little flock them whose portion and kingdom is not of this world whose calling is of another nature There was a time when Christianity it self must have been slighted justly and the Scribes and Pharisees were in the right if to make one Orthodox he must be fortunate and that Antiquity and outward splendor must be the Characteristical discoveries of Truth t is better to be Master of the treasures in the Castle of S. Angelo than to be endowed with the Holy Ghost if Peter must also say Gold and Silver have I none The Laws of the Iews were thought novell by Haman what S. Paul preached at Athens was not endeared with the most material circumstances of Antiquity and Fame Et Celsus cùm ex professo scriberet adversùs Christum ut ejus Evangelium novitatis nomine per contemptum eluderet An inquit post tot secula nunc tandem subiit Deum tam sera recordatio Eusebius etiam author est Christianam religionem ab inition contumeliae causâ dictam fuisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est peregrinam novam But I shall silence my self and pursue this controversie no longer it having a thousand times been handled succesfully in opposition to the Papists by Protestant writers of our Nation and others beyond the Seas who have treated de signis Ecclesiae It is evident that the Romanists are not ancient nor famous nor a true Church according to the doctrine of the Church of England Or if in any limited sense it may be called a Churâ—h Ancient and Famous none of these attributes can give it such a repute that any obedient and true Son of our Church can say that such respect is due thereunto as infers any Ecclesiastical exteriour Communion much lesse can I or any else assent to the subsequent Proposition 6. That such a respect or exteriour Communion may be entertain'd with Rome and yet we incur no danger of Superstition To censure this Proposition it is necessary that we consider it in a twofold sense either as it relates to that original mistake of our Historian about the Infallibility and Sovereign Dominion over our faith assumed by the Pope or as it relates unto the real condition and constitution of the Romish Church in its Offices and religious Doctrines Upon the first consideration ariseth this Question Whether a Protestant of the Church of England can entertain communion with the Church of Rome supposing no material Errours in the worship wherein the Communion is maintained the Bishop thereof assuming and the Church allowing of an infallibility in him and a sovereign dominion over our Faith and not onely over theirs and this without danger of Superstition Upon the second Consideration ariseth this Question Whether it be possible for any Protestant of the Church of England to hold Communion with the present Church of Rome in its Ecclesiastical Offices and Doctrines without danger of Superstiton The first Question is easily decided against our Virtuoso from that those Churches who have held communion with the Pope when those pretensions were on foot have been involved in superstitious and idolatrous practices which is notorious out of all Church history and the exorbitancies of the Pope in that kind when the Canonists and other abettours ascribed unto him a Sovereignty over the Christian faith have introduced all the Superstitions of the Gregorian Missal and Blasphemies and Idolatries nor doth it appear that any thing ever contributed so much to the advancement of all those superstitious and Idolatrous practices and Tenets as some unwary expressions and respects of Communion which have been indulged to the Pope by the Fathers and others of succeeding Ages which is notorious to any man
that considers the pretences upon which the Dominion of the Pope and his Supremacy is founded by the Roman Courtiers For though neither did the French Church nor other Bishops ever intend to submit unto several superstitious and destructive tenets that the Papacy and Canonists urge yet into what dangers some are fallen and ensnared and others are threatned to be involved is manifest and all this from too great tendernesse in point of Ecclesiastical Communion It is manifest from the mutability and frailty of humane nature and the usual effect thereof upon temptations that where such a power or Sovereignty is lodged it may be applied to the introducing of Superstitious and Idolatrous practices Thus Ieroboam the son of Nebat made Israel to sin they perhaps innocently complied with that Sovereignty when Orthodox and he misimploying it diverted them from the true worship of God So Nebuchadnezar one day erects an Idol and appoints all upon pain of death to worship it by and by commands all to worship the God of the three children Thus Darius makes a Decree that none shall put up any prayer or petition to God but onely to the King for thirty dayes the transgressor being to be cast into the Lyon's denne How many think we by holding Communion with a Prince owning such a power were by those Caprichio's ingaged not into the peril of but actual Superstition and Idolatry Nor are the Papal pretenses lesse the Canonists and Decretals ascribing unto him a power even to alter the Christian faith and not onely to enlarge it that He and Christ have but one Tribunal that He is God that if He vary from the Scripture and Christianity t is to be presumed that God Almighty hath changed his mind with such expression heretofore the Papal Letters and Canonists were stuffed and what danger there is from our Historian's communion of Superstition and Idolatry appears from the Determinations that have been made about Transubstantiation and the consequent worship and superstitions about that Breaden God In fine for I will not insist upon so notorious a point since the Councill of Constance could determine and involve others in a superstitious and impious compliance that non obstante notwithstanding any thing in the Scripture to the contrary the Communion in one kind should be celebrated T is strange for any man to say that there is no danger in communicating with one pretending to such a power though not yet abusing it there being so evident instances of fact to the contrary If there were no other argument for the continuance and advancing of the study of Philology and all ancient Learning and Church History the horror of this Assertion of our Virtuoso is such that no Protestant of the Church of England can otherwise but assent thereunto now Any man that understands the controversies betwixt the Papists and Protestants and contests about Image worship and several other Papal Superstitions and Idolatries which have hapned in Greece Germany France Spain and England of old and later dayes betwixt those of the Roman Catholick Communion will never assent to our Author's opinion or free him from the imputation of grosse and intolerable ignorance The second Question Whether it be possible for any Protestant of the Church of England to communitate with the present Church of Rome in her tenets and Ecclesiastical offices without danger of Superstition is easily determin'd by considering the nature of Ecclesiastical communion which I explained in the beginning and the nature and grounds of our separation from Rome and Reforming our selves No man can hold such an assertion but he must desert the Thirty nine Articles wherein the invocation of Saints and Image worship prayers in an unknown Tongue the five additional Sacraments Communion under one kâ—nd Transubstantiation worshipping of the Hoste are all condemned Nay the last additional Rubrique declares it to be express Idolatry to worship the Bread Now the actual acknowledging of all these superstitions and errours the actual complying with such as relate to practice is so required of all such as hold communion with the Church of Rome that none can remain therein without being sensible thereof so that either our Virtuoso understood not what it was to communicate with the Romanists or was ignorant what Superstition and Idolatry are when he writ this passage But so much hath been said by me in the foregoing passages in vindication of our Church for departing from the Romish Communion and our Laws together with other Ecclesiastical constitutions are so positive and severe against all such Communion that I need not insist hereon further but leave it to the Consideration of my Superiours and of those that are skilled in the Laws of the Land How consonant this passage of our Historian is thereunto how pernicious towards the subversion of the established Religion and how far punishable it being a notorious endeavour to withdraw the King's Majesties subjects from the Religion established to the Romish Religion Histor. R. S. pag. 349. He the Natural and Experimental Philosopher will be led to admire the wonderful contrivance of the Creation and so to apply and direct his praises aright which no doubt when they are offer'd up to Heaven from the mouth of one that hath well studied what he commends will be more suitable to the Divine Nature than the blind Applauses of the Ignorant This was the first service that Adam perform'd to his Creator when he obeyed him in mustering and naming and looking into the nature of all Creatures This had been the onely Religion if men had continued innocent in Paradise and had not wanted a Redemption THe former part of this passage is contrary to the Analogy of Faith and Scripture in that it makes the acceptablenes of mens prayers to depend more or less on the study of Natural Philosophy Whereas the Apostle suspends the acceptablenes of all Prayers unto God in being made unto him in the name and for the mediation of Christ Iesus applied by faith Hebr. 10.19 20 21 22. Having therefore Brethren boldnesse to enter into the holiest by the bloud of Iesus By a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us through the vaile that is to say his flesh and having an High priest over the house of God let us draw neer with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evill conscience and our bodies washed with pure water Here is not any mention how that Experimental Philosophie doth render any prayers more suitable to God than those of the lesse curious this knowledg is no where in the new or old Testament so far recommended unto us as that without this qualification the Saints should be said to offer up the blind applauses of ignorant persons Particularly I do not find this circumstance endeared unto us by that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 13.2 Though I have the gift of Prophesy and understand all Mysteries and all knowledg and though I have
b In summa lib. 5. tit de haereticis c summ de Eccles. l. 2. c. 93. 112. d de Schismate Pontificum e de concord catholicâ l. 2. c. 17. f summ part 3. tit 22. c. 7. g adv haereses l. 1. c. 2 4. h locor Theolog l. 6. c. 8. i de visibili Monarch l. 7. k controv 4. part 2. q. 1. l Canonistae in dist 40 c. si papa Archid Ioannâ— Andr. c. in fidei de haereticis in Sext. Cajetan de authoritate Papae Concilii c. 20 23. m Distinct. 40. c. si Papa n Synodus Romana quint. sub Symmachâ— S. Cresseyes Exomolog c. 51. Edit 1. Ibid. c. 52. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. c. 59. Dr Holden de resolut fidei l. 1. c. 9. I am very irresolute in this opinion of mine because I often finde the ancient Fathers Councels upon the account of errour heresie to Excommunicate and forbid all resort to heretical Synagogues and other Acts of Church communion though I do not finde that they varyed from the Catholiques in their Liturgies and there be some texts of Scripture that may render the case doubtfull as 2 John 7 8 9 10 11 12. 1 Cor. 8.10 1 Cor. 10.20 21 22. Tit. â— 10. yet may th 〈◊〉 cogency of these and other texts be eluded by contrary practises determinations and Texts as 1 Coâ— 3 12. Ephes. 4 5 6. 1 Eliz. c. 1. â— Calybute Doâ—ning of the staâ— Ecclesiasticallâ— here conclus 2 p. 41. Mr Chillingworth ch 5. § 11. Ibid. § 40. Causabon resp ad Cardin. Perron Ioan. 10.3 Ephes. 3.6 1 Tim. 3.15 2 Cor. 6.15 De pace orat 1. In Orat. habita in Concil Constantin vide praef ad D. Tho. EdmunduÌ„ Neque nos consensionem pacem fugimus sed pacis humanae causâ cum Deo belligerari nolumus Dulci quidem inquit Hilarius est nomen pacis sed aliud est inquit pax aliud servitus Nam ut quod isti quaerunt Christus tacere jubeatur ut prodatur veritas Evangelii ut errores nefarii dissimulentur ut Christianorum oculis imponatur ut in Deum apertè conspiretur non ea pax est sed iniquissima pactio servitutis Est quadam inquit Nazianvenus pax inutilis est quoddam utile dissidium Nam paci cum exceptione studendum est quantum fas est quantumque liceat Alioqui Christus ipse non pacem in mundum attulit sed gladium Quare si nos Papa secum in gratiam redire velit ipse priùs in gratiam redire debet cum Deo Juellus apolog Eccles. Anglic. pag. 194.195 edit latin Londin 1591. Ephes. 1.22 Coloss. 2.19 Raynolds conf with Hart. c. 1. divis 2. pag. 6. Ephes. 2. 1 Cor. 14. See H. L'E-Strange about the Liturgy Iuell Apolog. Latin pag. 139 140. edit Londini 1591 ibid. pag. 191 Marke this thaâ— the great Apologist who lived and acted in thâ— transaction noâ— onely professeth that there was no resemblance of a Church in Rome but alsâ— that the Separation was made not out of a violent heat and transport as our Historian sayes but in obedience to the precept of God Whitaker controv 2. qu. 6. c. 1 Dr. Potter pag. 81. saith Although we confesse the Church of Rome in some sense to be a true Church and her errors to some men not damnable yet to us who are convinced in conscience that she erres in many things a necessity lies upon us even upon pain of Damnation to forsake her in those Errors that is whosoever is convinc'd in conscience that the Church of Rome erres cannot with a good conscience but forsake her in the profession and practice of those Errors and the reason is manifest for otherwise he must professe what he believes not and practice what he approves not Chillingworth ch 5 §. 104. Iuell apol pag. 117. Hom. against Idol part 3. Casaubon ep ad Perron When the Devil who wanted not the pretence of Antiquity tempted our Saviour by proposing and pressing unto him the Kingdoms of this World and all their Glory he would not worship or communicate with him but dismist him with an Apage Satana and must we kisse the Pope's pantafles and give him the right hand of fellowship or bid God speed him upon no grater motives if so great Juell Apolog. pag. 115. Arâ—ic 13. See the Article about Original sin pag. 346. pag. 349. Pontificii per fidem implicitam intelligâ—nt eam fidem qua Laici ignota nondum intellecta â—idei dogmata eredunt implicite in illo generali Quod vera sinâ— omnia quae Romana Ecclesia credit pâ—o veris amplectitur â—â—uae â—ides non est divina sed humana id est non â—ilitur Dei sed hominum tesâ—imoâ—â—o non est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed levis â—aliax conjectura quae non Dei verbo sed hominum judicio per se parùm firmo atque adeò fragili admodum ruinoso fundamento nititur Rob. Baronius exercit 3. de fide scient Art 5.83 Review of the Council of Trent l. 1. c. 8. §. 5. Ephes. 1.17 18 19. Robert Baronius exercit 3. de fide scâ—eliâ opin Artic. 16. Raynolds against Hart. ch 2. divis 2. pag. 45 46. Hilarius de Synodis adv Arianos id ibid. Malo aliquid novum commemorâsse quà m impiè respuisse id ibid. Hilarius contra Constantium jam vitâ defunctum Casaubon respons ad Card. Perron In the fifth paper his Majesty says also that the Vnanimous consent of the Fathers and the universal practise of the primitive Church is the best and most authentical interpreter of Gods word Pag. 413. Pag. 314. Dan. Heinsii Exerc. Sacr. in Matth. c. 2. If I have in the Preface against Glanvil said that the Canon was ancient in this case 't is a mistake I think 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But speak thou the things that become sound doctrine Tit. 2.1