humana prebet oâ—perimentum How was the Lord's Body after the Resurrection a true Body that cou'd enter the House when the Doors were shut But we must understand that if the Work of God be comprehended by Reason it is not wonderful nor hath that Belief any merit to which humane Reason gives Experience The Disciples saw Christ's Body and felt it with their Hands consequently had the Evidence of two of their Senses Yet according to St. Gregory they cou'd have Faith concerning the Truth of his Body only because they did not comprehend how it was possible for it to enter the House when the Doors were shut In like manner tho' we have Evidence of Reason that the things we believe were reveal'd by Jesus Christ yet the Reward of our Faith is nothing diminish'd because we believe such things as we neither comprehend nor understand And indeed whoever seriously considers the great Work of our Redemption he cannot but think that it was most agreeable to the infinite Wisdom and Goodness of our Divine Redeemer to leave us this Evidence Jesus Christ came to the World declar'd to a select Number of Men such high and mysterious things as seem to shock Humane Reason laid down his Life for the Salvation of Mankind sent his Apostles to publish these Mysteries over all the World and threatned with eternal Damnation all those who wou'd not believe them and that not only for a Time but also unto the End of the World Is it not then very reasonable that this mysterious Doctrine should always be attended with such Characters and Credentials of Truth as may convince the most obstinate Gainsayers of it which I am sure nothing less than either Evidence of Sense or Reason can effect For if the Evidence be less then the Doctrine is only probable and if it be only probable one may reasonably doubt of the Truth of it and if the Truth of it may be reasonably doubted the contrary for ought any one knows may be true and if the contrary may be true I am sure it does not stand with God's Goodness to condemn any Body to eternal Flames for not believing a Doctrine the contrary to which for any thing that he doth or can know may be true Here I wou'd not be understood so as to mean that none can have true Faith without clear Evidence for 't is plain that the most part of Mankind are taught the Articles of their Faith by their Parents or Pastors whose Testimony is confessedly fallible nor do I pretend that this is a Rigorous Demonstration such as Mathematicians make nor yet an Evidence of Sense but this I say that the universal Consent of so many Nations as compose the Catholic Church conspiring in the Belief of such Articles of Faith make it as evident to my Reason that the said Articles of Faith are true as any Evidence of Sense or Demonstration cou'd make them if they were capable of any In a word the Apostles and their Disciples deliver'd the Christian Faith to several Nations and convinc'd their Senses and Reason of the Truth of it by true and real Miracles and the Universal Consent of the same Nations which succeeded the Evidence of Miracles is equally convincing to us that that Faith is certainly true Consequently we have a certain and an undoubted Motive to rely upon in the Belief of the Articles of our Faith Now it is manifest and even acknowledg'd by our Adversaries that excepting those who separated themselves or were cut off from the Church by Excommunication for their obstinate Adherence to some Errors contrary to Faith and whose Opposition cannot prejudice the Truth of that Faith as I prov'd before that excepting those I say the Universal Consent of all the Christian World agrees in all the Articles of Faith that the Catholic Church holds and believes But among other Truths that are deriv'd to us by this Universal Tradition or common Consent of all Nations as afore explain'd this is one That the Holy Ghost or the Spirit of God doth assist the Church and doth guide her into all Truth necessary to Salvation Hence we conclude 1. That the Catholic Church is Infallible in all the Articles of Faith that she holds and professes For since the Holy Ghost is given to the Church to guide her into all Truth and that this Holy Spirit is Omniscient and Omnipotent it cannot be affirm'd without Impiety that it should permit her to fall into Error 2. That General Councils are Infallible in all their Definitions and Decisions of Faith For tho' a General Council be but a Representative of the whole Church yet because General Assemblies of the chief Pastors of the Church have been always look'd upon even by the Apostles themselves whose Steps in this particular the Church doth follow as the best and most effectual Means of determining any Controversie that may arise and that all Good Christians have always held themselves bound to acquiesce to their Determinations and to submit to them it is reasonable to believe that the Spirit of God doth assist and guide them 3. That the Catholic Church is Infallible in determining what Books of Scripture are Canonical and what Books are not and in declaring the true Sense and Interpretation of them For since these sacred Books and the right Interpretation of them are very necessary for the Edification of our Faith and Manners the same Spirit which guides the Church into all Truth does no doubt guide Her in these great and important Truths We shall see hereafter what Society of Christians can justly pretend to be called the Catholic Church I now proceed to prove from Scripture that the Church is Infallible But whereas the Protestants are accustomed to carp at this kind of Proof pretending that this is to Dance in a Circle as They are pleas'd to term it it won't be amiss to examine what is meant by a Circle and when it is to be admitted in Reasoning When two things bear witness mutually the one of the other we call this a Circle and when they have nothing else to support the Truth of their Evidence but their mutual Affirmation then that sort of Proof is Faulty But when both or either have such Evidence on their side as is sufficient to establish their Credit before they bear witness one of another tho' it be still a Circle yet it is good and vallid in all sort of Proof Thus God the Father bore witness of Jesus Christ and He again of the Father Thus Jesus Christ bore witness of John the Baptist and John the Baptist likewise of Him And I hope no Body will be so impious as to say these were vicious or faulty Evidences because God the Father's Testimony was known to be true tho' Jesus Christ had not confirm'd it and Jesus Christ his Works prov'd likewise his own Testimony to be true tho' his Father had not born Him witness In like manner the Church bears witness that the Scripture
And most of these are condemned by the Protestants as are most if not all the Points wherein the Protestants differ from Her condemned by all other Sects An Evident Argument that she alone hath the Truth since if these things which they ground their Separation upon had been Evident as they pretend they wou'd all agree in them 3. All other Sects separated from the Communion of the Church of Rome begining each Sect in One or Two in opposition to the whole World And we are able to point at the Age and Year of their Separation and at the Name and Character of each Sect's Author and Promotor An Argument that She is the Mother Church or Root of the Tree and those Sects some Branches fallen or cut off 4. The Roman Catholic Church was never Condemn'd by any General Council nor yet by any Council of Bishops whether National or Provincial for the Points of Faith which the Protestants contest if we except the Bishops made in England by Secular Power when the true Bishops were all discarded But the Opinions held by the Protestants and all other Sects in Opposition to the Church of Rome were Condemn'd by several General Councils as every Learned Man can tell 5. It cou'd never be made out in what Age or Year or in whose Reign or by Whom any of the Points in Dispute were introduc'd into the Catholic Belief An Evident Argument that they were believ'd from the Begining it being impossible to conceive how all the Christian World cou'd be induc'd to believe those things contrary to what they held before and yet that no Man should perceive it Nay it is Absurd and Ridiculous to imagine that the greatest part of Mankind shou'd not be allarm'd at the Novelty of a Doctrine which if we believe the Protestants shocks so much both Sence and Reason whereas the New Doctrine of Arius Nestorius Luther Calvin and the Rest of his Tribe so violently shook the whole Earth that to this very day our own woful Experience is but too sensible a Testimony of its direful Effects Lastly the R. Catholic Church hath the universal Consent of all the Christian World for her Tenets in matters of Faith if we except that of the different Sects which sprung up at different Times which as it is before prov'd amounts to no more than the Dissent or Contradiction of one single Man concerning One Point in one Age and of another concerning an other Point or more in a different Age at least at different Times and that in Opposition to all the Rest of Mankind A Prerogative which no other Society of Christians can pretend to it being evident and even confest by themselves that the Opinions which they hold in Opposition to the R. Catholics were taken up by certain Men in different Ages and Times by Luther in the 16th Century by Wiclief in the 13th by De Waldo in the 12th c. I will then conclude That since the R. Catholic Church is as universal in its Communion as almost the Bounds of the Earth as Ancient in its Doctrine as the Apostles of Christ since it was it alone that adher'd to the Ancient Faith and rejected the Novelty of all Heresies and can only glory in having the Universal Consent of the Christian World as before explain'd for the Truth of its Doctrine This Society and no other is the True Catholic Apostolic Church I shall now proceed to answer Dr. Tillotsou's Objections to this Point The first is taken out of Vol. 2. Serm. pag. 50 61 62. which in Substance is this Tho' the R. Catholics be very Stiff and Peremptory in asserting their Infallibility yet they are not agreed among themselves where it is seated whether in the Pope alone or in a Council alone or in both together or in the Diffusive Body of Christians They are sure they have it says he tho' they do not know where it is Then he adds There is not the least Intimation in Scripture of this Priviledge confer'd upon the Church of Rome and it is strange the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics shou'd never Appeal to this Judge it being so short and expedite a way of ending Controversies and this very Consideration concludes the Dr. is to a Wise Man instead of a Thousand Arguments to satisfie him that in those days no such thing was believ'd in the World Answer I may say of these Three Propositions the first is neither True in it self nor in most of its Circumstances The second is perfectly of the same Nature if you except the Word Rome The third is grounded upon a Negative and proves nothing I begin with the first They are not agreed saith he among themselves where it is seated c. For my own part I never yet read or heard of any Catholic Divine that ever said That the Catholic Church taken for the Diffusive Body of Christians was not Infallible in declaring Matters of Faith Therefore I think All agree that the Infallibility is seated in the Diffusive Body of Christians And I challenge any Protestant in the World to name me One who says the contrary The Pope is One and the Chief Member of that Diffusive Body The Pope and Council together make a Great many Members and if you add to these All the Rest of the Faithful they make up the intire Diffusive Body of Christian If the Pope be Infallible surely the Concurrence of a Council will rather confirm than diminish his Infallibility If the Pope and Council together be Infallible the Consent of the Diffusive Body of Christians must surely strengthen and confirm it But if neither the Pope nor the Council alone be Infallible the Diffusive Body of Christians must necessarily be if any such Thing as Infallibility may be ascrib'd to any of the Three seeing both Pope and Council are included in it We are sure then the Infallibility consists at least in the Diffusive Body of Christians But to illustrate this a little more let us propose this familiar Example If I shou'd ask where my Lord Major of Londâ—n is at this Time And that some shou'd tell me He is in his own House Others not in his own House but some where in London and others neither in his own House nor in London but in England I wou'd willingly know whether these three sorts of People do not all agree that my Lord Mayor is in England Certainly they do because the assent of the two former is necessarily implied in the Latter In like manner tho' some say the Pope is Infallible Others not the Pope alone but together with a General Council and others neither Pope nor Council alone without the Concurrence of the Diffusive Body of Christians yet all do 〈◊〉 in this that the Diffusive Body of Christians is Infallible The Dr. then is very much out when he says they do not know where it is tho' they are sure they have it Touching the second Proposition There is not the least
of the Protestants that it needs no farther Confutation 3. All the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ both in a literal Sense and in a Sense of Transubstantiation I shou'd fill up a Volum were I to bring all the Passages of Councils and Fathers which make for this Truth no Mistery of our Religion being ever with more Care inculcated and expounded by the Fathers in their Homilies Catechisms and familiar Discourses to the common People and that no doubt for the difficulty Men naturally have to believe it But it not being my design to write all that may be said for it but what may suffice to evince the truth of it I shall content my self with the Testimony of a few Councils and Fathers whose Authority and Weight however I hope shall make sufficient amends for the smalness of their number And 1. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense or which is the same thing believ'd the Real presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament let St. Cyril Bishop of Alexandria bear witness This great Patriarch in his Epistle to Nestorius speaks thus of the Eucharist Neque enim illam ut â—arnem communem suscipimus absit hoc neque rursum tanquam viri cujuspiam Sanctificati dignitatis unitate verbo consociati sed tanquam verè vivificam ipsiusque verbi propriam God forbid we shou'd receive it as common flesh nor yet as the flesh of a Man sanctified and united to the Word by a conjunction of dignity but we receive it as it truely is the quickening and proper flesh of the Word Himself This Letter was read and approv'd in the third General Council * Concil Ephes puncto 7. which no doubt wou'd never have been had it contain'd any thing contrary to Orthodox Faith so that having receiv'd Authority and Approbation from those Fathers we shall no more consider it as the Doctrine of a private Man but as the Faith of the whole General Council Now can it be imagin'd that this Council which represented the whole Catholic Church shou'd approve and put upon Record a Letter which declares the Real Presence as clear and plain as is possible for words to express it unless it had been at that Time the Faith of the whole Catholic Church And can it be imagin'd that the Catholic Church in those fair Days of her Youth as the Calvinists speak shou'd believe that Christ's proper Flesh as the said Letter words it was in the Sacrament unless they had understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense and receiv'd the same Doctrine from their immediate Ancestors Or can it be imagin'd that these Ancestors shou'd be of this Belief unless they had likewise receiv'd it from their Ancestors and so up to the very Apostles This is surely to any Man of Sense but more especially ought to be to the Church of England who professes to receive the Acts and Decrees of this Council instead of a Demonstration that from the begining of Christianity to the Time of this Council all the Orthodox Christians did both believe the Real Presence and understand Christ's Words in a literal Sense 2. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ this is my Body in a sense of Transubstantiation we have the unanimous consent of the ancient Fathers of the Church many whereof in their familiar Discourses to the common People Illustrate this Conversion by the change of the Water into Wine of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of the River Nilus into Blood and the like And 't is very observable that in all their Discourses upon this Subject and whenever they speak of this Change they have Recourse to the Omnipotent Power of God to which alone they ascribe it which surely wou'd be very needless had there been no real Change in the Case St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem speaks thus Concerning this Change Therefore since Christ hath said of the Bread this is my Body who durst any more doubt it And since He himself so positively affirm'd saying this is my Blood who ever doubted so as to say that it was not his Blood In Time past at the Wedding of Cana in Galilee he chang'd Water into Wine which has a certain likeness to blood and shall not we think him worthy to be believ'd that he cou'd change Wine into his Blood Again for under the appearance of Bread he gives us his Body and under the appearance of Wine he gives us his Blood And a little after tho' your Senses seem in this to oppose you yet Faith must confirm you do not judge the thing by the Taste but let Faith assure you beyond all doubt that you partake of the Body and Blood of Christ Cate. Mystag 3. Here is a great Bishop an Eminent Witness of Antiquity one who flourish'd 1300 Years since and who no doubt knew very well the Faith of the Catholic Church of his Time touching this Point Here is a careful Pastor expounding Christ's Words and Catechizing his Flock in the very Language of the present Roman Catholics He tells them that since Christ said that the Bread and Wine were his Body and Blood they must believe that the Bread and Wine were chang'd into his Body and Blood He illustrates this change by a familiar Comparison of the Water which Christ chang'd into Wine and enforces the belief of the possibility of the other by the actual Existence of this change which they both read and believ'd He tells them that under the Appearance of Bread they receive the Body and under the Appearance of Wine they receive the Blood of Christ and that tho' their senses may tell them that it is still Bread yet their Faith must correct that Mistake that they must not judge what it is by the Taste but must believe that it is the Body and Blood of Christ whatever their senses may suggest to them to the contrary Did ever any Roman Catholic speak plainer concerning Transubstantiation Can any Roman Bishop or Pastor at present enforce the belief of this Mystery with more cogent Arguments than to tell his Auditors that since Christ said this is my Body we must believe it is so since he chang'd Water into Wine we have no Reason to doubt but his Omnipotence is sufficient to change Wine into his â—lood that tho' it appears to our Eyes to our Taste to our Smell that the thing is otherwise yet we must not in this bus'ness rely upon the Relation of these senses but upon the sense of Hearing because Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God which Word we are here only requir'd to believe All which are the very Reasonings of St. Cyril Now what the Protestants may think of this great Maâ— I shall not determin but this I am sure of that had he written this since the Reformation they wou'd have all reckon'd him to be as rank a Papist as ever put Pen
to Paper St. Gregory Nissen speaks thus to the same purpose Rectè Dei Verbo sanctificatum Panem in Dei Verbi corpus credo transmutari I do believe that the Bread sanctified by the Word of God is chang'd into the Body of God the Word Orat. Cate. Cap. 37. St. Ambrose takes a great deal of pains to inculcate this Truth to the Ignorant people instancing in several real Changes as that of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of the Creation of the World out of nothing c. I will instance in one only of his Passages to this purpose 'T is indeed somewhat tedious to be brought here at length however since it cannot be well understood unless it be intirely read I hope the Reader will pardon me so necessary a Fault Panis iste says he ante Verba Sacramentorum Panis est c. That Bread before the Sacramental Words is Bread but when the Consecration comes to it of the Bread is made the Flesh of Christ Let us prove this How can that which is Bread be the Body of Christ By Consecration By what and by whose Words is the Consecration perform'd By the Words of the Lord Jesus For all other things which are said do give Praise to God there is a Prayer premis'd for the People for Kings and for others but when the Priest comes to make the venerable Sacrament he does no more use his own but Christ's Words Therefore the Word of Christ maketh this Sacrament What Word of Christ Even that Word by which all things were made The Lord commanded and the Earth was made The Lord commanded and every Creature was ingender'd You see then how efficacious the Word of Christ is Seeing then there is so much Efficacy in the Word of the Lord Jesus as to cause things that were not to have a Being How much more efficacious is it to make the things that are extant to be chang'd into an other thing Heaven was not the Sea was not the Earth was not but hear him that says He said and they were made He commanded and they were created That I may answer you then It was not the Body of Christ before Consecration but after Consecration Note That some Critics have Doubted whether the Books whence this Passage is taken belong to St. Ambrose by Reason that the Stile of them is somewhat different from the Rest of the Works of this Father but the best and ablest Critics agree that they are either St. Ambrose's Works or some other Bishop's neer his Time who dilates upon what St. Ambrose wrote concerning the Eucharist I say unto you that it is then the Body of Christ He said and it was made He commanded and it was created Lib. 4. de Sacra Cap. 4. I shall not trouble the Reader with any Reflections upon this Passage being in my Opinion so plain and so much to the purpose that it cannot possibly need any thing to strengthen it Nor will I tire his Patience with any more from Fathers it being evident to any Man of Sense that these great Pillars of the Church Men so Eminent both for Learning and Piety wou'd never have believ'd Transubstantiation nor have taken so much pains to inculcate it to the People had it not been the universal belief of the Catholic Church I shall only add some Words of the Decree of the Council of Lateran on this Subject and so conclude The Words which relate to our purpose are these Concil Later 4. sub Inno. 3. Transubstantiates Pane Vino in Corpus Sanguinem Christi The Bread and Wine being transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ This all the Protestants confess is very plain in favour of Transubstantiation and therefore they do most outragiously declaim against it and even force their Lungs and Pipes both to decry the Decree and to expose the Authors of it For my part I am in no passion nor heat I shall therefore soberly and calmly examin what this Council was what Authority it may justly claim and how far it ought to influence our Faith If it be found to be only a Conventicle of Heretics or a confus'd assembly of some Bishops met together without any authority from the Chief Pastor and other Patriarchs of the Church in order to broach new Doctrines in opposition to the Faith which was once deliver'd unto the Saints then it will be but reasonable we reject their Authority But if on the contrary it appears to have been an Oecumenical or General Council representing the whole Catholic Church and that all the individual Members of the Catholic Church at that Time receiv'd and acquiesc'd to its Decrees especially to that part of it which relates to our present purpose it is but just and reasonable we pay the same respect and deference to it Now after having examin'd the Authentic Acts of this Council and consulted all the at least famous Historians and Ecclesiastical Writers of those Times and even the Writings of some of our Learned Adversaries I find that it has all the Marks and Characters which even the most Oecumenical Council ever yet had I find that this Council was call'd by common consent of both Emperors and of all the Kings and free States in Europe that it was held in Rome in the Year of our Lord 1215. Pope Innocent the 3d. Presiding in it The best Historians of those Times tell us that there were near 1200 Prelats in this Council that the Patriachs of Constantinople and Jerusalem were there in Person that the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch being under the Yoke of the Sarazen and Turkish Tyrany because they cou'd not come in Person sent their Deputies instructed with Power to represent their Persons and Churches As to Europe the great number of Prelates there assembled shew even to a Demonstration that there were more than sufficient Representatives of the Western Churches And what more can be desir'd to compleat a General Council Now can any Man imagin that so August an Assembly as this so man Grave and Learn'd Men of different Humors Interests and Manners shou'd all conspire together to impose upon themselves and all Mankind besides a New Doctrine in one of the most essential points of Christian Faith contrary to what they had receiv'd from their Ancestors and that not one Honest Man shou'd be found among them all to discover the Imposture Or that all Mankind shou'd acquiesce to such a Doctrine and none say this is contrary to what we have been hitherto taught Can it be imagin'd that the Bishops who met here on purpose to hear every Individual Prelate tell his own Story and to declare what Faith he had receiv'd from his Ancestors on this Subject who aim'd at nothing else but to find out the Truth but to see wherein they did all agree and to reckon That only as an Article of their Faith which shou'd be found to be the same in every Man's Mouth and yet that contrary to
I think I may reasonable conclude that the common people wou'd do the same were they never so well read in the Scriptures unless we suppose that the Protestant Religion has some Virtue to attract the common people upon the readding of Scripture in a vulgar Tongue which is incommunicable to Men of Letters when they read the same But methinks the stand the Protestant Religion has been at now upwards of an hundred Years without gaining one Foot of Ground nay hardly keeping what it had notwithstanding all the liberty and Indulgence it gives to Flesh and Blood is an evident Argument that it was not a serious Meditation and Study of Scripture but rather a popular fury and something like madness that brought over so many of the common People to embrace it in the Begining And indeed if the Fences and Bulworks wherewith the Protestant Religion is fortified were taken away if the Tests and Penal-Laws and other grievous Burdens laid upon R. Catholics were taken off if all the scandalous and opprobrious Language which Ministers thunder out in their Pulpits against the Church and Bishop of Rome all the False and Ridiculous Tenets which are ascrib'd to R. Catholics and manag'd with all the Art and Industry proper to inflame the People's hatred and to give them a perpetual aversion to R. Catholics and their Religion all the marks of Infamy and Dishonour put upon them being not permitted to bear any Civil or Military Office nay scarce allow'd in some Countries to exercise such honest Professions or Callings as may enable them to get their Bread if all these fatal Engins I say were laid aside and every Man left to chuse his Religion without the hopes of Reward on the one side or the Fear of loss of Goods and Temporal Punishment on the other I doubt the Protestant Religion wou'd soon fall to pieces and many a Prodigal Child wou'd return to their Father's Houses whence they have so long stray'd But these Fences and Barriers shall I call them of Religion being so Rivetted and interwoven with the Temporal Laws and Constitutions of most Governments where the Protestant Religion sways I fear all Reasons and Arguments tho' never so Evident are too weak to encounter them unless God of His Mercy be pleas'd to put His Hand to the Work To whose infinit Goodness and Mercy I do from my Heart most earnestly recommend it CHAP. VII Of the Invocation of Saints WHat we believe to be of Faith on this Head is thus declar'd by the Council of Trent That the Saints who Reign with Jesus Christ offer up to God their Prayers for Men that it is Good and Profitable to Invocate them after an Humble Manner and to have Recourse to their Prayers Aid and Assistance to obtain of God His Benefits thro' our Lord Jesus Christ His Son who is our only Saviour and Redeemer Sess 25. This the Council declares to be the Faith of the Church concerning this point but does not Command or Oblige any of the Laity to pray to the Saints or Invocate them 'T is a Practice receiv'd from the Primitive Church and us'd by the Greatest and most Learned and virtuous of the Holy Fathers of those Times as appears by their Works and handed Down to us by an uninterrupted Tradition But because it is not absolutely necessary the Church leaves every one the liberty to make use of it or not aâ— they think fit Yet to see how Dr. Tillotson lays about him upon this Subject and what pains he takes to confute it one wou'd think we have nothing in our Liturgies and public Prayer-books but Prayers to Saints and that we do nothing else in the public and solemn Service of the Church but pray to Saints and worship them Here it may be expected I shou'd give a Specimen of his Laborious Endeavours in this matter but I think a Pattern wou'd not do and therefore I shall refer the Reader to three intire Sermons Vol. 2. edit post obit Ser. 2 3 4. where this Bus'ness is handled to some purpose Now to justifie our Proceedings from these imputations and to shew the Reasonableness of this Practice as by us us'd I shall do these Four Things 1. I will endeavour to shew that to invocate the Saints by which Words we protest and declare and 't is hard if we may not be allow'd to interpret our own Words that we mean nothing else but to desire them to pray for us is not repugnant to the Word of God 2. that in the public and solemn Service of the Church excepting the Litanies of the Saints which are read or sung solemnly four times a Year the General Confession of Sins in the begining of the Mass a few Hymns Anthems and Versicles which are not Prayers strictly and properly so call'd and most of which are read only once a Year excepting these I say we put up no Prayers to Saints or Angels but all our Prayers are address'd to Almighty God and to Jesus Christ our Mediator and Redeemer Not but that we hold it lawful even in the public and solemn Service of the Church to pray to the Saints that is to desire them to pray for us since all the Addresses we make to the Saints do finally Terminate in Jesus Christ in virtue of whose Death and Passion we believe the Saints are enabled to pray for us but because it is matter of Fact that we do not address our Prayers in the solemn Service of the Church but to God alone 3. I will make it appear from the very Words of the Holy Fathers that the Practice of praying to Saints was us'd in the Primitive Church And Lastly I shall endeavour to return a brief Answer to what the Dr. thought fit to bring against this Point 1. I will endeavour to shew that to invocate the Saints or which is the same thing to desire them to pray for us is not repugnant to the Word of God The Texts of Scripture which seems to be against this Practice and which the Doctor urges are taken out of St. Paul 1 Tim. 2.5 where he says There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus And again Heb. 9.15 For this Cause He Christ is the Mediator of the New Testament c. Hence the Doctor concludes that it is contrary to the Word of God and which he mostly insists upon derogatory to the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ to pray to any Saint or Angel since to do so were to constitute them Mediators between God and Men contrary to the Express Words of St. Paul But sure he was not aware how far this Inference wou'd carry him else he wou'd be a little more reserv'd We are exhorted by the Scriptures and by the Rules of Charity we are bound to pray to God for one another Eph. 6.19 1 Tim. 2. Yea and St. Paul himself desires the Ephesians to pray for him and exhorts Timothy to have Prayers and
of our Saviour and the B. Virgin And as some of us now bow towards the Altar and all of us are enjoy'd to do so at the Name of Jesus so will we not fail to testifie all due Respect to this Representation Now we do-likewise declare and have upon all occasions done that we neither mean nor intend to give any more to the Images of Christ or the V. Mary or the Saints but due Honor and Respect But if neither the express Decree of the Council of Trent which commands us to give them no more nor the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition of our Doctrine in which this is so manifestly declar'd nor our own often repeated Protestations to that Effect will prevail upon them to believe us all we can say is that we are sorry for their Incredulity but cannot help it As to those Abuses which this Ingenious Man says have crept in upon Account of Images If there be any such we protest and declare that we abhor and detest them no less than he or any of his Perswasion or to use the Council of Trent's Phrase we earnestly desire they shou'd be intirely abolish'd But sure he was too reasonable to think that the abuse of a thing was a good Argument against the use of it Nor will his Example of Hezekiahis destroying the Brazen Serpent help the matter For he may please to consider that the Children of Israel liv'd in a Country where they were surrounded and as I may say hedg'd in on every side with Idolatry and the Worship of false Gods and not only so but they themselves were very much given to that Worship as appears by the Groves and high Places and Idols set up among them by their wicked Kings and Rulers and which this pious King pull'd down and destroy'd and therefore is deservedly commended in Scripture for breaking in pieces the Brazen Serpent to which the People no doubt sacrific'd But blessed be God we have no such thing to fear We have no Idolaters among us nor near us we have no Groves nor high Places nor Idols in the land We do not burn Incense to any false Gods nor worship them We make only the Images and Pictures of the true God and his Saints and it cannot be denied but these same Pictures and Images have been kept in our Churches and have had the same respect given them which we now give at least these nine hundred years and in the Opinion of many learned Protestants for four hundred Years before Yet all this while no Heathen Idolatry was ever introduc'd into the Church upon Account of our Images No Defection from Christianity to Pagan Worship was heard among us So that the Example of Hezekiah is not to the purpose the Parallel is not just we are nothing concern'd in it Besides the Brazen Serpent was a Monument of no such great Moment to be long preserv'd 'T was only kept to put the Children of Israel in mind of the Miraculous Cure of those who were bitten by the Serpents in the Wilderness and when they left that Land and were no more vex'd by these Serpents it was of no great use But the Remembrance of the Death and Passion of our Lord by whom the Sins of the World was taken away and of his Holy Apostles and Saints by whom his Doctrine was propagated and transmitted to us is of that high Importance and Concern to all the World that these Monuments which put us in mind of them ought to be for ever most carefully preserv'd Page 14. As to what he says that in the Hymns for the day of the Invention of the Cross Good-Fryday we desire the Cross to strengthen the Righteous and give Pardon to the Guilty c. And that in the Service on Good-Fryday we say Behold the Wood of the Cross Come let us adore it I answer First That Poetical Hymns and Verses have in all Writings a greater Latitude than Prose Secondly That these Expressions are Apostrophes and Exclamations address'd to Jesus Christ upon the Cross whom we represent to our minds as there hanging when we salute the Cross And that this is our meaning whatever the words may import upon any other occasion I think is plain from the Words of the Council of Trent which expresly forbids us to believe that there is any Virtue or Divinity in Images or to demand any thing of them which if we believe as we profess and declare we do it cannot with any colour of Reason be presum'd that we shou'd ask Strength or Pardon of the Wood of the Cross contrary to the express commands of the Council and to the Faith which we profess Touching the Words in the Service on Good-Fridaâ— Behold the Wood of the Cross Come let us adore it I am sorry to see so Ingenious a Man and who otherwise professes to be so great a Friend to Sincerity and Truth swerve so manifestly from both in this Point He gives us here an Anthem sung on Good-Fryday maim'd in the middle and added to in the End The Words in the Roman Missal are thus Ecce Lignum Crucis in quo salus mundi pependit Venice Adoremus Behold the Wood of the Cross on which the Saviour of the World hung Come let us adore Here is no It as he adds And sure it is more reasonable and more agreeable to Grammatical Construction to refer the word Adore to Saviour of the World which imediately goes before it than to Wood of the Cross which goes before that And then the sense is plainly this Behold the Wood of the Cross on which the Saviour of the World hung Come let us adore Him And that this and no other is the Sense in which the Roman Catholic Church takes these Words I wonder any Man that ever read the Council of Trent shou'd be ignorant of seeing the Church in that Council has expresly declar'd that by the Images which we kiss and before which we uncover our Heads and bow down we adore Christ and reverence the Saints Here is a Crucifix propos'd to us a Representation of Jesus Christ upon Mount Calvary we kiss it and bow to it and when we say Come let us adore we must surely mean come let us adore Christ else we shou'd contradict the express words of the Council I own indeed that we mean likewise by Kissing the Crucifix and bowing to it that day to give it due Honour and Respect and that we make use of the words Crucem Adoramus several Times on Good-Fryday to express the Respect we give it But then we are warranted so to do by the Scripture which uses the same Term to express the Honor exhibited to several Creatures as appears by these Texts Adorem te Filii Matris tuae Let thy Mother's Sons adore Thee says Isaac to his Son Jacob Gen. 27.29 Et omnis Multitudo inclinantes capita adoraverunt Dominum Regem and all the Congregation bowing their Heads ador'd the Lord and the King
it is Impossible the Church shou'd give them such Provocation as might justifie a Separation in like manner All those who are excommunicated by the Church for their obstinate Refusal to assent to any Truth declar'd to be an Article of Faith are properly call'd Heretics Now Protestants as well as Catholics agree that neither Schismatics nor Heretics are Members of the Catholic Church nor any way within its Pale There only remains then to examine who those are on whom these Marks of Schism and Heresie are justly chargeable and who on the other Hand are free from that charge which if plainly made out it will be easy to see what Congregation of Faithful can be justly call'd the Catholic Church Now all the Societies of Christians who with any colour of Reason can pretend to the Name of Catholic are these 1. The Nestorians and Eutychians 2. The Greek Church 3. The Church of England And lastly the R. Catholics I have on purpose omitted the Waldenses Socinians Hussites Lutherans Calvinists and all those almost Innumerable Sects continually shooting out of the Trunck of the Reformation and spreading far and near over our own unfortunate Ilands as Anabaptists Independents Quakers Mugoltonians Seekers Familists Philadelphians c. because all these are destitute of even the least Pretence to the Name of Catholic Church having neither lawful Pastors lawful Mission nor Right Ordination which as all the Christian World before the Reformation and as the Church of England still grants cannot be given without Imposition of Hands performed by Bishops This they Ingenuously own they have not consequently nor the least Pretence to the Catholic Church no nor if we believe some Learned Divines of the Church of England to the Name of Christian For as these Gentlemen Reason no Man can be call'd Christian unless he is Baptiz'd Baptism cannot be conferr'd but by such who have Authority to administer the Sacraments no Man can have this Authority but by lawful Ordination and this is not conferr'd nor cannot without Imposition of Hands by Lawfully ordain'd Bishops Bishops all these Sects own they have not consequently nor true Baptism nor Christianity This I confess cannot be said of the four Societies aforesaid For every one of them hath always retain'd the Hierarchy of the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons at least have pretended to it and think it Essential to the being of the Catholic Church But since this is not enough unless they have likewise the Catholic Faith and Communion which together with the said Hierarchy make up the essential parts of Catholic Religion our present Bus'ness shall be to try each of them by this Touchstone and see which will abide the Test 1. Touching the Nestorians and Eutychians Under this Appellation I comprehend the Jacobites Cophtes Armenians and all other Sects who follow the Opinions of Nestorius and Eutyches touching the Person and Natures in Christ all the Rest of the Eastern Christians either adhereing to the Roman or Greek Church What I have to say concerning these Sects shall be dispatch'd in a few Words Dr. Tillotson and all the Learned Men of the Church of England do receive the Definitions of the four first General Councils whereof the two last excommunicated and condemn'd as Heretics the Authors of these Sects and their Adherents Nâ—storius for asserting two persons Eutyches for denying two Natures in Christ consequently all those Sects who took up their Opinions are justly excluded from the number of True Catholics As to the Points in Controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants viz. Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Mass Prayers for the Dead Invocation of Saints c. they are as firmly believ'd by the said Sects as by the R. Catholics 2. As for the Greek Church It is notoriously known that the Chiefest Reason of their Separation from the Church of Rome was because this Church asserted the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son which yet the Protestants hold to be Orthodox Doctrine And no less evident that the Greek Church did Recant their Error concerning this Point and all other things wherein they differ'd from the Church of Rome many times but more especially in three General Councils First in the Council of Lâ—theran where the Patriarch of Constantinople assisted in Person 2dly In the Council of Lyons where the Greek Emperor and other Representatives of the Greek Church were present And lastly in the Council of Florence where the Emperor the Patriarch of Constantinople and a great many Greek Bishops were present and disputed the Point for a long time which at last came to this Issue There were Letters of Vnion drawn up wherein the Grecians do acknowledge the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son the Popes Supremacy and some other Points of no great Weight before debated These Letters were signed by the Emperor and by all the Greek Bishops the Bishop of Ephesus only excepted and stand upon Record to this day Whence it is manifest that by their own Act and Deed they are convicted of Schism for their wilful and causeless Separation afterwards from the Church of Rome whom they own'd by this Authentick Instrument to be the Catholic Church and themselves likewise to be Members of it Touching the main Points in Controversie betwixt the Protestants and the Church of Rome what the Greek Church holds and professes let us hear from the Pen of an Ingenious Protestant Gentleman Sir Edwin Sandys in his Europae Speculum pag. 233. With Rome saith he they concur in the opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole body of the Mass in praying to Saints in Auricular Confession in offering of Sacrifice and Prayer for the Dead and in these without any or no material Difference They hold Purgatory also and the Worshiping of Pictures Thus far Sandys So that tho' the Greeks were a true Church it wou'd but very little help the Protestant Cause nay rather it wou'd very much prejudice it since the Grecians hold those points to be Orthodox on the pretended falsity whereof the Protestants ground their Separation But of this more in its proper Place 3. Touching the Church of England This is of so Great Importance to our present Controversie or rather the only necessary Point to be Rightly understood that it is requisite it shou'd be handl'd with all the clearness and perspicuity imaginable And if it be possible to make it Evident that this Church is branded with Heresie and Schism two things sufficient to unchurch any Society of Christians whatsoever I hope I may without vanity say that I have gained my Point To prove then that the Church of England is both Heretical and Schismatical I am heartily sorry I must use such hard Expressions to so many Ingenious and Great Men whose Learning and other good Qualities I very much honor and respect I shall make use of no Arguments but such as are grounded upon the clear Light of natural
Reason upon the consent of Mankind and the concession of our Adversaries and upon such known and evident matters of Fact as the most Impudent Wrangler wou'd be asham'd to deny As to the first That the Church of England is Heretical I prove thus Whatsoever Society of Christians obstinately denies any Doctrine believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith is Heretical but the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England is Heretical The Major or first Proposition is a known Principle which no Christian in his wits ever denied The Minor or second Proposition I demonstrate thus The Church of England obstinately denies Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass and many other Points but these are believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith That the Church of England obstinately denies the said Doctrines or Points is matter of Fact and what She very much glories in That the same Points or Doctrines were all in the begining of the Reformation believed by the Catholic Church to be of Faith we have besides the unanimous consent of the Roman Greek and all the Eastern Churches the Testimony of several Learned Protestants who surely wou'd never have told a thing so favourable to their Adversaries if it had not been manifestly True And to shew that this is not said gratis I will Instance in some Hospinian faith Luther's Separation was from all the World Epist 141. White Popery was a Leprosie breeding so universally in the Church that there was no Visible Company of Men appearing in the World free from it Defence c. 37. p. 136. The aforesaid Doctrineâ— is what this good man is pleas'd to call Popery as all the World knows Bishop Jewel The Whole World Princes Priests and People were overwhelm'd with Ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope Sermon on Luke 11. Whitaker In times past no Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Controv. 4.9 5. c. 3. Bucer All the World err'd in that Article of the real presence p. 660. Calvin They made all the Kings and People of the Earth Drunk from the First to the Last Justit 4. c. 18. Perkins During the space of 900 years the Popish Heresie had spread it self over the Whole World Exposit symb p. 266. The Sum of this cloud of Witnesses which yet is not the twentieth Part of what may be brought from the Reformation-treasure amounts to this that before the Reformation there was no other Religion in the Whole Christian World but the Roman Catholic or as they are pleas'd to term it the Papistical and that the aforesaid Points and many more which they call Popery Leprosie and Ignorance were universally believed as Articles of Faith by all the visible Companies of Christians in the World And if this be true the Church of England which obstinately denies these Points and many more must necessarily deny some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church as of Faith and by consequence the Church of England is Heretical Touching the second viz. that the Church of England is Schismatical This is no less evident than the former For if Schism be a willful Separation from the Church as it is defined by all Mankind as well Protestants as Catholics the Church of England is doubly guilty of this Crime First for separating from the Pope and their own Immediate Heads the Bishops of England Secondly for separating from the Communion of all other Bishops in the World besides The Bishop of Rome in the begining of the Reformation was acknowledg'd by all the World to be at least Patriarch of the West and by the Protestants themselves to have exercis'd Jurisdiction over the Church of England for 900 years and more even from the time of its Conversion to Christianity and surely so long a prescription is a sufficient Title tho' no other cou'd be shewn We find in the Acts of the third General Council held at Ephesus Binius Tom. 2. Apend 1. Cap. 4. a complaint exhibited by the Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus against the Patriarch of Antioch who wou'd force that Iland to submit to his jurisdiction and oblige its Metropolitian to receive the Grace of Ordination from him as the Council phrases it To this Complaint the Council answers That if the Bishops of Cyprus cou'd make out that the Patriarch of Antioch had never conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan it was unjust to pretend to it now And the Bus'ness being fairly prov'd in favour of the said Bishops the Council decreed That the Patriarch of Antioch had no Jurisdiction over them nor ought to pretend to any Whence it is manifest that if the Patriarch of Antioch cou'd prove that he had conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan at any time or exercis'd Lawful Jurisdiction over them the Council wou'd have Decreed the said Iland to be subject to him and that as it was a manifest Usurpation in the Patriarch of Antioch to pretend to any such Jurisdiction since he was not in Possession of it nor cou'd prove to have ever had it so likewise it wou'd be perfect Rebellion and Schism in them to withdraw from his Jurisdiction if he were Legally possess'd of it Now I would fain know if the same Council were to judge the Church of England and the Pope's cause what they wou'd think of it Pope Eleutherius sent some of his own Clergy to Convert the Brittans in King Lucius his Time St. Gregory sent Augustin the Monk and others to convert the Saxons and exercis'd Jurisdiction over them ordaining their Metropolitan or causing him to be ordained by his Orders and the Popes his Successors continued in peaceable Possession of this Prerogative and they the Clergy and People of England receiving and obeying his lawful Commands not only as Patriarch of the West but even as Head of the Church for the Space of 900 Years and more what wou'd this Council I say think of the Church of England's rising up against the Pope's Authority after so long a Prescription Certainly it wou'd look upon them to be Rebels against the Authority the best establish'd in the World Nor will it any way help them to say as they usually do that the King of England has Power to Transfer the Papal or Patriarchal Power from Rome and confer it upon the Archbishop of Canterbury For besides that it is most absurd to suppose such a Power in a King since it cannot be imagin'd whence such an Ecclesiastical Authority can be deriv'd to a Secular Prince we have an express Decree to the contrary in the fourth General Council held at Calcedon What gave Occasion to it was this The Bishop of Tyre was anciently Metropolitan of Phaenicia Concil Calced Act. 6. and as such exercis'd Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in that Province Marcianus the Emperor contrary to
the Canon of the Council of Nice by which it was provided That there shall be but one Metropolitan in each Province made a Pragmatic Sanction whereby he Constituted the Bishop of Berithum Metropolitan in the same Province and submited a great many of the former Metropolitan's Suffragans to him which when the Bishop of Tyre expos'd to the Council it was unanimously Decreed That the said Bishop of Tyre should be restor'd to all his Privileges and Jurisdiction notwithstanding the Emperor's Sanction which the Council declar'd to be of no Force or Virtue against the Canons of the Church So that it is evident this General Council knew nothing of any such Ecclesiastical Power vested in the Emperor tho' Lord of almost all the World much less in a Prince of a few Provinces 'T is true there is a Canon of a Council held long after in Constantinople called Quinisexta-synodus which provides that if the Emperor shou'd Erect or raise any City to the Dignity of Metropolis of a Province the Ecclesiastical Power ought to follow the Temporal The Sense of which Canon I conceive must be this that either the Bishop of the City thus dignifi'd was to have the Jurisdiction of a Metropolitan over all the Bishops in the Province the former Metropolitan being reduc'd to the condition of a private Bishop or that the same Province ought to be divided into Two and Governed by two Metropolitans with distinct Limits and Jurisdictions Whether of the two be the Sense of those Fathers 't is manifest this Canon does not exempt the one or the other from the Jurisdiction of the Patriarch much less from that of the Pope as Head of the Church And indeed to give it the most rigorous Interpretation it is impossible to stretch it any further than this That when a City is made Metropolis or Head of a Kingdom the Bishop of that City ought to have Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in the same Kingdom But this does not give the least colour to any Exemption from the Ecclesiastical Power to which this Kingdom was subject before Besides this same was not enacted by the Emperor or any Secular Prince but by a Council of Bishops in favour doubtless of the Episcopal Dignity because it was proper that the first Bishop or Metropolitan shou'd have his Seat in the Metropolis of the Kingdom and take his Denomination from thence And yet we see this never took place in the West otherwise the Bishops of Paris in France of London in England of Edenburg in Scotland and others might as justly pretend to a Primacy in these several Kingdoms which I am confident the Archbishop of Canterbury wou'd as much oppose as any of the Rest Now that the Church of England did wilfully separate from the Pope from their own immediate Heads the Bishops of England and from the Communion of all the Bishops in the World besides Stow Baker Dr. Heilen Dr. Burnet is plain matter of fact equally attested by all Writers as well Protestants as Catholics K. Henry VIII did separate from the Pope and assum'd to himself the Title of Head of the Church of England persecuting and putting to death all such who oppos'd his Supremacy After the Death of Queen Mary in whose Reign the Church of England was again reconcil'd to Rome Queen Elizabeth call'd a Parliament in order to settle Matters of Religion In this Parliament all the Bishops of England were depriv'd of their Episcopal Seas some cast into Prison others banish'd the Country all violently forc'd away from their Flocks and Pastoral Functions Nor will it at all relieve the Protestant Cause to say which yet is their only plea that the Bishops were depriv'd because they wou'd not take the Oath of Supremacy reviv'd by that Parliament For beside that it is an unheard of Thing that any Society of Laymen shou'd take upon them to determin Spiritual Matters for such was the Tenure of that Oath and to impose them upon Bishops to whom it chiefly belong'd to determin such matters This Proceeding was contrary to the Ordinary Methods of Parliament both before and ever after that Time For all things relating to Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Matters are first determin'd and agreed upon in the Convocation of the Bishops whose province and care it is to declare what is Spiritual and what not and then refer'd to both Houses of Parliament to pass into Law But here is a Spiritual Matter past into a Law which vests the Supreme Spiritual Power in the Queen and which all the Bishops in the Kingdom solemnly protest against as a thing as monstrously absurd as it was ever before unheard of And yet they must be all depriv'd because they wou'd not swear to the Truth of nor assert this Spiritual Power lodg'd in a Person whose very Sex rendred her incapable of Indeed they might as well deprive them for not believing and swearing to the truth of the Alcaron But this is too absurd to need a Confutation That the Church of England separated from the Communion of all other Bishops in the World is evident even to this day since they never were able to shew as much as one single Bishop in the whole World who professeth to be of their Communion Now if all this be not Schism I confess I know not what is To separate from the Pope and all in Communion with him To separate from their own Bishops and raise Altars against their Altars or rather to pull down all Altars as they have done to separate from all the Bishops in the World If this be not in the highest degree Schismatical farewel Reason and Religion And here I may justly make the same Intercession as St. Paul calls it against the Church of England with that of Elijah against the Schismatical Church of Israel whose perfect Image I am sorry they bear Lord they have killed thy Bishops and Priests and digged down thine Altars and we poor persecuted Sheep are left alone and they seek our lives to take them away 4. As to the Roman Catholics I need not urge any more Reasons than what has been already offer'd to prove that this Society of Christians is the True Catholic Church For since it is manifestly prov'd that neither the Nestorian nor the Eutychian nor the Greek nor yet the Church of England is the Catholic Church it remains that the Roman Catholics must necessarily be it However I shall lay down some Notes agreed on by all sides to pertain to the Catholic Church which upon Examination will be found to be peculiar to the Roman Catholic Church 1. The Roman Catholic Church is a Great Body of the Faithful spread over all the known parts of the World there being but few Kingdoms known where some Believers in communion with the Bishop of Rome are not to be found Hence She justly claims the Title of Catholic 2. If we except the Protestants there are but few material Points in which all other Sects differ from Her
he was qualified by Jesus Christ for that Office or that he must be a very arrogant Man in taking so much upon him to the Diminution of the Honour and Esteem of his Fellow Apostles And if we put these three things together viz. 1. Christ's building his Church upon Peter giving him the Charge of feeding his Lambs and Sheep and the Power of Confirming his Brethren 2. The Evangelist pursuant to this Power not only reckoning him first amongst the Apostles but also calling him the First 3. Peter's exercising the Office and Charge of Head or Chief among the Apostles as aforesaid We shall plainly see that this Superiority is no Imaginary thing as our Adversaries wou'd make the World believe but a Real Truth grounded upon the Word of God And if this was confer'd upon Peter it is granted by all that the same Prerogative must necessarily devolve upon his lawful Successors the Bishops of Rome And indeed this was so publickly taught and profess'd by the Primitive Fathers and Councils as a necessary and fundamental Truth that many Learned Protestants have been forc'd to own it I shall instance in one Monsieur Blondel one of the most learned Protestants that ever writ against the Pope's Supremacy gives it this Testimony The Titles of the Apostle St. Peter saith he ought not to be put in debate since the Grecians and Pâ—otestants also do confess that it has been believ'd and that it might indeed be that he was the President and Head of the Apostles the Foundation of the Church and Possessor of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Again pag. 107. Rome being a Church consecrated by the Residence and Martyrdom of St. Peter whom Antiquity has acknowledg'd to be the Head of the College Apostolic having been honour'd with the Title of the Seat of the Apostle St. Peter might without Difficulty be consider'd by one of the most renowned Councils viz. that of Chalcedon as Head of the Church Thus far this Learned Man and surely nothing but the Evidence of this Truth cou'd extort so ingenuous a Confession from an Adversary in favour of â—â—me whose Supremacy he chiefly aim'd to pull down Now how far this Title gives him Superiority and Jurisdiction over all other Bishops I will not take upon me to determine This only I shall undertake to prove that the Fathers of the Primitive Church did believe St. Peter and his Successors the Bâ—shops of Rome to be by virtue of this Prerogative St. Peter Head and Chief amongst the Apâ—stles and the Bishop of Rome the same among all other Bishops and Center of Catholic Vnity and that the Bishop of Rome did exercise Jurisdiction as occasion offer'd over the Eastern as well as the Western Bishops even in the Primitive Times such as Excommunication receiving of Appeals Confirming and Deposing of Bishops c. For the Truth of all which we have besides the general Consent of the Church as Authentic Records next to the Scripture as for any matter of Fact whatsoever happening at so great a distance I shou'd never end if I shou'd cite all the Passages of Fathers and Councils and Ecclesiastical Writers which may be brought to prove this Point I will therefore Instance in a few only but they shall be such as will by the Greatness of their Authority and Clearness of Expression I hope be abundantly sufficient to compose this Difference And 1. St. Irenaeus speaks thus of the Church of Rome ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentierem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui undiquâ— sunt Fideles Every Church that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church by reason of her more powerful Principality lib. 3. c. 3. 2. St. Cyprian thus of St. Peter Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod erat Petrus pari consortio praediti Potestatis Honoris Primatus tamen Pâ—tro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia Cathedra una monstretur The Rest of the Apostles were the same that St. Peter was endued with a like Fellowship of Power and Honour yet the Primacy is given to Peter that the One Church of Christ and one Chair might appear lib. de Unitat. Eccles 3. St. Ambrose Andreas prius secutus est Dominum quam Petrus tamen principatum non accepit Andreas sed Petrus Andrew follow'd Christ sooner than Peter yet Andrew did not receive the Principality but Peter in 2 Cor. 12. 4. St. Jerom. Propterea inter duodâ—cem unus eligitur ut capite constituto Schismatis toâ—latur occasio One is chosen among the twelve Apostles to the end that a Head being constituted all occasion of Schism may be taken away Cont. Jovin 5. St. Chrysostom The Pastor and Head of the Church was a Fisherman Hom. 55. in Cap. 16. Mat. 6. St. Augustin In Ecclesia Romana semper viguit Apostoliâ—ae Cathedrae Principatus The Principality of the Apostolic Chair has always flourish'd in the Church of Rome Epist 162. 7. The General Council of Chalcedon We throughly consider that all Primacy and Chief Honour is to be kept for the Bishop of old Rome Act. 16. This was the General Language not only of the Fathers of this Council but even of all Antiquity both in public Assemblies and private Writings the primitive Fathers and Councils always deferring the chief Honour and Primacy to the See of St. Peter as they generally phrase it And indeed tho' the Bishops of Constantinople have always been observ'd to be very ambitious to advance their own See above all others and to have procur'd in two General Councils viz. in the first Council of Constantinople and in that of Chalcedon to have that See prefer'd to Alexandria and Antioch and plac'd next after Rome yet we do not find that any Council or Father did ever dispute with the Bishop of Rome in Point of Primacy or Jurisdiction in so much was all Antiquity perswaded and convinc'd that he was the Chief and Supreme visible Head of the whole Catholic Church Thus much concerning the Primacy of St. Peter and his Successors which yet is not the one half of what may be alledg'd for this Point Now I wou'd willingly beg of any of our Adversaries to Answer me to these few Queries Whether these Holy Fathers did not believe the Primacy of St Peter and his Successors when they spoke so plainly in favour of it Whether they did not understand and were well instructed in the Doctrine of the whole Catholic Church touching this Point Whether they had a mind to flatter the Bishop of Rome or to grant him any more Authority and Power over themselves than was justly due to him And whether it be not an excess of Folly and Weekness to say no worse in the Protestants now fifteen hundred Years after to dispute that Prerogative which is so manifestly acknowledg'd by so many Eminent Martyrs and Confessors and great Doctors of the Primitive Church That the Bishop of
the East for the Corfirmation and Depâ—sition of Bishops and for such other Acts of Jurisdiction as depended of the Apostolic See I might bring more Instances to this purpose from the most approv'd Writers of ancient and modern History but let these suffice for the Proof of a thing so universally attested by all Antiquity And now if neither plain Texts of Scripture declaring this Prerogative to have been confer'd upon St. Peter and plainly shewing his exercising of it on several Occasions nor the Authority of so many Holy Fathers and Councils of the Primitive Times manifestly defferring the same Privilege to his Successors nor the Testimony of two of the most celebrated Historians of Antiquity publicly witnessing that the Church of Rome had the Priviledge to hear and restore the Patriarchs and Bishops of the East and that the Bishop of Rome follow'd or acted according to the Laws of the Church when he commanded or cited the Eastern Bishops Patriach and all to appear before him nor yet the Consent which the Evidence of the thing has extorted from some Ingenuous and Learned Protestants in favour of this Truth If all this I say will not open our Adversaries Eyes to see the Pope's Supremacy all I can do for their Service is to pray to Almighty God that he wou'd be pleas'd to take away from their Hearts that vail of Prejudice which hinders them to see so manifest a Truth But of this enough let us now see the Objâ—ctions Against this Tenet the Doctor objects 1. That the Bishop of Rome as Successor of St. Peter there Vol. 6. pag. 155. cannot be the Supreme and universal Pastor of Christ's Church by Divine Appointment because saith he there is not the least mention of this in Scripture 2. That it is against reason to found the Pope's Supremacy in being Successor of St. Peter pag. 156. at Rome whereas it shou'd rather pertain to the Bishop of Antioch where Peter was first Bishop To the first I answer that by all these Titles is only meant that the Pope is Head of the Church and the Center of Catholic Unity and no more is requir'd of any Man to believe concerning this Point Now that there is not only mention but even Texts of Scripture clearly proving St. Peter whose undoubted Successor all the World knows to be the Bishop of Rome to have been made the Head of the Church of Christ is already made out 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of these Words supreme and universal Pastor no more does it of the Word consubstantial yet the Fathers of the Nicene Council did not scruple to make a Fundamental Article of Faith of it and carefully inserted it in their Creed because they judg'd it very proper to express their Belief concerning the Divinity of Jesus Christ In like manner tho' some Catholic Writers call the Bishop of Rome Supreme and Vniversal Pastor c. yet I do not see what Grounds the Doctor had to quarrel with them for that since all Catholics agree that they mean nothing else by these Words but that the Pope is Head of the Church and use them for no other end than to express more fully what it is to be Head of the Church But 't is very remarkable that no Sect ever separated from the Church who did not follow this Maxim They take hold of some words invented by the Church to declare more expresly such Articles of Faith as were contested and because these very Terms are not found in Scripture they cry immediately Victory as if our Faith consisted meerly in Words and not in what is meant by them To the Second I answer That it is much more against Reason nay altogether absurd to imagine that St. Peter whom the Dr. as well as I must in this case suppose to be Head of the Church shou'd come to Rome place his Chair in that City and yet leave his Authority behind him at Antioch This aiery Notion I am sure none of the Holy Fathers and Councils in the Primitive Times ever thought of on the contrary they have always consider'd the Bishop of Rome as Successor of St. Peter Head of the Church and Principle of Catholic Unity There are several Objections more of this Nature in the same Volume Pag. 244 245. c. And tho' most of them are levell'd at the Church of Rome yet I chuse to take notice of them under this Head rather than the former both because of their Affinity with this and for the Reader 's Satisfaction who I suppose won't be sorry to find them answer'd in the same order they lie 1. The Doctor grants that If the Roman Church be the Catholic Church it is necessary to be of that Communion because saith he out of the Catholic Church there is ordinarily no Salvation to be had But how do they prove continues he that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church They wou'd fain have us to be so civil as to take it for granted because if we do not they do not well know how to go about to prove it And after some pleasant Sallies of Rallery he concludes that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church To answer this Objection I say first that the Doctor here does very courteously justifie the Roman Catholics from that odious Imputation of Uncharitableness wherewith he elsewhere most grievously charges them for not allowing Protestants Salvation out of their Communion He grants that out of the Catholic Church there is ordinarily no Salvation to be had Now the Roman Catholics do sincerely believe that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church consequently when they say that there is ordinarily no Salvation out of it they cannot justly be charg'd with the least Uncharitableness since they have as it is already prov'd the greatest Assurance for that Belief that any thing of that Nature is capable of And if it be True as most certainly it is that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church then surely the Roman Catholics are so far from being uncharitable in this particular that it is one of the greatest Marks of their Charity to have that Love for their Erring Brethren as to mind them of the Hazard they run and exhort them to avoid it tho' they are sure they shall be hated for their Pains 2dly That he must be a great Stranger to our Divines and Controveâ—tists if he thinks as he here writes they do not well know how to go about to prove it Surely he must have been very ill read in the Writings of Bellarmin Peron Richelieu and hundreds of Catholic Divines who wrote on this subject when he advances so groundless shall I call it a Story And what as yet renders the thing more intollerable is that this is spoken out of a Pulpit where nothing but Truth and Sincerity shou'd as much as be mention'd In short this is matter of Fact The Catholic
Divine's Books on this subject are still extant and let even our Adversaries be the Judges whether this be not one of the most groundless Mistakes that ever any serious Man cou'd fall into 3dly That he is as far out when he says that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church Had we said that the particular Church and Diocess of Rome were the Catholic Church his Comparison wou'd then indeed have been Reasonable but surely he cou'd not be ignorant that we understand by the Roman Church all the Christian Churches over the World in Communion with the particular Church and See of Rome which we therefore call the Roman Catholic Church because Rome being the Seat of St. Peter's Successor is the Center and Principlâ— of Catholic Unity If the Doctor had a mind to make good his Thesis he shou'd have prov'd that all other Societies of Christians who are not in Communion with the Church of Rome are notwithstanding their Heresies and Schisms a Part of the Catholic Church he shou'd have prov'd that the Nestorians and Eutychians which take up the greatest part of the Eastern Christians are a Part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding they were excommunicated and cut off from the Body of the Catholic Church by the lawful Authority of two General Councils whose Decrees he and all other learned Protestants do profess to embrace that the Grecians are still Members of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their willful Schism from its Communion their ancient Error concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost their having been so often reconcil'd and united to it yet still returning to their Vomit but more especially their self-condemn'd Perverseness in their late Separation from the Communion and Fellowship of the Church of Rome which they solemnly and in the most Authentic manner gave under their Hands in the Council of Florence they wou'd hold and maintain he shou'd have prov'd that Luthor Calvin and all those who adher'd to their new broach'd Opinions are a part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their being excommunicated by the Church and their own Confession of holding these Opinions in Opposition to all the World besides All this I say the Doctor shou'd have prov'd to shew that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church But neither he nor any Body else did ever so much as attempt it on the contrary most of the learned Men of the Church of England have readily given up the Cause in regard of all the aforesaid Sects and most of all other Sects do as censoriously condemn those of the Church of England With what colour of Reason then can the Doctor suggest that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church Nay can any thing be more plain than that the Roman Church as it is understood by Catholics is the whole Catholic Church since none of the aforesaid Sects can with the least colour of Reason pretend to be a part of it since they themselves do unchurch one another since they own that the Church of Rome is a Part at least of the Catholic Church and that one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the being or Constitution of the one Catholic Church in both which Essential they own themselves to be different from the Church of Rome So that if we had no other Proof besides this last Reason is a plain Demonstration that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no part or member of it 'T is a known Truth and even vouch'd by all Protestants whatsoever that the Church of Rome is at least a Part of the Catholic Church That one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the Constitution of the Catholic Church of Christ is a Doctrine generally receiv'd by the Church of England and I suppose by all the Divines in the World besides now there is none of all the aforesaid Sects as they all unanimously agree that holds either the same Faith or Communion with the Church of Rome which yet they hold to be a Part of the Catholic Church and which together with the said Sects make up the whole Body of Christians It is then most evident that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no Part or Member of it But the latter no Protestant ever yet durst affirm for if they shou'd affirm that the Church of Rome is no part of the Catholic Church this would vacate all their Pretences to be a Church since it is from the Church of Rome they pretend to derive their Mission Ordination and spiritual Power if any they have We are then sure even to a Demonstration that if what the Protestants say be true the Roman Church is the whole Catholic Church and no less sure that neither the Protestants nor any other Sect whatsoever can be any part or member of the Catholic Church whilst they continue out of the Communion and Faith of the Roman Church 2. To prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church the Doctor requires the following Particulars shou'd be clearly shewn and made out 1. A plain Constitution of our Saviour whereby St. Peter and his Successors at Rome are made the Supreme Head and Pastors of the whole Christian Church Of this says he we have not the least Intimation in the Gospel nor in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles nay there is clear Evidence adds he to the contrary that in the Council of Jerusalem St. James was if not superior at least equal to him And St. Paul upon several Occasions declares himself equal to St. Peter But suppose it were true continues the Doctor That St. Peter were Head of the Church where doth it appear that this Authority was deriv'd to his Successors And if it were why to his Successors at Rome rather than at Antioch where â—e was first and unquestionably Bishop Answ Touching a plain Constitution c. methinks a modest good Christian might well be content with one plain Text of Scripture produc'd to that purpose much more with a great many and this surely is already done a hundred times over both from the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles where we plainly find this Charge committed to St. Peter and his frequent Exercise of it as occasion offer'd 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of his Successor at Rome Nor do we say it is necessary he shou'd be there rather than any where else For St. Peter might if he pleas'd for ought we know have as well plac'd his Chair in Canterbury but it is matter of Fact that he did not place it there but in Rome His making St. James equal if not superior to St. â—eter in the Councâ—l of Jerusalem needs no other Confutation than a bare recital of the matter of Fact which pass'd there I am sure it is as plain as words can make it
that St. Peter rose up first open'd the Subject of their Meeting discours'd upon the Conversion of the Gentiles by his Ministry shew'd the Unreasonableness of that Yoke the Jews wou'd fain put upon them and concluded with a peremptory Sentence to that purpose which 't is manifest St. James and the rest did but follow and if this be not sufficient Evidence of his Superiority even over St. James let the World judge As for St. Paul's declaring himself equal to St. Peter it moves me not For so may any Bishop lawfully ordain'd do to the Pope without the least diminution of his Supremacy the Equality meant by St. Paul respecting only the Power of preaching the word of God to those to whom he was sent of administring the Sacraments and of ordaining Ministers for the use and benefit of the Faithful To do all which I readily grant every Apostle's Power to be equal to St. Peter's and every lawfully ordain'd Bishop's to that of the Pope's As to his Question Where doth it appear that St. Peter 's Power was deriv'd to his Successors I am almost unwilling to honour it with a Confutation being in my sense one of the simplest Expressions that ever drop'd from a Man of his parts If I shou'd ask where doth it appear that he was by Divine Institution Archbishop of Canterbury I believe he wou'd be puzel'd a little to give a good Answer Yet he did not scruple to stile himself John by the Grace of God Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Did ever any Man question whether the Authority and Power of the Bishop of any See was deriv'd to his Successor Was not Christ's Power deriv'd to his Apostles As the Father hath sent me even sâ— sâ—nd I you Was not the Apostle's Power deriv'd to their Successors Else how cou'd we pretend to be Christians In short that Heirs and Successors shou'd Inherit the Power and Authority of their Ancestors unless there be a positive Law or Exception to the contrary is surely a self evident Maxim grafted in our Hearts by the Law of Nature and confirm'd by the Common Consent of Mankind What shou'd then hinder Peter's Authority to be deriv'd to his Successors whom all the World before the rise of Protestanism did believe to be the Bishops of Rome and not those of Antioch as the Dr. seems here to suggest 2. To make good that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church they are oblig'd to affiirm says the Dr. That the Churches of Asia and Affrica which were Excommunicated by the Bishops of Rome for celebrating Easter after the Jewish manner and upon the point of Rebaptizing Heretics were cut off from the Catholic Church and from a possibility of Salvation This the Church of Rome themselves will not affirm continues he and yet if to be cast out of the Communion of the Roman and the Catholic Church be all one they must affirm it Answ This Argument is grounded upon a Fallacy and therefore the Inference is False Had the Bishop of Rome and the Roman Church been convertible Terms the Inference wou'd then indeed have been Right and the Argument True but surely Dr. Tillotson knew very well we never understood these Terms so The Fallacy then consists in this that he joyns together the two different Notions of Roman Church and Bishop of Rome and makes them pass for one and the same thing and so by a cunning piece of Sophistry concludes that whatever is done by the Bishop of Rome is likewise the Act and Deed of the whole Roman Church 3. In consequence of this Proposition that the Church of Rome is the Catholic Church they ought to hold that all Baptism out of the Communion of their Church is void and of none effect For if it be good pursues the Dr. then it makes the Persons Baptiz'd Members of the Catholic Church and then those that are out of the Communion of the Roman Church may be true Members of the Catholic Church And then the Roman and the Catholic Church are not all one But the Church of Rome holds the Baptism of Heretics to be good consequently the Roman Church is not the Catholic Church Answ His Inference is likewise here false and so is his Consequence The Roman Catholics following the Ancient Fathers and Councils of the Primitive Church do believe that the Baptism confer'd by Heretics with due Matter and Form is good and vallid and that it makes the Baptiz'd True Members of the Catholic and consequently of the Roman Church provided there be no impediment of Heresie or Schism on the part of the Persons thus Baptiz'd but if they are engag'd in any Heresie or Schism they hold indeed that they receive a true Character of Baptism but this alone neither makes them Members of the Catholic Church nor availes any thing to their Salvation For as St. Austin says all the Sacraments may be had out of the Church but Salvation cannot Now the Doctor to make good this Inference shou'd do these two things 1. He shou'd have prov'd that Infants and such as are not capable of Heresie or Schism being Baptiz'd by Heretics are out of the Communion of the Roman Church For this we utterly deny and on the contrary affirm they are true Members of it untill they forsake or renounce it by actual Profession of Heresie or by Schism 2. That those who are actually engag'd in Heresie or Schism being Baptiz'd in that State and persisting in it are notwithstanding by virtue of their Baptism made true Members of the Catholic Church Cou'd the Dr. but prove this he wou'd I own both gain his Point and render glorious Service to several Thousands of Ancient Heretics who denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ as well as to the present Protestants by making them all True Members of the Catholic Church in spite of all the General Councils and their Authority But alas This is what neither he nor any body else will ever attempt And indeed if it were possible to be effected we shou'd I am sure be as glad of it and as willing to contribute to the Salvation of these Men as he or any body else but we have learn'd from the Word of God and from the Principles of true Charity not to flatter any Society of Men with a false Peace and Security when we have no grounds for it 4. In consequence of this Proposition all the Christians in the World which do not yield Subjection to the Bishop of Rome and acknowledg his Supremacy are no true parts of the Catholic Church nor in a possibility of Salvation And this does not only exclude those of the Reform'd Religion from being Members of the Catholic Church but the Greeks and the Eastern Churches i. e. four of the five Patriarchal Churches of the Christian World Hence the Dr. concludes that the Roman Church is not the Catholic Church because it has not more Charity than this comes to Answ This Argument is founded upon an Inconveniency and a great
Inconvenience I confess it is but if we shou'd conclude the Existence or non-Existence the Truth or Falshood of things from their conveniency or inconveniency the World wou'd be brought to a sine pass 'T is very inconvenient that God shou'd condemn all Mankind to death to all the other miseries and infirmities to which human Nature is now obnoxious for the eating of one single Fruit yet it is never the less True 'T is very inconvenient that a Man shou'd be condemn'd to eternal Flames for one only Sin wherein he dies unrepented yet no Man ever question'd this Truth We must not then conclude from the inconvenience that attends a Thing that is therefore false but we ought to weigh the Reasons and Motives whereby we are induc'd to believe it is so Now the Roman Catholics believe that those among the Greeks and Eastern Churches which are not in communion with the Church of Rome together with the Protestants are no true Members of the Catholic Church because they have the most Authentic Records and the most invincible Proof that any matter of Fact is capable of that the said Greeks Eastern Churches and Protestants fell into Heresie and Schism in which they do as yet actually persist What allowance God-almighty may make for the invincible Ignorance and want of Capacity in a great many of these People and how far he will be merciful and pardon the other defects of those who endeavour to live up to what they know and want necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth He alone knows None I am sure is more willing to judge favourably of their Salvation than Roman Catholics But to flatter them with hopes of Salvation whilst they persist in their Errors and have necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth and to tell them they may be saved with such Errors when we are convinc'd in our Consciences they cannot is surely no Christian Charity but the greatest of Heathenish Cruelty 5. In consequence of the Truth of this Proposition and of the importance of it to the Salvation of Souls they ought to produce express mention of the Roman Catholic Church in the ancient Creeds of the Christian Churches But this says the Dr. they are not able to do on the contrary Aeneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the second says that before the Council of Nice little Respect was had to the Roman Church Answ Just so the Arians used to object to the Catholics that if the word Consubstantial were of that importance as it was pretended they ought to produce express mention of it in the ancient Creed of the then present Church but as the Catholics then answer'd that it was enough the thing meant by that Word was in the Creed tho' not the Word it self so say we to the Protestants that in these Words of the Creed I believe the holy Catholic Church is implied what we mean by the Words Roman Catholic Church tho' the Word Roman be not there What Aeneas Sylvius might in passion or upon some private quarrel with the Pope have Written against the Roman Church consider'd with respect only to the Diocess of Rome I am not much concern'd For I am sure he never said nor writ that the Roman Church as it includes all the Christian Churches in communion with the See of Rome in which sense the Dr. cou'd not be ignorant we always take it was not the true Catholic Church Besides if it be true that Aeneas Sylvius said what the Dr. makes him here speak let the Holy and Learn'd Martyr St. Irenaeus who liv'd very neer two hundred years before the Council of Nice teach him the contrary Every Church says he that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church the Roman by Reason of her more powerful Principallity Loco sup cit CHAP. IV. Of Transubstantiation WHat we hold to be of Faith concerning this Point is this That the whole Substance of the Bread and Wine is after Consecration chang'd into the Body and Blood of Christ without any Alteration in the Accidents or outward Forms This is to all our modern Sectaries a Stone of Stumbling and Rock of Offence Against this they have whetted their Pens and Tongues and pointed all the Shafts of their Art and Eloquence in order to pull down an Edifice whose Builder and Maker is God himself But however they agree to destroy this mysterious Fabrick yet what to substitute in its Room or how to expound those Texts of Scripture on which it is founded none can with greater Heat and Passion even to the most injurious and provoking Language be divided nor fall into more manifest Absurdities and Contradictions than these Pretenders to Reformation And indeed if the Disagreement of Witnesses be an Argument of their Falshood as the Evangelists assure us it is we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that these are false Witnesses For I am sure none ever disagreed more not only in the Circumstances but even in the very Nature and Substance of their Evidence Martin Luther and his Adherents expound these Words This is my Body litterally and therefore believe the Real Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament but being however resolv'd to Incommode the Pope Epist ad Calvin as Luther says they add that the Substance of the Bread and Wine is likewise there And to extricate themselves from a difficulty which attends the Real Presence they affirm moreover that the Body of Christ is every where And thus they have brought forth two New Points of Faith never before heard of namely Consubstantiation and Vbiquitie And this the Church of England Writers call an absurd and monstrous Doctrine Calvin and his Sectators in Contradiction to this expound the same Words Figuratively and therefore believe a Real Absence or which is all one that the Eucharist is but a Type or Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ Zuinglius tells us himself was the first that found out this Exposition by the help of a certain Angel which appear'd to him but whether he was black or white he says he cannot tell So that for ought he knew it may be the Doctrine of a Devil I am sure Luther at least did think it so for he calls Calvin a Devil Epist ad Calvin and worse than a Devil for offering to obtrude this Doctrine upon the World and for wresting the plain Words of our Saviour to such a Sense The Church of England neither expounds those Words litterally nor yet figuratively for She neither believes Transubstantiation nor Consubstantiation neither Real Presence nor yet Real Absence And to deal ingenuously I do not well know what she believes in this particular And what is worse to the best of my Understanding nor she herself For in the Catechism which is put into the Children and common people's Hands where surely the Articles of Faith must if any where be clearly and plainly expounded she teaches
prove to him that the Symbols taken in that Sense were not chang'd But this he is so far from doing that the Reason he offers to evince that he was so caught proves no more than that the Accidents or Objects of Sense still remain namely that which may be seen and handled which the Hetetic Eranistes never denied 'T is then evident that he understood the Word Symbol in a different Sense from that of Eranistes Consequently his meaning must have been that the Accidents which he calls Symbols did not pass out of their Nature c. And all his Advantage consisted in the Equivocation of the Word Symbol which his Adversary took in a vulgar Sense and by that gave him an Opportunity to perplex him and tell him he was caught in his own Net And God knows he must be hard put to it who would fain squeez Proof for his Faith from such intricate Disputes I have nothing to add in answer to Gelasius his Passage to what is here said For 't is plain from the Scope and Design of this Father who likewise disputed with an Entychian Heretic that he meant by substance or nature of Bread the Qualities of it which we confess remain still in the Sacrament nothing being more usual in common Discourse than to give the name of Nature to the Quality as we commonly say a Man of ill nature that is of ill Qualities One Word more with the Doctor and I take leave of this Subject He tells us Discourse against Transubstantiation pag. 328 329. That Transubstantiation was first introduc'd into the Catholic Religion about the latter End of the Eight Century in the Second Council of Nice And pag. 333. that it was almost 300 Years before this Mishapen Monster as he Religiously terms it cou'd be Lick'd into that Form in which it is now settl'd and establish'd in the Church of Rome What I shall say to the matter of Fact here mention'd leaving the Doctor to his own Master to account for his civil Language is that I cou'd wish he were alive that he might now at least consult his own Protestant Authors to correct his Error since he was then in two much haste to do it Doctor Humfrey a Famous Divine of his own Country and perswasion wou'd better inform him that Austin the great Monk as he calls him Jesuitiâ—mi part â— sent by Gregory the Great Pope taught the English a Burthen of Ceremonies Purgatory Mass Prayer for the Dead Transubstantiation Reliques c. Now all the World knows that Austin the Monk taught the English about the latter end of the sixth Century and the Begining of the seventh almost two hundred Years before the Second Council of Nice Cent. 6. de Oper. Sti. Greg. The Centuriators of Magdeburg the Doctor 's own good Friends wou'd tell Him that the same Gregory the Great wrought a Miracle in the presence of an uncredulous Woman to confirm her in the Belief of the substantial Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ as the Centurists Phrase it And surely it was no less these Gentlemens Interest than his cou'd they but dâ—vest themselves of all honesty and sincerity to make it of a Fresher Date than even the Council of Nice But the Doctor was so intent upon baffling Monsieur Arnauld's Demonstration of the Impossibility of obtruding this Doctrine upon the Faithful without Great and Violent Commotions both in Church and State which he saw he cou'd not well effect unless he had fix'd a certain Epocha whence this Doctrine shou'd take its rise that rather than fail he wou'd hit at a venture upon the Second Council of Nice and there fix his Foot Being perswaded as he says that this was the fittest Time for such a Change And is not this a miserable Shift to which this Ingenious Man is reduc'd when he is forc'd to make good his undertaking to have recourse to such known and manifest I am asham'd to say it falshoods Which surely do better become Impostors than Grave Divines whose very Names and Character shou'd prompt them to candor and sincerity it being evident that disingenuity and false dealing whatever they may do for a time serve to no other end at last than to discredit the Cause and confound its Patrons CHAP. V. Of the Communion in one kind TO give the Communion in one or in both kinds is no matter of Faith but respects the Discipline of the Church which according to the different Circumstances and Exigencies of Affairs for the increase of Piety and Devotion and in Condescension to the Infirmity of her Children is often necessitated to alter some things in her Discipline it being Evident that what in one Age was good and profitable an other Age will in no wise bear And since it is agreed upon that the care of feeding the Flock was committed to the Church that she alone is Commission'd to dispence the Divine Mysteries and hath a peculiar promise of the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to guide her into all Truth none can reasonably doubt but She is the most Competent Judge what in her Discipline to change what to retain Now the main stress lyes upon this whether or no it be in the Power of the Church to alter her Discipline in a matter of this Importance so as to restrain the Faithful to the receiving of the Sacrament in one kind only It being acknowledg'd by our selves that in the Primitive Times this Sacrament was indifferently administred sometimes in Both sometimes in one kind Tho 't is hard to conceive why Men shou'd rather conclude that it is not in the Power of the Church to restrain the Faithful to one kind because the Communion was somtimes given in Both than the contrary that it is in the Power of the Church so to do because it was likewise sometimes given in one kind To justifie then the conduct of the Church in this particular I shall only examin whether the Receiving of the Eucharist in both kinds be Essential to a True and Real Participation of the Sacrament For if both kinds be Essential then 't is certain the Church cannot take away any Essential part of the Sacrament without destroying the whole and consequently in giving but part wou'd give nothing at all Therefore cou'd not restrain the Faithful to one kind it being evident that the Church is only impower'd to dispense and not to destroy the Mysterys of God But if I can make out that the Participation of the Euchurist in Both Kinds is not Essential to the worthy receiving of the Sacrament then it will evidently follow that the Church may lawfully command the forbearance of one kind For if you shou'd ask any of our Learned Protestants why they do not give the Communion at night or after Supper or sitting down or lying on Couches as 't is confess'd Christ gave it They will tell you because 't is not Essential to the Sacrament to give it so Or why they do not
the Sacred Bread about them that they may eat of it in Case of any Hazard or Danger But of this enough Touching the Public and solemn Communion of the Church I own we have no instances from Fathers or Ecclesiastical Writers for the first four Centuries to prove that the Communion was publickly given in one kind to any except Infants and little Children nor can our Adversaries instance in any who says it was not so given And so far we are upon the Level But methinks the Scales being thus even the Practice and Custom of the Church expresly Recorded and Deliver'd by the Writers and Liturgies of the Fifth Sixth and all other succeeding Ages in Favour of the public Communion in one as well as in both kinds ought to weigh down the Ballance and determin any reasonable Man to conclude that this same Practice was deriv'd from the foregoing Ages We find indeed in the latter End of the fifth Age a Decree of Pope Gelasius which forbids certain People to receive the Communion in one kind but if we attend to the Motives and Circumstances of this Decree and to the Persons there meant we shall find it is so far from destroying our Hypothesis that it plainly confirms it What gave Occasion to it was this In the Time of St. Leo Pope Gelasius his Predecessor there were a great many Manichees in Rome who the better to spread their wicked Errors feign'd themselves Catholics and frequented the Churches and Sacraments like others but it being part of their Belief that Wine was created by the Devil and that Jesus Christ did not spill his Blood for us but that his Passion was Fantastick not Real they abhorr'd Wine above all things and therefore abstain'd from the Sacred Cup in the Communion St. Leo complains of the Disorders which they caus'd in the Church He declaims against their wicked and hellish Devices He tells us they were so bold as to presume to mix themselves with the Faithful and receive the Lord's Body but abstain'd from the Sacred Cup and gives that as a Mark to discern them by But because the Faithful were at Liberty to take One or both Kinds and that many devont Christians receiv'd the Body without the Sacred Cup it was hard to find out by that Mark who these Manichees were However St. Leo did not think fit to alter the Discipline of the Church nor take away their Liberty from the Faithful but was content to insinuate that whosoever shou'd refuse to take the Sacred Cup as abhorring Wine or in Detestation to the Blood of Christ shou'd be reputed of that Sect. But this Remedy proving ineffectual Pope Gelasius was forc'd to Decree that whosoever abstain'd from the Sacred Cup upon any such superstitious Pretence shou'd be altogether depriv'd of the Communion It may not be amiss to subjoin his very Words Gr. Dist 2 can comper de consecrat We have found out that some People do take only the Body and abstain from the Sacred Blood who seeing they are engag'd in I know not what Superstition must either take both parts or be depriâ—'d of both because the Division of one and the same Mystery cannot be done without great Sacriledge Now to give you my Thoughts upon this Decree I think it is plain First that there was no need of making such a Decree if all the Catholics in those days had receiv'd the Communion in both kinds For this being made on purpose to discover the Manichees who never drank Wine there was nothing so easie as to find out who they were upon their refusal of the Sacred Cup consequently there needed no Decree to discover them But since it is confess'd that these Heretics did mix themselves with the Catholics and receiv'd the Communion only in one kind and that notwithstanding all St. Leo's Care and Diligence to find them out they were still undiscover'd I think it is a Demonstration that some Catholics as well as the Manichecs did receive the Communion in One Kind only And this being all that I undertook to evince I might now take leave of this Decree But I shall observe Secondly that the prohibition here made affects only those who were engag'd in a certain Superstition who seeing they are engag'd in I know not what Superstition must either take both parts or be depriv'd of both For the Reason why they are to be depriv'd of both parts of the Sacrament unless they take both is because they were engag'd in a certain superstition which tended to destroy the Sacrifice of our Redmption by the Belief they had that Christ's Blood was only an Illusion and to divide that Mystery which Gelasius says cannot be done without great Sacriledge by the like wicked opinion that Wine being created by the Devil Christ wou'd never have instituted the Memorial of his passion in that Liquor Whence 't is evident that the Catholics who were in no manner engag'd in these superstitious Errors are nothing concern'd in this Decree nor barr'd of the liberty they always had of receiving the Sacrament in one or both kinds as suited best with their Devotion And this is so true that we find the practice of it recommended by a Canon of a very Famous if not General Council held in Constantinople in the sixth Century Can. 52. known to the Ancients by the Name of Concilium Trullanum This Council confirms the Ancient Custom of the Greek Church which was to celebrate Mass in Lent only on Saturdays and Sundays it being by the Ancients Judg'd improper to consecrate on any of those Days on which they fasted because they wou'd not as they commonly speak mix the solemnity of the Sacrifice with the sadness of the Fast. But on these two days in which they did not fast they us'd to consecrate and reserve as much of the sacred Oblation as wou'd suffice for the Clergy and Laity to take every day till the Saturday following and this they call'd the Mass of the Presanctified than which nothing is more frequently mention'd in the Greek Church Now to know what was offer'd and distributed to the People in this Mass All the Ancient Greek Liturgies tell us that there was nothing reserv'd but the sacred Bread that this Bread was carried in Procession from the Sacrifice into the Church Eucho Goar Bib. P. P. Paris T. 2. expos'd to be ador'd by the People and after some Ceremony distributed to all the Faithful So that here is a Public and Solemn Communion given in One Kind for five Days every Week Yearly while Lent holds But this Practice was not peculiar to the Greek for we find it as early and as solemnly us'd in the Latin Church The Roman Ordinal Bib. P. P Var. T. de Div. Off. whose Antiquity I suppose no body will question being that which St. Gregory the Great made use of in the sixth Century gives us the same Account of Good Friday-Service with that which is express'd in the Rubrics of our
present Mass-book Alcuinus De Div. Off. a Famous Author of the eigth Century relates the same thing So doth Rupertus Lib. 2. c. 9. de Div. Off. Hugo de Sancto Victore and other Writers of the Eleventh Century They tell us that on Good-Friday there was no Consecration made but that the Body of our Lord which was consecrated the day before was reserv'd for that day's Communion that the Priest took the Lord's Body and some unconsecrated Wine and Water and then gave the Communion to the People under the Form of Bread alone So that there has been a perpetual Practice in the Latin Church of giving the Communion in one kind solemnly once every Year both to Clergy and Laity even to this very Time I might further bring the Authority of Sozomenus Evagrius Authors of the sixth Century and of several Great and Learned Men of the Gallican Church to confirm this Practice but I think it is sufficiently evident from what is said that the Communion was publicly givâ—ng in one kind ever since Christians had Churches for public and solemn Service I shall therefore proceed to shew in the last place That to take the Communion in both kinds is not Essential to the Sacrament from the Consent of our Adversaries if consistent with Themselves I suppose Martin Luther's Opinion in this Matter is of no small Authority for 't is but reasonable to suppose that those who have follow'd the Scheme which he drew shou'd pay their just tribute of Respect to his Opinion in this Point Let us then hear him speak If any Council says he shou'd chance to Decree the Communion in both kinds we shou'd by no means make use of Both De Miffa Ang. nay we wou'd sooner in contempt of the Council take one or neither than both and curse those who shou'd by the Authority of such a Council make use of both kinds Here I think it is very plain Luther was of opinion that both kinds was not essential to the Sacrament else surely he wou'd not have said that he wou'd sooner make use of neither than of both nor curse those who shou'd take both kinds But the Discipline of the French Protestants will afford us a more ample Testimony in this Matter In a Synod held in Potiers Anno. 1560. and in an other in Rochel 1571. It is provided that those who cannot drink Wine may receive the Communion under the Form of Bread It may not be amiss to subjoin their very Words as they are read in the 12th Chapter of their Discipline Tit. Of the Lord's Sup. Art 7. The Bread of the Lord's Supper ought to be administer'd to those who cannot drink Wine upon their making Protestation that it is not out of Contempt and upon their endeavouring what they can to obviate all Scandal even by approaching the Cup as neer their Mouths as they are able Now 't is not to be imagin'd that these Gentlemen shou'd think both kinds essential to the Communion and yet make such a Decision For there is no Body who is never so little Read in Philosophy but knows that the Essence of Things is indivisible that by separating one essential Part from the other you destroy the nature of the whole that in giving only an essential part of a thing you give nothing in regard of that whose essential part it was consequently he that gives but part of the Sacrament gives no Sacrament at all Therefore these Gentlemen who knew better Things in ordering the Bread alone to be given to those who cou'd not drink Wine cannot in Reason be suppos'd to believe that the Cup was Essential to the Communion else they wou'd have absolutely refus'd the Sacrament to those who cou'd not receive it in both kinds since to give it in one kind were to give nothing at all but rather to prophane and abuse that which is most Sacred and August in the Christian Religion whereas the natural disability of those who cannot drink Wine might reasonably excuse them from taking either kind And thus I have endeavour'd as briefly as I cou'd to prove from the practice and discipline of the Church in all Ages from public as well as private Communion from Liturgies Fathers and Historians and even from the consent of our Adversaries manifestly imply'd in their Discipline and Practice that neither the Primitive Christians nor the Catholic Church in any Age nor yet any Orthodox Believer did ever think that to take the Sacrament in both kinds was essential to the Communion And if so then it is plain and evident that the Church hath Power to and may lawfully restrain the Faithful from the Cup and confine them to One kind only Let us now see what Dr. Tillotson objects to all this And here I shall not abuse the Reader 's Patience by repeating the same thing over again for since all that can with any colour of Reason be objected is contain'd in one short Paragraph tho' the things there insisted on are often repeated in several of his Sermons but with no material Addition I will only transcribe it and offer my Exceptions to it And then says he the Communion in One kind is plainly contrary to our Saviours Institution in both kinds as they themselves acknowledge And therefore the Council of Constance being sensible of this was forc'd to decree it with an express non Obstante to the Institution of Christ and the Practice of the Apostles and the Primitive Church And their Doctrine of Concomitancy as if the Blood were in the Flesh and together with it will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and pierc'd and exhausted and drain'd of his Blood and his Blood is represented as shed and poured out so that one kind can by no means contain and exhibit both Three things the Doctor here insists upon 1. That We our selves acknowledg the the Communion in one kind to be contrary to our Saviour's Institution 2. That the Council of Constance was forc'd to decree it with a non obstante to the Institution of Christ 3. That the Doctrine of Concomitancy will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and exhausted and drain'd of His Blood I may say of these three Propositions the first is neither True nor to the purpose The second is something to the Purpose but not True The third is like the first neither True nor to the Purpose I begin with the first We our selves acknowledge that the Communion in one Kind is contrary to our Saviour's Institution For my own part I have read at least some of the best R. Catholic Casuists and Divines upon this Subject and have convers'd with many more Yet I declare I neither read nor heard any of them say that to give the Communion in one kind was contrary to our Saviour's Institution nay I think all R. Catholics do believe that the Administration of the Communion
Ordinary Rule the Council of Trent does not in the least favour their Pretension I shall subjoin the very Words of that Council and leave it to speak for it self Since Experience sheweth that Cum experimento manifestumsit si Sacra Biblia vulgari lingua passim sine discrimne permittantur plus inde ob Hominum temeritatem detrimenti quam utilitatis oriri hac in parte Judicio Episcopi aut Inquisitoris stetur ut cum consilio Patochi vel Confessarij Bibliorum a Catholicis authoribus verlorum lectionem in vulgari lingua eis concedere possint quos intellexerint ex hujusmodi lectione non damnum sed fidei atque pietatis augmentum capere posse quam facultatem in scriptis habeant De lib. proh Reg. 4. if the Sacred Bible were permitted Indifferently and without Distinction in vulgar Language such a Liberty by reason of Men's Rashness wou'd occasion more hurt than good Be it left to the Bishop's or Inquisitor's Judgment by and with the Advice of the Parish priest or Confessor to give leave to read the Versions of Catholic Authors in vulgar Language to such as may in their Opinion receive not a Loss but an Increase of Faith and Piety thereby Which Leave they are to have in Writing De lib. prob Reg. 4. Hence I think it is plain the Council is so far from locking up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue that it gives free Leave to every one whom the Bishop or Inquisitor with the Advice of the Parish priest or Confessor shall judge meet to read it in vulgar Language And since there is nothing so proper nor so powerful to increase Faith and Piety in a Meek and Humble Soul as the Sacred Scripture 't is plain that no sincere Christian is barr'd by this Decree from the use of it in vulgar Language And if any such shou'd happen to be refus'd leave to read it which we have no Reason to suppose 't is contrary to the Spirit and Intention of the Council who orders that Persons so dispos'd may have the free use of them And however this no great Restraint was necessary in those Days when Mens minds were in a Ferment and the Itch of Novelty had seiz'd them as it commonly happens when any new Opinions are broach'd yet when they began to see with their own Eyes and became more Still and Calm the Governors of the Church were so far from hindring them the use of the Scripture or putting this Decree in execution that they exhort all Persons to Read and Meditate upon them as the most effectual means to bring them acquainted with the Will of God and their Duty to Him And now methinks Dr. Tillotson and his Party are of all Others the unfittest to reproach us this Conduct considering that most of the Learned Men of his Church do ingenuously own that the promiscuous use of the Scripture allow'd to all sorts of Persons and their private Interpretations thereof was in a great measure the cause of all the Different Sects that sprung up and divided themselves from their Communion As to what he says that Christ exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures that St. Luke commends the Berâ—ans for so doing and that the Holy Fathers do earnestly recommend the Reading and Study of the Scriptures I acknowledge the truth of this saying I will add to it that all the Art and Industry all the Rhetoric and Eloquence in the World have not that Force and Efficacy upon Pious and Virtuous Souls that the serious Reading and Meditating upon the Holy Scriptures hath yet this notwithstanding since Experience hath taught us that as the Spider extracts Poison out of the same Flower whence the Bee gathers Honey so I believe no Man can doubt considering all the Schism and horrid Impieties now maintain'd but that the rankest Soul-killing Poison has been often extracted out of the sacred Scriptures not out of any Defect in them but thro' the deprav'd Disposition and Supercilious Pride of the Readers And therefore I think it is the least the Church cou'd do in a time of confutation and disorder such as was that of the Council of Trent when so many were gapeing after Novelty and setting up for Heads of new Sects to moderate the Use and Reading of those Sacred Writings But still so as not to shut up the Fountain of Life nor hinder all Good and Virtuous Christians to drink of that Living-Water which tho' little Restraint was yet by Degrees abated as Men began to entertain Thoughts of Peace and Quiet and in a few Years after was insensibly taken away in many Countries by a Tacit Admission of the Reading of Scripture in vulgar Languages to all sorts of people And this I am sure no Body can justly deny to be the Case of the R. Catholic Church in regard of the present Debate which how agreeable to Sense and Reason and to the Piety and Care of a Tender Mother let even the most Inveterate of our Adversaries judge Touching the fourth viz. It cannot be imagin'd how people shou'd square or measure their Faith by this Rule unless they were allow'd to Read and Understand it Answ The Answer to this Objection is sufficiently imply'd in what I spoke to the former I shall therefore add these few Words only That the Word of God is the Rule of our Faith but whether it be convey'd to us by Writing or by Word of Mouth methinks the Scripture it self declares in favour of the latter For Christ our Lord as the Evangelists say commanded his Disciples to go and preach the Gospel but we do not find that He gave any Injunction about giving his Word in Writing to the people in order to learn their Faith However since it is confess'd that the Sacred Scriptures are excellent Means to edifie our Faith and compose our Manners we do earnestly and heartily recommend them to the Study and Meditation of the People Concerning the last viz. That we therefore lock up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue because it is certain that if the common people were once brought to understand the Scripture they wou'd soon quit us and go over to them Answ This Proposition is false in all its Circumstances 1. That we do not lock up the Scripture in an unknown Tongue is already prov'd 2. That the common People wou'd not quit our Religion c. will easily appear if we consider that by the same Rule our Scholars and Men of Letters who understand the Scripture in that Language which they call unknown shou'd have quitted us which he well knew they do not Men of Breeding and Sense are less apt to be pleas'd with Superstition and Error than the common ordinary People and we cannot suppose they shou'd have less Regard for the good of their Souls than ordinary people and yet since those Men from whom we cannot if we wou'd conceal any thing in our Faith or Practice do not go over to them but persist in our Communion
the Angel declar'd it grant us thy humble Petitioners who believe Her to be truly the Mother of God that by Her intercession we may with Thee be assisted thro' the same our Lord Jesus Christ c. Amen A Collect on the Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul O God who hast consecrated this Day by the Martyrdom of Peter and Paul grant to thy Church to follow their Example in all things by whom the Religion began thro' our Lord Jesus c. Amen A Collect on the Nativity of St. John Baptist O God who hast Honor'd this Day with the Nativity of St. John give to thy People the Grace of Spiritual Joy and guide the Minds of all the Faithful in the way of eternal Salvation thro' Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen Here you see all these Prayers are address'd to God alone And thus indeed are all the Collects in the Mass-Book and Breviary which I willingly submit to any Man's Tryal ad Paenam libri As to the Office and Litanies of the B. V. Mary which are found in Manuals and read by some R. Catholics there is no Reason to charge them upon the Public Office and Service of the Church since they are not us'd by the Church nor publish'd by public Authority The Church does indeed allow such Prayers to be said as far as they hold within the Compass of meer Intercession because they are founded in the Practice of the Primitive Church and all succeeding Ages But if any of them contain any Terms or Expressions bordering upon the Prerogative of the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ she does as heartily and as earnestly desire they shou'd be abolish'd as any Protestant whatsoever Touching the Rosary or Beads in which the Dr. reproaches us for saying ten Ave Marias for one Pater Noster I believe every one knows the Church obliges no body to say it I am sure there are Millions of R. Catholics who never do Besides there is nothing in the Ave Maria but the very Words of Scripture except these last pray for us now and in the Hour of our Death and if it be a good thing to desire the Mother of God to pray for us sure the oftner we desire it the better it is As to the Disproportion between the Pater Nosters and the Ave Marias I must confess it were something if those who use the Rosary made all their Devotion to consist in it But it is well known that such as say it do to their Power discharge all other Christian Duties at least do pretend to no Exemption upon the Score of their Beads or Rosary from Praying to Almighty God from Adoring and Worshiping Him and giving Him their Humble and Hearty Thanks for his Benefits and Blessings from commemorating the Death and Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and having recourse to the Merits thereof for Mercy and Pardon of their Sins And now when they have endeavour'd to discharge all these Essential Duties where lies the harm if they spend some part of their spare Hours in saying over and above so many Ave Marias especially since they are founded in the Merits of the Death and Passion of our Lord and Saviour in Virtue whereof all Catholics do hope and trust that the Virgin Mary and all the Saints will pray for them Or how can it be counted a Fault to desire the Virgin Mary to do that for us which even the Dr. himself and all the Learned Protestants in the world do acknowledge She and all the Saints in Heaven constantly do tho' we shou'd not ask it of them Now this is plainly the Case All R. Catholics are taught and exhorted by the Church to discharge first their Duty to God to worship and adore him to put up their Prayers to Him to thank him for His Benefits to be sorry for their sins to beg Mercy and Forgiveness thro' the Merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and when this is done if they will take the Lady's Office or the Litanies of the Saints or the V. Mary or their Beads and beg those great Friends and Favourits of Jesus Christ who shed their Blood and lay down their Lives for the Truth of His Gospel to recommend them to Him and his Heavenly Father is it not better since the mind of Man must always be in Action than spend the Time in Idleness or perhaps in Evil Conversation In a Word these are Devotions which certain Fraternities and Regular Societies have taken upon them to discharge over and above the necessary and Essential Duties of Christianity and which other Catholics to be Partakers of the Prayers of the said Fraternities and Societies do also perform But in saying their Beads they do not always as the Dr. wou'd suggest say ten Ave Maria's for one Pater Noster For several Fraternities and Catholics say all Pater Nosters without ever an Ave Maria. But of this enough I proceed to shew 3. From the very Words of the Holy Fathers that this Practice of praying to Saints was us'd in the primitive Church St. Ambrose delivers his Thoughts in these Words We ought to pray to the Angels in our own Behalf who are given as a Guard to Vs We ought to pray to the Martyrs whose Bodies remaining with Vs seem to be as it were a Pledge of their Protection Lib de Viduis prope Fin. Gregory Nissen speaks thus to the Martyr St. Theodorus Intercede and Pray for your Country with our Common Lord and King Orat. in St. Theodor. St. Austin We do not Commemorate the Martyrs at the Lord's Table as We do those who die in the Peace of the Church but We do Commemorate them that they may pray for Vs that we may follow their Steps Tract 84. in Joa Again Holy Mary * Note that the Sermon whence this Passage is taken is ascrib'd by some Critics to St. Fulgentius but whether of the two it belongs to it matters not being both Fathers of Great Renown and of the same Age. succour the Distressed help the Pusillanimous cherish those that Mourn pray for the People mediate for the Clergy intercede for the Devout Female Sex let every one perceive thy Assistance who celebrate thy Commemoration Ser. 18. de Sanctis Theodoret We do not address our Selves unto the Martyrs as unto Gods but we pray unto them as Divine Men that they wou'd please to become Legats or Intercessors for us Ser. 8. de Martyr lib. Curat Grae◠Affect The Council of Calcedon Act. 11. has these Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Flavianus Liveth after his Death the Martyr will pray for us or as the Translators render it Let the Martyr pray for us it being usual with the Orientals to put the Future Tense for the Imperative Here is a General Council of more than 600 Bishops desiring the Martyr Flavianus to pray for Them This Council was held in the Year 451 and is one of the four first General Councils whose Acts and Decrees the Church of
England Divines do profess to receive So that it cannot be enough admir'd what shou'd induce them to reject the Invocation of Saints I shou'd never end if I shou'd bring all the Sayings of the Fathers on this Subject St. Austin has a long Discourse upon it against Faustus the Manichean where He gives at large the Reasons why the Catholic Church gives due Honour to the Martyrs and desires the Assistance of their Prayers And St. Jerom wrote a Book against Vigilantius upon this Subject and calls him Heretic for denying the Lawfulness of praying to Saints I shall therefore conclude with this Reflection that it is not reasonable to believe nay 't is incredible that these Holy Fathers who took so much pains to propagate the Faith and Gospel of Jesus Christ who wrote so many Learned and Voluminous Works which breath so much Piety and Christian Devotion spent all their Lives in Holy and Religious Exercises consecrated their Time and Labour to the Service of the True and Living God and were ready to lay down their Lives for the Truth of the Doctrine which they taught and practis'd if Occasion requir'd shou'd at the same Time write and practice a Doctrine which derogates from the Honour and Mediatorship of Jesus Christ it being their chief Study and Care to inculcate to the World that He was the only Lord and Mediator in whose Name and no other Salvation was to be had But if the Doctor shou'd say as many of his Brethren have that all these Holy Fathers err'd and consequently did not understand the Doctrine they labour'd so earnestly to Propagate I answer him as St. Austin did a certain Man to whom I fear the Doctor was in some Things but too near akin Mallem cum eis errare quam tecum consentire I had rather err with the Fathers than agree with Him Thus I have endeavour'd as plainly and briefly as I cou'd to shew how Reasonable how Harmless how Inoffensive the Invocation of Saints is and how agreeable to the Practice of the Holy Fathers and the Primitive Church I now proceed Lastly to return a brief Answer to what Dr. Tillotson thought fit to bring against this Point Here I wou'd not be understood as if I meant to answer all the little Objections and pretty quâ—rks of Wit which he endeavours to improve with all his Art and Eloquence in order no doubt to catch the well-meaning but weaker sort of People with this Fig-leaf Cover which yet all sober thinking Men may easily see thro' My Design is to answer only such Objections as have any real or apparent Difficulties being convinc'd that things naked or so thinly cover'd need no Reading upon His first Objection is taken out of St. Paul Colos 2.18 Vol. â— edit post obit pag. 43 44 45 19. Where the Apostle says Let no Man beguile you of your Reward in a voluntary Humility and worshiping of Angels not holding the Head By which Words says the Doctor St. Paul intimates that for Christians to address themselves to God by any other Mediator than Jesus Christ only was a Defection from the Head This He says is Theodoret's Interpretation of that Passage in his Comment upon it and the third Chapter ver 17. of the same Epistle and to enforce this Interpretation he cites a Canon of the Council of Laodicea which says That Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and go away from it and to invocate Angels and to make Conventicles all which are forbidden if therefore any be found giving himself to this secret Idolatry let him be Anathema because he hath forsaken our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God and is gone over to Idolatry After which Words the Dr. breaks out into this Exclamation What shall be said to them who do not only secretly and in their Private Devotions but in the public Assemblies of Christians and in the most public Offices of their Church invocate Angels and pray to them Before I answer this Objection it won't be amiss to clear the Equivocation which in most controversial Disputes commonly attends these two words Worship and Invocation I worship is render'd in Latin colo or adoro in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in these three Languages 't is us'd in Scripture and in common Discourse not only to signifie the supream Worship and Honour we pay to Almighty God but also for all sort of Respect and Reverence done to Kings Princes and Persons of Condition Of this we have innumerable Examples in Scripture and not only so but the very Word which we use to signifie the supream Worship due to God alone is sometimes applied to human Affairs For as we say colere Deum to worship God colere Parentes to honour our Parents colere Vineam colere Agrum Hortum c. to till the Vineyard to till the Ground c. Yet no Man ever said that we rob God of his due Honour by using the same Expression to signifie the Respect we pay some Creatures which we use when we express the Honour due only to Him because the different Ideas or Notions we have of God and these Creatures sufficiently determin our meaning tho' the want of Words or rather the Conveniency of delivering our Thoughts in fewer Words oblige us to make use of the same Term to express these different Services In like Manner the Word Invocation is us'd in Scripture not only to signifie our calling upon God as our Sovereign Lord and Maker but is also us'd and applied in several places to ordinary Men. For instance Isaiah says Seven Women shall take hold of one Man saying we will eat our own Bread and wear our own Apparel only let thy Name be invocated upon us to take away our Reproach Tantum invocetur Nomen tuum super nos Cap. 4.1 So that if we do not attend to the Subject Matter to which these Words are applied the Scripture will afford us sufficient Grounds for Worshipping and invocating not only God Angels and Saints but even common ordinary Men. To worship and invocate then must necessarily mean to exhibit a Service and Duty to those whom we worship and call upon according to the Notion or Idea we have of their Excellency and Perfection and of the Power and Ability we conceive in them to help and assist us And then to Worship God and invocate Him must mean to pay Him the Supream Honor and Respect which is due only to the Great Creator and Redeemer of the World and to beg Mercy and Forgiveness of Him as the Source and Fountain of all Goodness but to Worship and Invocate the Angels and Saints must mean no more than to shew them that respect and honor which is due to the Friends and Courtiers of our Sovereign Lord and to ask their Help and Assistance in those things which we conceive they are able to do that is to pray for us and to recommend us to their
and our Great Master because these only are the Excellencies and Abilities we conceive the Angels and Saints to be endued with and for which we respect them This suppos'd I answer 1. That St. Paul speaks here of Certain Heretics who separated from the Faithful and gave to Angels the supream Worship and Honour which is due only to God as these words of his not holding the Head do plainly denote For by these Words He give us to understand that these Heretics departed from Christ which is the Head and by these other words Worshipping of Angels that they offer'd Sacrifice to Angels whom they believ'd to have been the Mediators of the New Covenant or as Theodoret phrases it that the Law was given by Angels But this I hope the Protestants will not say we believe or hold 2. That the Dr's Interpretation of St. Paul's words is altogether forc'd and by no means warranted by Theodoret or any ancient Father of the Church on the contrary Theodoret is intirely ours For He says in that very Place cited by the Doctor that therefore these Heretics worship'd Angels because they believ'd Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 44. the Law was given by Them He says indeed in an other place which the Doctor quotes that we must send up Thanksgivings to God and the Father by Christ and not by the Angels And this I hope we are careful to do for I am sure we put up all our Prayers to God and the Father by or thro' the Merits of Jesus Christ and not of any Angel or Saint But sure it is not reasonable to believe that Theodoret there meant that we ought not to desire the Angels or Saints to pray for us since he himself as I observ'd before so expresly says We not address our selves to the Saints as Gods but we pray unto them as Divine Men that they wou'd please to be Legats or Intercessors for us Comment in Epist â—d Colos c. 3. v. 17. 3. That the Canon of the Council of Laâ—dicea as Theodoret tells us speaks only of these Heretics meant by St. Paul who forsook the Church and gave themselves to secret Idolatry that is as the Fathers have always understood that word offer'd Sacrifice to Angels But the words of the Canon are so plain and full to this purpose that there needs no reading upon it 4. That the Doctor might very well have forborn his Exclamation for I assure him that excepting the General Confession aâ— aforesaid we do not invocate or pray to Angels in the Public Offices of the Church We have but one Feast in the Year wherein we Commemorate Angels which is that of St. Michael the Arch-Angel and in this excepting one Anthem in the Breviary and one Versile in the Mass which are not properly Prayers where 't is said in the first Arch-Angel Michael be mindful of us and pray for us to the Son of God and in the second Holy Michael defend us in Battle that we perish not in the dreadful Judgement there is no invocating or putting up of Prayers to St. Michael or any other Angel But it seems the Doctor was warm upon the Matter and in such a Case Rhetorical Exclamations are more pardonable pray God they may be pardon'd him in Heaven His second Objection is to this purpose Mediation and Intercession is founded in the Merit and Virtue of the Sacrifice Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 56 57. by which Expiation for Sin is made but this Jesus Christ and no other has done Therefore He only is Mediator and Intercessor Answ This Argument proves too much For it proves that neither our Brethren on Earth nor the Saints in Heaven ought or can lawfully pray or intercede for us because they did not offer the Sacrifice by which Expiation for sin is made Yet the Doctor grants that both our Brethren on Earth and the Saints in Heaven may and do pray for us Well but granting that Mediation and Intercession is founded in the Virtue and Merit of the Sacrifice by which Expiation for Sin is made Does it therefore follow that the Saints may not charitably beg of God to forgive us our Sins 'T is true Christ only has a Right and Title to mediate and intercede for us because he alone paid the Ransom and full Value of our Sins and therefore may in Justice ask of His Father to forgive us But sure this does not hinder but that the Saints may do Us that Charitable Office as to pray to God to have Mercy upon Us tho' they cannot in Justice demand it May not a Friend and Favourite of the King beg the Life of a â—enitent Criminal And have not Kings and Princes often granted such Favours to their Friends tho' they were not in Justice bound to do so And are not the Saints in Heaven Christ's Favourites Does not He call them his Friends Vos Amici mei estis Job 15.14 Mat. 19.28 And what is more Does not He tell His Apostles that they shall sit upon Thrones Judging the twelve Tribes of Israel And why may not then these Judges and Friends and Favourites of Jesus Christ beg of Him to have Mercy upon poor miserable Sinners tho' they cannot in Justice require it at his Hands But the Doctor 's Mistake consists in this that he does not or rather will not distinguish between an Intercession founded in Justice and Equity and an Intercession founded only in Favour and good Will The first I grant is peculiar only to Christ for the Reasons offer'd by the Doctor but the second which is the Effect of Charity is common to every one who is possest of that Divine Virtue Well but says the Doctor the Mediation or Intercession of Saints is not properly speaking Intercession So say I for I own that in the Sense in which Christ is both our Mediator and Intercessor the Saints and Angels in the same sense cannot be call'd Intercessors but whether he calls them Intercessors in a proper or an improper Sense 't is all one to me Since he acknowledges they do pray for us and intercede with God in our behalf I am satisfied for I am sure we desire no more of them After this the Dr. gives us a great many Passages out of the Fathers ibid pag 76 77 78. 79. 80 81 82 83. to prove the Invocation of Saints unlawful namely out of St. Ireneus Origen Novatian for he must be a Father too Clemens Romanus St. Athanasius St. Epiphanius St. Chrysâ—stom and which I must admire at out of St. Austin who if Invocation of Saints be Popery was I am sure a Rank Papist But the Doctor might have spar'd Himself the Labour of quoting these Passages for there is not one of them all to which any Roman Catholic wou'd refuse to Subscribe and therefore I have no Temptation to vex or trouble them His third Objection is level'd at the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which
them for which they ought to be worship'd On the contrary we are expresly forbid to give these Pictures or Images any manner of Worship for their own Sake but that the respect which we shew them is to be referr'd to the Originals namely to Christ and his Saints And sure these things which represent Christ and his Saints to our Eyes and put us in mind of the Death and Passion of the One and of the Patience and Sufferings of the Others are worthy of some Respect and may very well be honour'd upon Account of what they represent without any Danger of Idolatry as the Pictures of Kings and Princes and other Men by whom we receive Benefits are in their own degree confessedly respected and had in Esteem without any such Suspition In one Word the Heathens call'd all their Heroes or Saints Gods sacrific'd to them as such worship'd them as such call'd upon them as such but we do not call the Christian Saints Gods we do by no means sacrifice to them nor worship them as Gods nor call upon them as Gods So that upon the whole matter the Doctor might as well resemble Sea to dry Land or Light to Darkness or the obscurest Night to the brightest Day as compare the Worship we give the Christian Saints to that which the Heathens paid to their Heroes or Saints as the Doctor is pleas'd to call them CHAP. VIII Of Images WHat the Council of Trent declares concerning Images is this That the Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and kept especially in Churches and that due Honor and Respect is to be given them not that we believe any virtue or Divinity to be in them for which they ought to be worship'd or that we shou'd ask any thing of them or put any trust or confidence in them as was formerly done by the Gentils who put their trust in Idols but because the Honor done to them is refer'd to the Originals which they represent So that by those Images which we kiss and before which we uncover our Heads and bow down we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness they bear Ses 25. Dec. de invocat Sanct. Here you see this Council only requires that we give duâ— honor and respect to Images which signifies no more than that we ought to give them the honor which is due to them But this is not all for the Council adds that when we uncover our Heads or bow towards Images we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness these Images bear So that it is not so much the Images we honor as Christ and His Saints And since 't is confess'd that the Types and Figures of all sacred things are worthy of some Respect in propotion to what they represent how mnch more ought the Types and Figures of Jesus Christ who is the Source and Fountain of all Holiness and Sanctification and of the Saints to whose Charity and goodness we owe under God our Faith and Religion to be had in Honor and Esteem We honor and respect the Bible more than ordinary Books tho' it is but Paper and Ink like other Books because the Characters therein contain'd are sacred Signs which represent to us the Word and Will of God And even Nature teaches us to honor and respect the Pictures and Images of Kings and Princes and of our Friends for the Excellency of these Persons and the Benefits we receive by them And why may not we likewise honor and respect those Signs or Images which represent to us that which is most Excellent and most August in the Christian Religion namely Christ and His Saints The Chief End of Images and Pictures is to adorn our Churches to put us in mind of the Passion of Christ and of the Piety and Virtue of the Saints and to be Books to the Ignorant And what Ornament so proper for the Church of God as the Picture of Jesus Christ who planted it with His Blood What in the next Place as the Pictures of Saints who water'd it with their's and are now in their own Degree the great Ornaments of the Heavens What can be more powerful to excite us to a greatful Remembrance of the Passion of Jesus Christ then to behold a Crucifix which represents Him to us with Arms stretch'd out as it were to embrace us and Hands and Feet and Side pierc'd for our Sins What pious Christian can then abstain from expressing the Sense of his Heart by some exteriour Act of Honor and Respect to such a Representation if not for its own at least for the sake of that which it represents And as to the Ignorant it cannot be denied but that when they are taught that such a Picture represents Jesus Christ who in that posture Sacrific'd Himself for their Sins that such other Pictures represent the Apostles and Saints who preach'd and deliver'd that Faith and Religion to them by which they are to be eternally happy it cannot be denied I say but that such lessons are easily retain'd and create in their Minds a greatful acknowledement of the Mercies of their Redeemer and a desire to imitate the Virtue and Piety of the Saints And then the Respect which they shew to these Pictures is but the Natural Result of their Sense of the Benefits they receive by the Passion of Christ and by the Piety and Charity of the Saints These were the chief motives that induc'd the Church in all Ages to have and to keep the Pictures of Jesus Christ and His Saints I say in all Ages Eusebius the Great and Famous Ecclesiastical Historian â—ist Eccles lib. 7. cap. 18 edit vol. who flourish'd in the Begining of the fourth Age tells us that the Christians had from the Begining the Pictures of Christ and of St. Peter and St. Paul that he himself had seen the Statue which the Woman whom Christ had heal'd of the bloody flux erected for Him at Paneas that at the Foot of this Statue there grew an Herb which when it touch'd the Skirt of the Statue had a virtue of curing Diseases And Helena's seeking and finding the Cross on which our Lord suffer'd and the Miracle by which it was discover'd are too well known to be question'd But what need I insist upon proofs of the lawfulness of Pictures and Images in Churches or of the respect that is due to them since the Protestants themselves acknowledge both They say they only exclaim against the Abuses committed in the Church of Rome upon this account But for the Thing it self they say they willingly own it This is the Declaration The Ingenious Author of The Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in answer to the Bishop of Meaux makes in the Name of that Church page 18. It may not be amiss to subjoin his very Words We will honor says he the Relicks of the Saints as the primitive Church did We will respect the Images
nothing so frequent in the Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers as the Recommendation of it In a Word there is not one Doctrine or Practice of the Catholic Religion deliver'd with so full and unquestionable a Tradition no not the Mystery of the Trinity no nor the Incarnation nor the Necessity of Baptism nor even the Truth of the Scriptures So that a Man may lib. de Cor. Militis lib. de Monog de vita Const lib. 4. c. 71. In Enchir cap. 110. lib. 9. Confes cap. 13. as well make an Apology for being a Christian as for this Tertulian tells us that in his Days they made yearly Oblations for the Dead and pray'd for their Souls Eusebius that all the Congregation pray'd for the Soul of the Emperor Constantin the Great St. Austin that it is not to be denied that the Souls of the Dead are eas'd by the Pitty of their living Friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offer'd for them That his Mother Monica her last Injunctions to him was to remember her at the Altar That the Tradition of the Fathers is observ'd by the whole Church Serm. 32. de Verb. Apost viz. That they shou'd pray for those who dy'd in the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ in that place of the Sacrifice where the Dead are recommended In short I shou'd never end shou'd I relate all the Sayings of Fath rs and Councils and Eccl siastical Writâ—rs upon this Subject so that I may confidently affirm there is not one Point in the Christian Religion more unanimously believ'd or more religiously practic'd over all the Catholic Church in all Ages than this of praying for the Dead and offering the Sâ—crifice of the Mass for their Souls And this is so well known that â—o Sober and Learned Protestant ever yet denied the immemorial Antiquity of it at least that ever I met with But being sensible how necessarily and inevitably the Belief of Purgatory or a Third Place where Souls are detain'd for a Time is consequent upon this Practice they have recourse to certain suâ—terfuges and Evasions They tell us that Prayers were made from the second Age for the Apostles and Martyrs and Confessors Exposit of the Doctrine of the Church of England pag. 31. and even for the Blessed Virgin Mary all which they thought in Happiness and never touch'd at Purgatory that therefore it does not follow there is a Purgatory because they prayed for the Dead To which I answer that these Gentlemen wou'd very much oblige us if they wou'd be so good as to instance in some of those Prayers which they say were put up for the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary which I never yet met with in any of their Writings And this very thing gives me a shrewd Suspicion that they are not able to produce any Examples of that kind at least to the purpose considering how liberal and even prodigal they are of Quotations of Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers when they seem to make for them This I am certain of that the primitive Church did only believe their Prayers available for those whom they thought not to have so well lived as that they shou'd not need their Charitable Assistance 'T is what St. Austin says De Civit. Dei lib. 21. cap. 24. Pro defunctis quibusdam Ecclesiae exanditur oratio quorum in Christo regeneratorum nec usque adeo vita in corpore malè gesta est ut tali Misericordia judicentur digni non esse nec usque adeo berè ut talem Misericordiam reperiantur necessariam non habere The Prayers of the Church are heard for such as are regenerated in Christ whose Lives have not been altogether so bad as not to be thought worthy of such a Mercy nor altogether so good as not to need such a Mercy And the same Father tells us that it were to injure the Martyrs to pray for them to whose Prayers we ought rather to have our selves commended But do not the Ancient Liturgies make mention of Prayers and Thanksgivings put up to God for or in Honor of the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary And does not the Roman Missal we now use do the same Yes most certainly for we pray to God and thank Him for and in Honour of the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary and so did all Antiquity But then these Prayers are not intended for the Delivery of their Souls from any Pains but to thank Almighty God for crowning the Martyrs and Saints and to praise his Holy Name for bringing them to that happy State they how are in as the Prayers and Oblations of the Prâ—â—ative Church and those we new make for the Souls of such as die in the Communion of the Church of whose perfect Innocence and Holiness we are not assur'd are intended to beg of God that he wou'd be merciful to them and forgive them those sins for which they did not fully satisfie in this Life And this St. Austin tells us was the Design and End of all the Prayers put up for the Dead whether Apostles or Martyrs or other Christian Souls These are his Words The Oblations and Alms usually offer'd in the Church for all the Dead De Enchiridio ad Lau. cap. 100. who receiv'd Baptism were Thanksgivings for such as were very Good Propitiations for such as were not very Bad but for such as were very wicked tho' they gave no Relief to the Dead yet were they some Consolation to the Living And is not this the very Doctrine we hold this Day Do not we offer the Sacrifice of Christ's Body as this Father calls it on the Feasts of the Apostles and Martyrs c. in Thanksgiving to God for the blessed Estate of the Saints in Heaven And do not we pray and give Alms and offer the same Sacrifice for the Propitiation of those whom we charitably believe to have died in the Peace and Communion of the Church Does our praying to God for the Apostles and Martyrs and the Virgin Mary as aforesaid hinder us to believe that there is a Place wherein other Souls are detain'd till they have satisfied the Divine Justice No sure And why must the like Prayers hinder the Primitive Church to believe the same Nay rather does it not necessarily follow that the Primitive Church as well as We did believe there was such a place because they put up Prayers to God for Pardon and Forgiveness of Sins for such as they reasonably believ'd to have died in the Communion of the Body of Christ as the Fathers speak but not so perfect as that they shou'd not need their Prayers since it were both vain and superfluous to have pray'd for them upon this Score had they believ'd they were immediately receiv'd into Heaven or thrust into Hell This I am confident no Man of Sense can reasonably deny So that it is a most shameful Evasion to conclude that the Primitive Church did not believe
them in the venerable and dreadful Mysteries For shame Doctor Away with such unchristian Scandals and do not put us upon exposing your Credit and Character any farther But perhaps the Legacies left for the bireing of Priests as he odly phrases it to say Mass for the delivery of Souls out of the place of Torments will mend the matter Indeed if the Priests were allow'd to determin matters of Faith the thing comming from the Doctor wou'd not appear altogether so unreasonable for considering how very remarkable his Charity is to Priests I do not question He wou'd judge they wou'd deal well for themselves had they but the handling of these matters But it is no less evident that no simple Priest has ever yet had any Vote in declaring matters of Faith than that no other is hired as He calls it or will receive any Money for saying Masses for the Living or the Dead but the poorer or more indigent sort of Priests who have not a sufficient Patrimony or Maintenance to subsist without it And the matter being undeniably so where is the Conscience in saying that the Councils and Prelates of the Church shou'd possess the People with the fear of Purgatory only to oblige them to hire some indigent Priests to say Mass for their Souls But the Scandal is so gross and palpable that the best answer I can make it is to contemn it The Doctor has some two or three Objections more upon this Subject but they are either solv'd in the Proofs brought for this Point or coincident with those Objections already spoken to or else have no particular Difficulty And so I take leave of him for this Time CHAP. X. Of Indulgences THE Power of Indulgences is founded in the Power of the Keys wherewith Jesus Christ was pleas'd to intrust the Pastors and Governours of the Church by which Emblem of Keys is denoted the Power of opening and shutting the Kingdom of Heaven of letting in and keeping out as Christians shall be found worthy of the one or the other This Power is promis'd to Saint Peter in a special Manner and in his Person to all his lawful Successors in these Words I say unto thee that thou art Peterâ— i. e. a Rock and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Mat. 16.18.19 Again the Promise of binding and loosing is made in another Place to all the Apostles in the same Words Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven And whatsoever ye loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Matt. 18.18 And Christ a little before his Ascension actually confer'd this power upon them and told them wherein it consists Receive ye the Holy-Ghost whosoever Sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosoever Sins ye retain they are retain'd Joa 20.22 23. So that the Power of the Keys consists in remitting of Sins and retaining them that is in loosing Men from those Bands of Iniquity wherewith they tye themselves and in binding them up or keeping them bound till they have satisfied for their Sins according to the Rules prescrib'd for that purpose In a Word in opening the Gates of the Kingdom of Heaven and letting some in and in shutting the same and excluding others as they shall be found to have deserv'd it But whereas our Blessed Saviour did not intend that the Apostles and their Successors shou'd bind Sinners so as finally to exclude them from the Kingdom of Heaven but only to keep them under Discipline for a Time till they had fulfill'd the Terms of the Covenant upon which he offers them Salvation which consists in Obedience to His Laws in Repentance and Satisfaction for their Sins and Amendment of Life for the Time to come so the Church in all Ages never retain'd the Sins of Men for any other End than to keep them in a wholesome and saving Discipline till by penitential and laborious Works they had given Marks of their Sorrow and Repentance in Proportion to the Greatness of their Sins And as the Apostles and their Successors are commission'd by Christ to retain Sins so likewise are they to loose them And therefore may remit abate or alter these penitential and laborious Works as their Prudence and Wisdom shall judge it most expedient Now Indulgence is nothing else but a Relaxation or Remission of some part of or all these penitential Works to which a Sinner is lyable by the Canons of the Church which Remission is granted by the Pastors but especially by the Chief Pastor of the Church upon some weighty Considerations for the greater Benefit and Advantage of the Faithful in general Which that we may the better understand it will be requisite to lay open some part of the Discipline of the Primitive Church with Respect to this Matter We have 50 Canons that go under the Name of the Apostles which if not of them are undoubtedly of some Apostolical Bishops of the first or second Age their Use and Authority being very great since that Time We have likewise the Canons of several Provincial Councils of the third and fourth Age which have been in great Esteem and Veneration among the Ancients and for the pure and wholesome Discipline contain'd in them have been inserted in the Codex Canonum or Book of Canons of the Vniversal Church as the Ancient Writers term it These Canons among other Matters of Discipline prescribe the different Penances which were to be impos'd upon Sinners in proportion to the greatness of their Sins whence came the Name of Penitential Canons so famous in Antiquity Some Canons prescribe seven Years Penance to certain Sins others eight Years to other sins some prescribe ten Years some fifteen some to the Hour of Death Some Penitents by order of these Canons fasted three Days every Week during the Time of their Penance using no other Sustenance during that Time but Bread and Water others stood cover'd with Sackcloath at the Church Doors sub dio in the open Air on Sundays and Festivals while their Penance lasted others stood within Doors cloathed in the same Raiment weeping and lamenting their sins some lay prostrate upon the Floor begging and praying their Brethren to intercede for them others were admitted to hear divine Service in the Weeds of Penitents after they had gone thro' the foremention'd Stations whence the Names of Hyemantes Flentes Prostrati Audientes so often mention'd in the Canons Now these Rigorous Penances very Rigorous I am sure they wou'd appear in our Days or Exomologeses as some of the Fathers call them were sometimes abated and remitted partly upon Account of the Fervor of the Penitents who before they had gone thro' all their Stations gave such Marks of sincere
Repentance that to encourage others to follow their Examples they were admitted to the Communion and Fellowship of the Faithful tho' they had not compleated the Time prescrib'd by the Canons Partly but more especially at the Intercession of the Martyrs For when any Martyrs were to be executed and had begg'd of the Bishops to indulge those Penitents whom they recommended to them the Bishops who cou'd not in Reason refuse any thing in their Power to Men who were ready to lay down their Lives and shed their Blood for the Christian Faith did commonly grant their Requests And this the Fathers call'd as in very deed it is Indulgence It were endless to instance in all the Examples which might be brought from the Fathers of the second and third Age upon this Subject St. Cyprian is most remarkable in this Bus'ness We have several of his Epistles wherein he tells us that having very often granted Indulgences to Penitents at the request of Martyrs he was forc'd at last being too much importun'd for People who did not deserve that Favor to write to the Martyrs themselves to beg of them that they wou'd not recommend but such as were worthy of that Grace at least that they shou'd not take it ill if he shou'd not grant their Request lest the Discipline of the Church shou'd be enervated upon that Score The same Father complains in his Letters to the Clergy of Rome and to others that some of his own Priests in his Absence had presum'd to give Indulgences which the Bishops only cou'd do In short there is nothing more frequently mention'd both by Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers or more universally practic'd for the four first Ages than these Indulgences Now the Roman Catholic Church neither means by Indulgences nor pretends to any more than the same Power which the Primitive Fathers both had and practic'd that is of dispensing with or remitting the Ronances prescrib'd by the Canons nor did she ever pretend to dispense with any Man from Repentance for Sins or Obedience to the Law of God On the contrary the R. C. Church teaches and has always taught that all the Indulgences in the World do signifie nothing without a hearty Contrition and sincere Sorrow for Sin which is the Spirit and Essence of Christian Devotion But Canonical penances being meerly of Ecclesiastical Institution and pertaining to Discipline it cannot be denied but that the Church has Power to Intend or Remit them according to the different Circumstances of Time Place and Persons especially since Christ himself has given her Power to remit and retain Sins in which Power this Relaxation is manifestly implied 'T is true the R. C. Church does not now impose such rigorous Penances upon Sinners as the primitive Church did Nor does she expose them publickly in the Church in Penitential Weeds as was practic'd in the primitive Times but then the Reason on 't is because no Body now wou'd undertake these Penances because she is convinc'd that Men wou'd sooner break off with Christ and turn Heathens than purchase Heaven at so dear a Rate So far has Wickedness and Dissolution prevail'd in the World In the Infancy of the Church Piety Devotion Mortification Austerity were lovely Things Christians affected them very much of themselves and therefore readily undertook them when they had the misfortune to fall into any grievous Sin Besides they had before their Eyes frequent Examples of the Constancy and Resolution of their Pastors They saw them expose their Lives with the greatest contempt of the World and bear the Torments of Racks Gridirons Wheels and other hellish Instruments Episcopacy in those days being but one remove from Martyrdom with as much chearfulness and as little concern as if these cruel Engins had been Bays and Laurels and therefore it is not to be admir'd that the Blood of Martyrs then reeking hot shou'd warm their inclinations to sufferings and mortification and stir them up to a contempt of the allurements and pleasures of a wicked World not knowing how soon they themselves shou'd be call'd to the like Fiery Tryal But no sooner did the Blood of Martyrs grow cold and the Terrors of Death were taken away by the Peace and Quiet which Constantine the Great restor'd to the Church when the Primitive Piety and Devotion began to decay and Christians multiplied their Sins as they did their Riches No sooner were the Sangninary Laws and cruel Edicts of Pagan Emperors repeal'd and Christians put in Possession of great Fortunes and promoted to Honors and Dignities when they forgot their former Condition wax'd wanton against Christ and spurn'd at Discipline So that in a few Ages after you might as well expect Grapes from Thorns or Figs from Thistles as the primitive Penances from modern Christians And therefore it was necessary to mitigate the Severity of that Discipline lest the generality of I may say all Christians shou'd throw off all care of their Salvation and either return to Pagan Idolatry or follow the Delusions of their own Fancies However since the Apostles and Apostolical Bishops whose Conduct ought to be the Rule and Measure of all future Ages have prescrib'd and declar'd what Penances ought to be impos'd upon Sinners according to the degree of their Sins the Church hath always taught that all Christians who have been or are so unfortunate as to fall into grievous Sins are still lyable to these Penances unless they are dispens'd with by the Church or Commuted for some other Works of Piety And that the discipline of the Church might be preserv'd and upheld as much as the Wickedness of the Times will bear all Pastors and Confessors are commandded to impose such Penances upon Sinners as will bear some proportion with the greatness of their Sins tho' not to that degree as the primitive Canons require Leaving the rest to be dispens'd with or Indulg'd by the Chief Pastors of the Church according to the power which Christ has given them and as general Councils have determin'd And this in as few Words as I cou'd well deliver it is truly and plainly the Case of Indulgences and the reason why they are so often given is the great decay of Piety and Devotion in Christians and the tender affection of the Church for their eternal Welfare not a desire of Money or any filthy Lucre as our Adversaries do most injustly suggest On the contrary I am confident that there is not one Divine or Casuist in our Church who does not hold that it is Sinful and Diabolical even the Sin of Simon Magus to give or receive any Money for Indulgences And several General Councils and Pope's Decrees have expresly declar'd that to give or receive any sort of Gift either directly or indirectly for either Indulgences or any other Spiritual Grace is perfect Sâ—mony which surely is sufficient to justifie us from any sinister dealing in this particular As to the Abuses of Indulgences which I do not deny to have sometimes happen'd we
1 Chron. 29.20 Adorate Scabellum podum ejus Psal 99. Adore ye His Footstool Here is Adoration with a Witness and all to one given to meer Creatures and tho' in all these Phrases the very Term is used in the Hebrew and Greek as well as in the Latin which the Scripture uses to express the Supream Adoration given to the true God yet no Man ever said that these Creatures ought to be ador'd in the strict Propriety of Adoration or Supream Worship but the Sense is that they ought to be worship'd with the Honor and Respect that is due to Them In like manner tho' we say in Scripture Language Crucem Adoramus we do not mean nor intend to give the Cross any other Worship than that which is due to a Type or Figure which represents our Saviour and Redeemer to us Thus much concerning this Ingenious Man's Exceptions to Images I now come to Dr. Tillotson's Objections And here his Difficulties are neither great nor many in number Two things only I observe in his Sermons that deserve some consideration The first that worshiping of Images is as point blank against the Second He shou'd have said the First Commandment Vol. 2. pag. 7â— as a deliberate and malicious killing of a Man is against the Sixth Fifth wou'd have been more true The Second 〈…〉 edit post ob pag. 291. That to secure the People from discerning our guilt in this matter we are put upon that shameful shift as he is pleas'd to term it of leaving out the Second Commandment in our common Catechisms and Manuals lest the People seeing so plain a Law of God against so common a Practice of our Church shou'd upon that discovery have broken off from us As to the First I answer If He means by Worship to give the Supream Worship and Adoration to Images which is dâ—o only to God he is very much in the right and I hope shall never be contradicted by me But if He understands by Worship to give Images that Honor and Respect which is due to Things that represent Jesus Christ and His Saints he is contradicted by Scripture by all Antiquity and even by his own Church as well as by us Now that we give Images no other Worship than the latter or that the Decrees of our Church enjoin no more I think I have already sufficiently prov'd Touching the Second I answer that we never left out any of God's Commandments either in Catechism or Manual and that that which he says is left out which yet is not the Second Commandment but part of the First is to be found in hundreds of Manuals and Catechisms in England it self And at this Time I have upon my Table a Manual and Catechism wherein all He says we left out are contain'd The first bears this Title a Manual of Prayers and Christian Devotions the later An Abridgment of Christian Doctrine with Proofs out of Scripture c. The first Edition printed Anno. 1649. Now a Man that can dispense with his Conscience and honor so far as to publish from Press and Pulpit untruths so easily discover'd what Paradox may not he undertake to maintain 'T is true there are some Manuals and Catechisms in which the Ten Commandments are comprehended as it were in so many Verses that Children and People of weak Capacity may learn them with more case But in no Manual or Catechism that pretends to give the Commandments was ever the Second Commandment left out That which he calls the Second Commandment viz. Thou shalt not Make to thy Self any graven Image c. is undoubtedly part of the First only added to inculcate to a Gross Ignorant People what they were to avoid in consequence of the One God which the First Commandment obliges them to have For 't is evident that in these Words Thou shalt have no other Gods but me is necessarily imply'd that they shou'd not make to themselves any Graven Images or Idols to Worship them which to do were to have other Gods And therefore these two Negatives make but one Commandment Unless the Dr. will have it that it is a distinct Commandment from the first because it begins a Verse or contains some Words which are not express'd in the first But he may please to consider that the Law of Moses was extant at least a Thousand Years before it was digested into Verses or that any Points were added to it during which Time there was nothing to distinguish one Commandment from an other but the very Reason and Nature of the things commanded and then since this which the Dr. wou'd have to be the Second Commandment is altogether of the same Nature with the First and prohibits nothing but what the First prohibits namely the having or worshiping more than one God we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that it is but One and the same Commandment with the First And thus all our Ancestors and all the Ancient's Comments upon this Chapter of Moses at least as many as I have seen understood it and even Martin Luther in those Books which he wrote against the Church of Rome makes but one Commandment of the Doctor 's First and Second But if He will have it that it is a distinct Commandment because it has a distinct prohibition then it will follow that we must have as many Commandments as we have distinct Prohibitions in that Chapter besides the affirmative Precepts and then we shall have 13 or 14 Commandments at least Thou shalt not make to thy Self any graven Image must be the Second thou shalt not how down to them the Third thou shalt not take the Name of thy Lord thy God in vain the Fourth remember to keep holy the Sabbath Day the Fifth thou shalt do no manner of Work the Sixth and so on But as the Dr. wou'd not I suppose allow of this distribution so He may please to give us leave to stick to the Old Ten Commandments in the same order manner we receiv'd them from our Ancestors of Blessed Memory CHAP. IX Of Purgatory WHat we hold as of Faith concerning this Point is thus declar'd by the Council of Trent That there is a Purgatory and that the Souls there detain'd are help'd by the Prayers of the Faithful but especially by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Mass Here the Council do's not determine what sort of Place Purgatory is or what manner of Pain Souls endure in it nor whether they are purg'd by material Fire or by other Torments or Anguishes of Mind but is content to declare with the Ancient Fathers that there is a Place wherein Souls departed are detain'd without entering upon curious need less Questions concerning the Manner or Duration of the Pains they there suffer In handling therefore this Argument I shall endeavour to tred in the Steps of the Ancient Fathers and follow the Pattern of this Council waving all superfluous and needless Questions relating to this Subject
which that I may the more plainly and distinctly do I shall proceed in this Method 1. I will endeavour to shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in Scripture as interpreted by the Ancient Fathers of the Church 2. But more especially that it is founded in the Practice observ'd in the primitive Church of Praying for the Dead This I take to be an unanswerable Argument for if it appears that the Primitive Church did pray for the Dead that their Sins might be forgiven them then it will necessarily follow that they believ'd those Souls they thus pray'd for to be in a place where they might be help'd and benefited by their Prayers This is evident for if the Primitive Church were of Opinion that all Souls departed did go strait to Heaven or to Hell it were vain and superfluous to pray for them They knew there was no getting of Souls out of Hell for out of Hell there is no Redemption And therefore it were in vain to attempt it And it were superfluous to pray for the Souls in Heaven for the Remision of their Sins For why shou'd they pray for that which they knew they had no need of So that if they did pray for the Remission of Sins of Souls departed the Consequence is inevitable that they did believe there was a Third Place were some Souls were detain'd and might be assisted by their Prayers which is what we call Purgatory 3. I shall answer what Doctor Tillotson brings against this Point 1. I shall endeavour to shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in Scripture as interpreted by the Ancient Fathers of the Church To prove this Head I will produce some Texts of Scripture with the Readings of the Fathers upon Them 1. Agree with thine Adversary quickly whilst thou art in the way with him Lest at any time the Adversary deliver thee to the Judge and the Judge deliver thee to the Officer and thou be cost into Prison Verify I say unto thee thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost Farthing Mat. 5.25.26 Tertullian a Father of the Second Age â— de Anima cap. 58. reâ—ds thus upon this Text. Seeing we understand that Prison which the Gospel demonstrates to be places below and the uttermost Farthing we interpret every small fault there to be punish'd by the delay of the Resurrection no Man can doubt but the Soul may pay something in the places below St. Cyprian a Father of the third Age It is one thing to be cast into Prison not to go out thence till he pays the uttermost Farthing an other Epist 52. ad Anton presently to receive the Reward of Faith one thing to be afflicted with long pains for Sins to be mended and purg'd long with Fire another to have purg'd all Sins by sufferings Here this Father alluding to the foregoing Text says that some Souls are cast into Prison 'till they pay the uttermost Fathing that others immediately receive their Reward that is Heaven Some are afflicted and purg'd by Fire in order to their Amendment whilst others have purg'd all their Sins by Sufferings or Martyrdom The very Language of the present R. Catholic Church St. Jerom a Father of the fourth Age who for his extraordinary Learning and Knowledge in the Scriptures was call'd Magister Mundi the Master of the World in his comment upon the said Text has these Words This is that which he says Comment in 5. Matt. thou shalt not go out of Prison till thou pay even thy little Sins There is then such a Prison in this Great Master's Opinion 2. Every Man's Work shall be made manifest for the Day shall declare it because it shall be reveal'd by Fire and the Fire shall try every Man's Work of what sort it is If any Man's Work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a Reward If any Man's Work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire 1 Cor. 3.13.14 15. St. Ambrose or the Author of the Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul annex'd to his Works which the ablest Critics do with good Reason ascribe to Hilary Deacon of the Church of Rome and Contemporary to St. Ambrose speaks thus of this Passage But when he St. Paul saith Yet so as by Fire he shews indeed that he shall be saved but yet shall suffer the Punishmenâ— of Fire that being purg'd by Fire he may be sav'd and not tormented for ever as the Infidels are with Everlasting Fire In cap. 3. Epist 1. ad Cor. St. Gregory of Nisse is so plain and full upon this Subject that no R. Catholic can at this Time speak plainer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Man is cleansed says he either in this present Life by Prayer and the Love of Wisdom or after his Death by the Furnace of a Purging Fire And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After his Departure out of the Body knowing the Difference between Virtue and Vice it is impossible to be Partakers of the Divinity unless Purgatory Fire doth cleanse the Soul from the Spots that stick to it Orat. pro. Mortuis prope Fin. St. Austin speaks much to the same purpose Purge me O Lord says he in this Life and make me such as shall not need that Puâ—ifying Fire And a little after he adds He shall be saved yet so as by Fire And because it is said He shall be saved this Fire is contemn'd yet it will be more grievous than any Thing that a Man can suffer in this Life Enar. in Psal 37. I might insist upon several other Passages of St. Austin and bring more Texts of Scripture with the Sense of the Fathers upon them with Respect to this Subject but I think what is here offer'd is sufficient to shew that our Doctrine concerning Purgatory is founded in Scripture and that the Ancient Fathers did believe it to be so I shall now proceed to shew 2. That the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in the Practice observ'd in the Primitive Church of praying for the Dead for the Remission of Sins This as I said before if made out will plainly establish our Tenet For if the Primitive Church did pray for the Dead for the Remission of their Sins it follows necessarily that they suppos'd them capable of being assisted by their Prayers and consequently neither in Heaven nor in Hell but in a third Place which is what we believe and call Purgatory Now that the Primitive Church and all succeeding Generations us'd to pray for the Dead for the Remission of their Sins no one Point in the Christian Religion is more Universally attested St. Epiphanius tells us that Aerius was reputed an Heretic for denying the Lawfulness of it and besides him I do not find since Christianity began till the Begining of the last Age any one single Person that ever denied or question'd it Never was there found any Liturgy without it