by 〈◊〉 Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur Dele Solus Deus adorandus that God alone is to be worshipped is commanded to be blotted out as being a dangerous Doctrine These instances may serve instead of multitudes which might be brought of their corrupting the witnesses and razing the records of antiquity that the errors and Novelties of the Church of Rome might not be so easily reprov'd Now if the Fathers were not against them what need these arts Why should they use them thus Their own expurgatory indices are infinite testimony against them both that they do so and that they need it But besides these things we have thought it fit to represent in one aspect some of their chief Doctrines of difference from the Church of England and make it evident that they are indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles SECT II. The Church has no power to make new Articles The Roman Church has many ready for the stamp Council of Trents new Article against the necessity of Communicating Infants against the Sense of divers Fathers FIRST we allege that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism Judaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would 〈◊〉 have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth declar'd for the Pope's Supremacy But John Gerson who was at the Council says that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope which afterwards moderate Men durst not speak but yet some others spoke them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Lateran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an Article of Faith But ofr the present it is a probationary Article and according to Bellarmine's expression is ferè de fide it is almost an Article of Faith they want a little age and then they may go alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article but it is sine controversiâ credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted that although the Ancient Fathers did give the Communion 〈◊〉 Infants yet they did not believe it necessary to Salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himself and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian belief But we proceed to other instances SECT III. The Roman doctrine of Indulgences an Innovation No mention of them in the Canon-Law of Gratian or in P. Lombard What Indulgences the Old Church gave to Penitents What they signifie in the New Roman the value of them disputed but the Merchandise and abuses continue THE Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first occasion of the great change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproach to Christendom it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Antient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Prierias Bishop Fisher of Rochester says that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences and that they began after the people were a-while affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the 12 th Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the first of England 1300 years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon-Law written by Gratian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of Pope Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as antient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of
yet if any of your Guides shall seem to question any thing of it I will bind my self to verifie it to a tittle and in that too which I intend them that is so as to be an objection obliging you to return under the pain of folly or heresie or disobedience according to the subject matter And though I have propounded these things now to your consideration yet if it be desired I shall represent them to your eye so that even your self shall be able to give sentence in the behalf of truth In the mean time give me leave to tell you of how much folly you are guilty in being moved by such mock-arguments as your men use when they meet with women and tender consciences and weaker understandings THE first is where was your Church before Luther Now if you had called upon them to speak something against your religion from Scripture or right reason or Universal Tradition you had been secure as a Tortoise in her shell a cart pressed with sheaves could not have oppressed your cause or person though you had confessed you understood nothing of the mysteries of succession doctrinal or personal For if we can make it appear that our religion was that which Christ and his Apostles taught let the truth suffer what eclipses or prejudices can be supposed let it be hid like the holy fire in the captivity yet what Christ and his Apostles taught us is eternally true and shall by some means or other be conveyed to us even the enemies of truth have been conservators of that truth by which we can confute their errors But if you still ask where it was before Luther I answer it was there where it was after even in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and I know no warrant for any other religion and if you will expect I should shew any society of men who professed all the doctrines which are now expressed in the confession of the Church of England I shall tell you it is unreasonable because some of our truths are now brought into our publick confessions that they might be oppos'd against your errors before the occasion of which there was no need of any such confessions till you made many things necessary to be professed which are not lawful to be believed For if we believe your superinduced follies we shall do unreasonably unconscionably and wickedly but the questions themselves are so useless abstracting from the accidental necessity which your follies have brought upon us that it had been happy if we had never heard of them more than the Saints and Martyrs did in the first Ages of the Church but because your Clergy have invaded the liberty of the Church and multiplied the dangers of damnation and pretend new necessities and have introduc'd new articles and affright the simple upon new pretensions and slight the very institution and the Commands of Christ and of the Apostles and invent new Sacramentals constituting Ceremonies of their own head and promise grace along with the use of them as if they were not Ministers but Lords of the Spirit and teach for doctrines the commandments of men and make void the Commandment of God by their tradition and have made a strange body of Divinity therefore it is necessary that we should immure our Faith by the refusal of such vain and superstitious dreams but our faith was completed at first it is no other than that which was delivered to the Saints and can be no more for ever So that it is a foolish demand to require that we should shew before Luther a systeme of Articles declaring our sense in these questions It was long before they were questions at all and when they were made questions they remained so a long time and when by their several pieces they were determined this part of the Church was oppressed with a violent power and when God gave opportunity then the yoke was broken and this is the whole progress of this affair But if you will still insist upon it then let the matter be put into equal ballances and 〈◊〉 them shew any Church whose confession of Faith was such as was obtruded upon you at Trent and if your Religion be Pius Quartus his Creed at Trent then we also have a question to ask and that is Where was your Religion before Trent THE Council of Trent determined that the souls departed before the day of Judgment enjoy the Beatisical Vision It is certain this Article could not be shewn in the Confession of any of the antient Churches for most of the Fathers were of another opinion But that which is the greatest offence of Christendom is not only that these doctrines which we say are false were yet affirmed but that those things which the Church of God did always reject or held as uncertain should be made Articles of Faith and so become parts of your religion and of these it is that I again ask the question which none of your side shall ever be able to answer for you Where was your Religion before Trent I could instance in many particulars but I shall name one to you which because the thing of it self is of no great consequence it will appear the more unreasonable and intolerable that your Church should adopt it into the things of necessary belief especially since it was only a matter of fact and they took the false part too For in the 21. Sess. chap. 4. it is affirmed That although the holy Fathers did give the 〈◊〉 of the Eucharist to Infants yet they did it without any necessity of salvation that is they did not believe it necessary to their salvation which is notoriously false and the contrary is marked out with the black-lead of every man almost that reads their Works and yet your Council says this is sine controversià credendum to be believed without all controversie and all Christians forbidden to believe or teach otherwise So that here it is made an Article of Faith amongst you that a man shall neither believe his reason nor his eyes and who can shew any confession of Faith in which all the Trent doctrine was professed and enjoyned under pain of damnation and before the Council of Constance the doctrine touching the Popes power was so new so decried that as Gerson says he hardly should have escaped the note of Heresie that would have said so much as was there defined so that in that Article which now makes a great part of your belief Where was your Religion before the Council of Constance and it is notorious that your Council of Constance determined the doctrine of the half-communion with a Non obstante to Christ's institution that is with a defiance to it or a noted observed neglect of it and with a profession it was otherwise in the Primitive Church Where then was your Religion before John Hus and Hierom of Prague's time against whom that Council was convened But by this instance it appears
most certainly that your Church cannot shew her confessions 〈◊〉 after Christ and therefore if we could not shew ours immediately before Luther it were not half so much for since you receded from Christ's Doctrine we might well recede from yours and it matters not who or how many or how long they prosessed your doctrine if neither Christ nor his Apostles did teach it so that if these Articles constitute your Church your Church was 〈◊〉 at the first and if ours was invisible afterwards it matters not For yours was invisible in the days of light and ours was invisible in the days of darkness For our Church was always visible in the 〈◊〉 of Scripture and he that had his eyes of Faith and reason might easily have seen these truths all the way which constitute our Church But I add yet farther that our Church before Luther was there where your Church was in the same place and in the same persons for divers of the errors which have been amongst us reformed were not the constituent Articles of your Church before Luther's time for before the last Councils of your Church a man might have been of your Communion upon easier terms and Indulgences were indeed a practice but no Article of Faith before your men made it so and that very lately and so were many other things besides So that although your men cozen the credulous and the simple by calling yours The old Religion yet the difference is vast between Truth and their affirmative even as much as between old Errors and new Articles For although Ignorance and Superstition had prepared the ore yet the Councils of Constance and Basil and Trent especially were the forges and the mint Lastly if your men had not by all the vile and violent arts of the world stopped the mouths of dissenters the question would quickly have been answered or our Articles would have been so confessed so owned and so publick that the question could never have been asked but in despite of all opposition there were great numbers of professors who did protest and profess and practise our doctrines contrary to your Articles as it is demonstrated by the Divines of Germany in Illyricus his Catalogus testium veritatis and in Bishop Morton's appeal BUT with your next objection you are better pleased and your men make most noise with it For you pretend that by our confession Salvation may be had in your Church but your men deny it to us and therefore by the confession of both sides you may be safe and there is no question concerning you but of us there is great question for none but our selves say that we can be saved I answer 1. That Salvation may be had in your Church is it ever the truer because we say it If it be not it can add no considence to you for the proposition gets no strength by your affirmative But if it be then our authority is good or else our reason and if either be then we have more reason to be believed speaking of our selves because we are concerned to see that our selves may be in a state of hope and therefore we would not venture on this side if we had not greater reason to believe well of our selves than of you And therefore believe us when it is more likely that we have greater reason because we have greater concernments and therefore greater considerations 2. As much charity as your men pretend us to speak of you yet it is a clear case our hope of your Salvation is so 〈◊〉 that we dare 〈◊〉 venture our selves on your side The Burger of Oldwater being to pass a river in his journey to Daventry bad his man try the ford telling him he hoped he should not be drowned for though he was afraid the River was too deep yet he thought his horse would carry him out or at least the boats would fetch him off Such a considence we may have of you but you will find that but little warranty if you remember how great an interest it is that you venture 3. IT would be remembred that though the best ground of your hope is not the goodness of your own Faith but the greatness of our charity yet we that charitably hope well of you have a fulness of assurance of the truth and certainty of our own way and however you can please your selves with Images of things as having no firm footing for your trisling confidence yet you can never with your tricks outface us of just and firm adherencies and if you were not empty of supports and greedy of bulrushes snatching at any thing to support your sinking cause you would with fear and trembling consider the direct dangers which we demonstrate to you to be in your Religion rather than slatter your selves with collateral weak and deceitful hopes of accidental possibilities that some of you may escape 4. IF we be more charitable to you than you are to us acknowledge in us the beauty and essential form of Christian Religion be sure you love as well as make use of our charity but if you make our charity an argument against us remember that you render us evil in exchange for good and let it be no brag to you that you have not that charity to us for therefore the Donatists were condemned for Hereticks and Schismaticks because they damn'd all the world and afforded no charity to any that was not of their Communion 5. BUT that our charity may be such indeed that is that it may do you a real benefit and not turn into Wormwood and Colliquintida I pray take notice in what sense it is that we allow Salvation may possibly be had in your Church We warrant it not to any we only hope it for some we allow it to them as to the Sadduces in the Law and to the Corinthians in the Gospel who denyed the resurrection that is till they were sufficiently instructed and competently convinced and had time and powers to out wear their prejudices and the impresses of their education and long perswasion But to them amongst you who can and do consider and yet determine for error and interest we have a greater charity even so much as to labour and pray for their conversion but not so much fondness as 〈◊〉 slatter them into boldness and 〈◊〉 adherencies to matters of so great danger 6. BUT in all this affair though your men are very bold with God and leap into his judgment-seat before him and give wild sentences concerning the salvation of your own party and the damnation of all that disagree yet that which is our charity to you is indeed the fear of God and the reverence of his judgments we do not say that all Papists are certainly damn'd we wish and desire vehemently that none of you may perish but then this charity of judgment relates not to you nor is derived from any probability which we see in your doctrines that differ from ours but because we know
a number of Fathers that their doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alleged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then matter of faith or a Doctrine of the Church for if it had these had been Hereticks accounted and not have remain'd in the Communion of the Church But although for the reasonableness of the thing we have thought fit to take notice of it yet we shall have no need to make use of it since not only in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubitably more than Conquerors but even in the succeeding Ages we have the advantage both numero pondere mensurâ in number weight and measure WE do easily acknowledge that to dispute these questions from the sayings of the Fathers is not the readiest way to make an end of them but therefore we do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the foundation and final resort of all our perswasions and from thence can never be confuted but we also admit the Fathers as admirable helps for the understanding of the Scriptures and as good testimony of the Doctrine deliver'd from their fore-fathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation and therefore if we sind any Doctrine now taught which was not plac'd in their way of Salvation we reject it as being no part of the Christian faith and which ought not to be impos'd upon consciences They were wise unto salvation and fully instructed to every good work and therefore the faith which they profess'd and deriv'd from Scripture we profess also and in the same faith we hope to be sav'd 〈◊〉 as they But for the new Doctors we understand them not we know them not Our faith is the same from the beginning and cannot become new BUT because we shall make it to appear that they do greatly innovate in all their points of controversie with us and shew nothing but shadows instead of substances and little images of things instead of solid arguments we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted and choose this sword of Goliah to combat their errors for non est alter talis It is not easie to find a better than the word of God expounded by the prime and best Antiquity THE first thing therefore we are to advertise is that the Emissaries of the Roman Church endeavour to perswade the good People of our Dioceses from a Religion that is truly Primitive and Apostolick and divert them to Propositions of their own new and unheard of in the first ages of the Christian Church FOR the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of faith and therefore unless there can be new Scriptures we can have no new matters of belief no new articles of faith Whatsoever we cannot prove from thence we disclaim it as not deriving from the Fountains of our Saviour We also do believe the Apostles Creed the Nicene with the additions of Constantinople and that which is commonly called the Symbol of Saint Athanasius and the four first General Councils are so intirely admitted by us that they together with the plain words of Scripture are made the rule and measure of judging Heresies amongst us and in pursuance of these it is commanded by our Church that the Clergy shall never teach any thing as matter of Faith religiously to be observed but that which is agreeable to the Old and New Testament and collected out of the same Doctrine by the Ancient Fathers and Catholick Bishops of the Church This was undoubtedly the Faith of the Primitive Church they admitted all into their Communion that were of this faith they condemned no Man that did not condemn these they gave letters communicatory by no other cognisance and all were Brethren who spake this voice Hanc legem sequentes Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti reliquos vero dementes vesanosque judicantes 〈◊〉 dogmatis infamiam sustinere said the Emperors Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius in their Proclamation to the People of C. P. All that believ'd this Doctrine were Christians and Catholicks viz. all they who believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity which indeed was the summ of what was decreed in explication of the Apostles Creed in the four first General Councils AND what faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace the surer ligaments of Catholick Communion or the 〈◊〉 basis of a holy life and of the hopes of Heaven hereafter than the measures which the Holy Primitive Church did hold and we after them That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did acknowledge to be the adaequate foundation of their hopes in the matters of belief The way which they thought sufficient to go to Heaven in is the way which we walk what they did not teach we do not publish and impose into this faith entirely and into no other as they did theirs so we baptize our Catechumens The Discriminations of Heresie from Catholick Doctrine which they us'd we use also and we use no other and in short we believe all that Doctrine which the Church of Rome believes except those things which they have superinduc'd upon the Old Religion and in which we shall prove that they have innovated So that by their confession all the Doctrine which we teach the People as matter of Faith must be confessed to be Ancient Primitive and Apostolick or else theirs is not so for ours is the same and we both have received this faith from the fountains of Scripture and Universal Tradition not they from us or we from them but both of us from Christ and his Apostles And therefore there can be no question whether the Faith of the Church of England be Apostolick or Primitive it is so confessedly But the Question is concerning many other particulars which were unknown to the Holy Doctors of the first ages which were no part of their faith which were never put into their Creeds which were not determin'd in any of the four first General Councils rever'd in all Christendom and entertain'd every where with great Religion and veneration even next to the four Gospels and the Apostolical writings OF this sort because the Church of Rome hath introduc'd many and hath adopted them into their late Creed and imposes them upon the People not only without but against the Scriptures and the Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God laying heavy burdens on Mens consciences and making the narrow way to Heaven yet narrower
which the Apostles receiv'd to open and shut the Kingdom of Heaven a Doctrine that introduces pride among the Saints and advances the opinion of their works beyond the measures of Christ who taught us That when we have done all that is commanded we are unprofitable servants and therefore certainly cannot supercrogate or do more than what is infinitely recompenc'd by the Kingdom of Glory to which all our doings and all our sufferings are not worthy to be compar'd especially since the greatest Saint cannot but say with David Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight no flesh living can be justified It is a practice that hath turn'd penances into a Fair and the Court of Conscience into a Lombard and the labours of Love into the labours of pilgrimages superstitious and useless wandrings from place to place and Religion into vanity and our hope in God to a confidence in man and our fears of hell to be a meer scar-crow to rich and confident sinners and at last it was frugally employed by a great Pope to raise a portion for a Lady the Wife of France schetto Cibo bastard Son of Pope Innocent viii and the merchandize it self became the stakes of Gamesters at Dice and Cards and men did vile actions that they might win indulgences by gaming making their way to heaven easier NOW although the Holy Fathers of the Church could not be suppos'd in direct terms to speak against this new Doctrine of Indulgences because in their days it was not yet they have said many things which do perfectly destroy this new Doctrine and these unchristian practices For besides that they teach a repentance wholly reducing us to a good life a faith that intirely relies upon Christs merits and satisfactions a hope wholly depending upon the plain promises of the Gospel a service perfectly consisting in the works of a good conscience a labour of love a religion of justice and piety and moral vertues they do also expresly teach that pilgrimages to holy places and such like inventions which are now the earnings and price of indulgences are not requir'd of us and are not the way of salvation as is to be seen in an Oration made by S. Gregory Nyssene wholly against pilgrimages to Jerusalem in S. Chrysostom S. Augustine and S. Bernard The sense of these Fathers is this in the words of S. Augustine God said not Go to the East and seek righteousness sail to the West that you may rcceive indulgence But indulge thy brother and it shall be indulg'd to thee you have need to inquire for no other indulgence to thy sins if thou wilt retire into the closet of thy heart there thou shalt find it That is All our hopes of Indulgence is from GOD through JESUS CHRIST and is wholly to be obtain'd by faith in Christ and perseverance in good works and intire mortification of all our sins To conclude this particular Though the gains which the Church of Rome makes of Indulgences be a heap almost as great as the abuses themselves yet the greatest Patrons of this new Doctrine could never give any certainty or reasonable comfort to the Conscience of any person that could inquire into it They never durst determine whether they were Absolutions or Compensations whether they only take off the penances actually impos'd by the Confessor or potentially and all that which might have been impos'd whether all that may be paid in the Court of men or all that can or will be required by the Laws and severity of God Neither can they speak rationally to the Great Question Whether the Treasure of the Church consists of the Satisfactions of Christ only or of the Saints For if of Saints it will by all men be acknowledged to be a defeisible estate and being finite and limited will be spent sooner than the needs of the Church can be served and if therefore it be necessary to add the merits and satisfaction of Christ since they are an Ocean of infinity and can supply more than all our needs to what purpose is it to add the little minutes and droppings of the Saints They cannot tell whether they may be given if the Receiver do nothing or give nothing for them And though this last particular could better be resolv'd by the Court of Rome than by the Church of Rome yet all the Doctrines which built up the new Fabrick of Indulgences were so dangerous to determine so improbable so unreasonable or at best so uncertain and invidious that according to the advice of the Bishop of Modena the Council of Trent left all the Doctrines and all the cases of Conscience quite alone and slubber'd the whole matter both in the question of Indulgences and Purgatory in general and recommendatory terms affirming that the power of giving Indulgence is in the Church and that the use is wholsome And that all hard and subtil questions viz. concerning Purgatory which although if it be at all it is a fire yet is the fuel of Indulgences and maintains them wholly all that is suspected to be false and all that is uncertain and whatsoever is curious and superstitious scandalous or for filthy lucre be laid aside And in the mean time they tell us not what is and what is not Superstitions nor what is Scandalous nor what they mean by the general term of Indulgence and they establish no Doctrine neither curious nor incurious nor durst they decree the very foundation of this whole matter The Churches Treasure Neither durst they meddle with it but left it as they found it and continued in the abuses and proceed in the practice and set their Doctors as well as they can to defend all the new and curious and scandalous questions and to uphold the gainful trade But however it be with them the Doctrine it self is prov'd to be a direct Innovation in the matter of Christian Religion and that was it which we have undertaken to demonstrate SECT IV. The Doctrine of Purgatory which is the Mother of Indulgences an Innovation Of punishment due when the guilt is removed The Antients prayers for the dead respected not Purgatory Their fire of Purgation not kindled till the day of Judgment Purgatory no Doctrine of the Church in Saint Austin's time The new Purgatory depends upon Legends and apparitions The Ancients knew but of two states after death of the just and unjust THE Doctrine of Purgatory is the Mother of Indulgences and the fear of that hath introduc'd these For the world hapned to be abus'd like the Countrey-man in the Fable who being told he was likely to fall into a delirium in his feet was advis'd for remedy to take the juice of Cotton He feared a disease that was not and look'd for a cure as ridiculous But if the Parent of Indulgences be not from Christ and his Apostles if upon this ground the Primitive Church never built the Superstructures of Rome must fall they can be no
by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches Declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of faith till the Later an Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third MCC years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Johannes de Bassolis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the Primitive ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgment of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus says that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of Faith as Bellarmine confesses and Henriquez affirms that Scotus says it was not antient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory the VII nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English sesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Peter Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there was any substantial change or no. His words are these If it be inquir'd what kind of conversion it is whether it be formal or substantial or of another kind I am not able to define it Only I know that it is not formal because the same accidents remain the same colour and taste To some it seems to be substantial saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance that it is done essentially To which the former authorities seem to consent But to this sentence others oppose these things If the substance of bread and wine be substantially converted into the body and blood of Christ then every day some substance is made the body or blood of Christ which before was not the body and to day something is Christ ' s body which yesterday was not and every day Christ ' s body is increased and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the conception These are his words which we have remark'd not only for the arguments sake though it be unanswerable but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new not the Doctrine of the Church And this was written but about fifty years before it was said to be decreed in the Lateran Council and therefore it made haste in so short time to pass from a disputable opinion to an Article of Faith But even after the Council Durandus as good a Catholick and as famous a Doctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly maintain'd that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd and although he says that by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held yet it is not only possible it should be so but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christs body and yet the matter of bread remain and if this might be admitted it would salve many difficulties which arise from saying that the substance of bread does not remain But here his reason was overcome by authority and he durst not affirm that of which alone 〈◊〉 was able to give as he thought a reasonable account But by this it appears that the opinion was but then in the forge and by all their understanding they could never accord it but still the questions were uncertain according to that old Distich Corpore de Christi lis est de sanguine lis est Déque modo lis est non habitura modum And the opinion was not determined in the Lateran as it is now held at Rome but it is also plain that it is a stranger to antiquity De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio said Alphonsus à Castro There is seldom mention made in the antient writers of transubstantiating the bread into Christs body We know the modesty and interest of the man he would not have said it had been seldom if he could have found it in any reasonable degree warranted he might have said and justified it There was no mention at all of this Article in the primitive Church and that it was a mere stranger to Antiquity will not be denyed by any sober person who considers That it was with so much uneasiness entertained even in the corruptest and most degenerous times and argued and unsetled almost 1300 years after Christ. And that it was so will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this question which we find in the Canon Law For Berengarius was by P. Nicolaus commanded to recant his error in these words and to affirm Verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi sensualiter non solùm in sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri That the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually not only in Sacrament but in truth is handled by the Priests hands and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy France and Germany yet at this day it is renounced by the Church of Rome and unless it be well expounded says the Gloss will lead into a heresie greater
Antichrist if he ever get into that Seat or be in already and made it necessary for all of the Roman Communion to believe and obey him in all things SECT XI Other instances of new Doctrines and practices in the Roman Church It is easier to shew where our Religion was before Luther than where theirs was before the Council of Trent Great and Excellent persons have complained heavily of the corrupt State of that Church but without redress The Reformation preferred a New cure before an Old sore THERE are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture and the practice of the Catholick Apostolick and primitive Church SUCH are these The Invocation of Saints the Insufficiency of Scriptures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation their absolving sinners before they have by Canonical penances and the fruits of a good life testified their repentance their giving leave to simple Presbyters by Papal dispensation to give Confirmation or chrism selling Masses for Nine-pences Circumgestation of the Eucharist to be ador'd The dangerous Doctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in collating Sacraments by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he pleases of his own Parish their affirming that the Mass is a proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead private Masses or the Lord's Supper without Communion which is against the doctrine and practice of the Antient Church of Rome it self and contrary to the Tradition of the Apostles if we may believe Pope Calixtus and is also forbidden under pain of Excommunication Peractâ consecratione omnes communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia When the Consecration is finished let all Communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church for so the Apostles appointed and so the holy Church of Rome does hold The same also was 〈◊〉 by Pope Soter and Pope Martin in a Council of Bishops and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Canon Law THERE are divers others but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted may be 〈◊〉 to verifie this charge of Novelty But we have done this the rather because the Roman Emissaries endeavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity and calling their Religion the Old Religion and the Catholick so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth their Religion as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland being neither the Old nor the Catholick Religion but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences BUT they have taught every Priest that can scarce understand his Breviary of which in Ireland there are but too many and very many of the people to ask where our Religion was before Luther Whereas it appears by the premises that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther than for them to shew theirs before Trent And although they can shew too much practice of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the purest and first ages and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded and where polished and where furnished BUT when the Keepers of the 〈◊〉 slept and the 〈◊〉 had sown tares and they had choak'd the wheat and almost destroyed it when the world complain'd of the 〈◊〉 errors in the Church and being oppressed by a violent power durst not complain so much as they had cause and when they who had cause to complain were yet themselves very much abused and did not complain in all they might when divers excellent persons S. Bernard Clemangis Grosthead Marsilius Ocham Alvarus Abbat Joachim Petrarch Savanarola Valla Erasmus Mantuan Gerson Ferus Cassander Andreas Fricius Modrevius Hermannus Coloniensis Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun Paulus Langius Staphilus Telesphorus de Cusentiâ Doctor Talheymius Francis Zabarel the Cardinal and Pope Adrian himself with many others not to reckon Wiclef Hus Jerom of Prague the Bohemians and the poor men of Lions whom they call'd 〈◊〉 and confuted with fire and sword when almost all Christian Princes did complain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church and of Religion and no remedy could be had but the very intended remedy made things much worse then it was that divers Christian Kingdoms and particularly the Church of England Tum primùm senio docilis tua saecula Roma Erubuit pudet exacti 〈◊〉 temporis odit Praeteritos foedis cum religionibus annos Being asham'd of the errors superstitions heresies and impieties which had deturpated the face of the Church look'd into the glass of Scripture and pure Antiquity and wash'd away those stains with which time and inadvertency and tyranny had besmear'd her and being thus cleans'd and wash'd is accus'd by the Roman parties of Novelty and condemn'd because she refuses to run into the same excess of riot and de-ordination But we cannot deserve blame who return to our antient and first health by preferring a New cure before an Old sore CHAP. II. The Church of Rome as it is at this day disordered teaches Doctrines and uses Practices which are in themselves or in their true and immediate Consequences direct Impieties and give warranty to a wicked Life SECT 1. Repentance according to the Romish Doctors not of obligation as soon as we sin by Gods Law but only before we die The Church requiring it once a Year at Easter is satisfied with a ritual repentance The Objection answered that this is not the Doctrine of the Church but the Opinion of some private Doctors Contrition with them not available without confession to a Priest but Attrition with it is And one act of Contrition will make all sure OUR First instance is in their Doctrines of Repentance For the Roman Doctors teach that unless it be by accident or in respect of some other obligation a sinner is not bound presently to repent of his sin as soon as he hath committed it Some time or other he must do it and if he take care so to order his affairs that it be not wholly omitted but so that it be done one time or other he is not by the precept or grace of Repentance bound to do more Scotus and his Scholars say that a sinner is bound viz. by the precept of the Church to repent on Holy days especially the great ones But this is thought too severe by Soto and Medina who teach that a sinner is bound to repent but once a year that is against Easter These Doctors indeed do differ concerning the Churches sense which according to the best of them is bad enough
can dispense with his oath and take off the Obligation This is expresly 〈◊〉 by one of the most moderate of them Canus Bishop of the Canaries But beyond dispute and even without a dispensation they all of them own it That if a man have promised to a woman to marry her and is betrothed to her and hath sworn it yet if he will before the consummation enter into a Monastery his Oath shall not bind him his promise is null but his second promise that shall stand And he that denies this is accursed by the Council of Trent NOT only husbands and wives espoused may break their vows and mutual obligation against the will of one another but in the Church of Rome children have leave given them to disobey their Parents so they will but turn Friers And this they might do Girls at twelve and Boys at the age of fourteen years but the Council of Trent enlarged it to sixteen But the thing was taught and decreed by Pope Clement the III. and Thomas Aquinas did so and then it was made lawful by him and his Scholars though it was expresly against the Doctrine and Laws of the preceding ages of the Church as appears in the Capitulars of Charles the Great But thus did the Pharisees teach their Children to Cry Corban and neglect their Parents to pretend Religion in prejudice of filial piety In this particular Aerodius a French Lawyer an excellently learned man suffered sadly by the loss and foreing of a hopeful Son from him and he complain'd most excellently in a Book written on purpose upon this subject BUT these mischiefs are Doctrinal and accounted lawful But in the matter of Marriages and Contracts Promises and Vows where a Doctrine fails it can be supplied by the Pope's power Which thing is avowed and own'd without a cover For when Pope Clement the V. condemn'd the Order of Knights Templers he disown'd any justice or right in doing it but stuck to his power Quanquam de jure non possumus tamen ex plenitudine potestatis dictum ordinem reprobamus that is though by right we cannot do it yet by the fulness of power we condemn the said Order For he can dispense always and in all things where there is cause and in many things where there is no cause sed sub majori pretio under a greater price said the tax of the Datary where the price of the several dispensations even in causà turpi in base and filthy causes are set down Intranti nummo quasi quodam Principe summo Exiliunt valvae nihil auditur nisi salve Nay the Pope can dispense suprà jus contra 〈◊〉 above Law and against Law and right said Mosconius in his books of the Majesty of the Militant Church For the Popes Tribunal and Gods is but one and therefore every reasonable creature is subject to the Popes Empire said the same Author And what Dispensations he usually gives we are best inform'd by a gloss of their own upon the Canon Law Not a mirabile quod cum co qui peccat Dispensatur cum illo autem qui non peccat non Dispensatur It is a wonderful thing that they should dispense with a Fornicator but not with him who marries after the death of his first wife * They give Divorces for Marriages in the fourth degree and give Dispensation to marry in the second These things are a sufficient charge and yet evidently so and publickly owned WE need not aggravate this matter by what Panormitan and others do say that the Pope hath power to dispense in all the Laws of God except the Articles of Faith and how much of this they own and practise needs no greater instance than that which Volaterran tells of Pope Innocent the VIII that he gave the Norvegians a Dispensation not only to communicate but to consecrate in bread only As the Pope by his Dispensations undertakes to dissolve the Ordinances of God so also the most solemn Contracts of men Of which a very great instance was given by Pope Clement the VII who dispensed with the Oath which Francis the I. of France solemnly swore to Charles the V. Emperor after the Battel of Pavy and gave him leave to be perjur'd And one of the late Popes dispens'd with the Bastard Son of the Conde D' Olivarez or rather plainly dissolv'd his marriage which he made and consummated with Isabella D' Azueta whom he had publickly married when he was but a mean person the son of Donna Marguerita Spinola and under the name of Julian Valeazar But when the Conde had declar'd him his son and heir the Pope dissolv'd the first marriage and gave him leave under the name of Henry Philip de Guzman to marry D. Juana de Valesco Daughter to the Constable of Castile AND now if it be considered what influence these Doctrines have upon Societies and Communities of men they will need no further reproof than a meer enumeration of the mischiefs they produce They by this means legitimate adulterous and incestuous marriages and disannul lawful Contracts They give leave to a Spouse to break his or her Vow and Promise and to Children to disobey their Parents and perhaps to break their Mothers heart or to undo a Family No words can bind your faith because you can be dispens'd with and if you swear you will not procure a Dispensation you can as well be dispens'd with for that perjury as the other and you cannot be tied so fast but the Pope can unloose you So that there is no certainty in your promise to God or faith to men in Judicatories to Magistrates or in Contracts with Merchants in the duty of Children to their Parents of Husbands to their Wives or Wives to their contracted Husbands of a Catholick to a Heretick and last of all a Subject to his Prince cannot be bound so strictly but if the Prince be not of the Popes persuasion or be by him judg'd a Tyrant his Subjects shall owe him no obedience But this is of particular consideration and reserv'd for the Third Section SECT II. Exemption of the Clergy from the Jurisdiction of Secular Princes This pretended to be by Divine right The evil consequences of it Plain Scripture against it The Sacredness of the Seal of Confession not to be broken to prevent the greatest evil and mischief THERE is yet another instance by which the Church of Rome does intolerable prejudice to Governments and Societies In which although the Impiety is not so apparent yet the evil is more own'd and notorious and defended and that is the Exemption of their Clergy from the Jurisdiction of Secular Princes and Magistrates both in their Estates and Persons Not only in the matters of Simony Heresie and Apostasie but in matters of Theft Perjury Murther Adultery Blasphemy and Treason In which cases they suffer not a Clergy man to be judged by the Secular power until the Church hath quit him and
turn'd him over and given them leave to proceed This was verified in the Synod of Dalmatia held by the Legates of Pope Innocent the III. and is now in the Church of Rome pretended to be by Divine Right For it cannot be proved that Secular Princes are the Lawful Superiours and Judges of Clergy men unless it can be prov'd that the Sheep are better than the Shepherd or Sons than the Fathers or Temporals than Spirituals said Bellarmine And therefore it is a shame says he to see Princes contending with Bishops for precedency or for Lands For the truth is this whatever the custom be the Prince is the Bishops Subject not the Bishop the Princes For no man can serve two Masters the Pope is their own Superiour and therefore the Secular Prince cannot be So both Bellarmine and 〈◊〉 conclude this Doctrine out of Scripture AND although in this as in all things else when he finds it for the advantage of the Church the Pope can dispense and diverse Popes of Rome did give power to the Common-wealth of Venice to judge Clergy men and punish them for great offences yet how ill this was taken by Paulus V. at their hands and what stirs he made in Christendom concerning it the World was witness and it is to be read in the History of the Venetian Interdict and not without great difficulty defended by Marcus Antonius Perogrinus M. Antonius Othelius and Joachim Scaynus of Padua beside the Doctors of Venice NOW if it be considered how great a part of mankind in the Roman Communion are Clergy men and how great a portion of the Lands and Revenues in each Kingdom they have to pretend a Divine Right of Exemption of their Persons from Secular Judicatories and their Lands from Secular burthens and charges of the Common-wealth is to make Religion a very little friend to the Publick and causes that by how much there is more of Religion by so much there is the less of Piety and Publick Duty Princes have many times felt the evil and are always subject to it when so many thousand persons are in their Kingdoms and yet Subjects to a Foreign Power But we need not trouble our selves to reckon the evils consequent to this procedure themselves have own'd them even the very worst of things The Rebellion of a Clergy man against his Prince is not Treason because he is not his Princes Subject It is expresly taught by Emanuel Sà and because the French-men in zeal to their own King could not endure this Doctrine these words were left out of the Edition of Paris but still remain in the Editions of Antwerp and Collen But the thing is a general Rule That all Ecclesiastical persons are free from Secular Jurisdiction in causes Criminal whether Civil or Ecclesiastical and this Rule is so general that it admits no exception and so certain that it cannot be denied unless you will contradict the principles of Faith So Father Suarez And this is pretended to be allowed by Councils Sacred Canons and all the Doctors of Laws Humane and Divine for so Bellarmine affirms Against which since it is a matter of Faith and Doctrine which we now charge upon the Church of Rome as an Enemy to publick Government we shall think it sufficient to oppose against their Pretension the plain and easie words of S. Paul Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers Every Soul That is saith S. Chrysostom whether he be a Monk or an Evangelist a Prophet or an Apostle 〈◊〉 the like iniquity when it is extended to its utmost Commentary which the Commenters of the Church of Rome put upon it is the Divine Right of the Seal of Confession which they make so Sacred to serve such ends as they have chosen that it may not be broken up to save the lives of Princes or of the whole Republick saith Tolet No not to save all the World said Henriquez Not to save an Innocent not to keep the World from burning or Religion from perversion or all the Sacraments from demolition Indeed it is lawful saith Bellarmine if a Treason be known to a Priest in Confession and he may in general words give notice to a pious and Catholick Prince but not to a Heretick and that was acutely and prudently said by him said Father 〈◊〉 Father Binet is not so kind even to the Catholick Princes for he says that it is better that all the Kings of the World should perish than that the Seal of Confession should be so much as once broken and this is the Catholick Doctrine said Eudaemon Joannes in his Apology for Garnet and for it he also quotes Suarez But it is enough to have nam'd this How little care these men take of the lives of Princes and the Publick Interest which they so greatly undervalue to every 〈◊〉 fancy of their own is but too evident by these Doctrines SECT III. Their Doctrines enemies to the 〈◊〉 Powers and Lives of Princes The whole Order of Jesuits subject Princes to the Pope Whose power extends to Temporal punishments and depriving them of their Kingdoms The method of doing it and how they answer the precepts of obeying Kings Instances of putting the deposing power in execution Answer to the Objection that this is but the private opinion of some Doctors not the Doctrine of the Church A Conclusion exhorting all that desire to be saved to decline these horrid Doctrines THE last thing we shall remark for the instruction and caution of our Charges is not the least The Doctrines of the Church of Rome are great enemies to the Dignity and Security to the Powers and Lives of Princes And this we shall briefly prove by setting down the Doctrines themselves and their consequent practices AND here we observe That not only the whole Order of Jesuits is a great enemy to Monarchy by subjecting the Dignity of Princes to the Pope by making the Pope the Supreme Monarch of Christians but they also teach That it is a Catholick Doctrine the Doctrine of the Church THE Pope hath a Supreme power of disposing the Temporal things of all Christians in order to a Spiritual good saith Bellarmine And Becanus discourses of this very largely in his book of the English Controversie printed by Albin at Mentz 1612. But because this book was ordered to be purged Vna litura potest we shall not insist upon it but there is as bad which was never censur'd Bellarmine says that the Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compel the Temporal which is indeed its Subject to change the Administration and to depose Princes and to appoint others when it cannot otherwise defend the Spiritual good And Father Suarez says the same The power of the Pope extends it self to the coercion of Kings with Temporal punishments and depriving them of their Kingdoms when necessity requires nay this power is more necessary over Princes than
question is after what manner it is so whether after the manner of the slesh or after the manner of spiritual grace and sacramental consequence We with the Holy Scriptures and the primitive Fathers affirm the latter The Church of Rome against the words of Scripture and the explication of Christ and the doctrine of the primitive Church affirm the former 2. That they be careful not to admit such Doctrines under a pretence of being Ancient since although the Roman errour hath been too long admitted and is ancient in respect of our days yet it is an innovation in Christianity and brought in by ignorance power and superstition very many Ages after Christ. 3. We exhort them that they remember the words of Christ when he explicates the doctrine of giving us his flesh for meat and his bloud for drink that he tells us The flesh profiteth nothing but the words which be speaks are spirit and they are life 4. THAT if those ancient and primitive Doctors above cited say true and that the symbols still remain the same in their natural substance and properties even after they are blessed and when they are receiv'd and that Christ's body and bloud are only present to faith and to the spirit that then whoever tempts them to give Divine honour to these symbols or elements as the Church of Rome does tempts them to give to a creature the due and incommunicable propriety of God and that then this evil passes further than an errour in the understanding for it carries them to a dangerous practice which cannot reasonably be excus'd from the crime of Idolatry To conclude THIS matter of it self is an error so prodigiously great and dangerous that we need not tell of the horrid and blasphemous questions which are sometimes handled by them concerning this Divine Mystery As if a Priest going by a Baker's shop and saying with intention Hoc est corpus meum whether all the Bakers bread be turned into the body of Christ Whether a Church mouse does eat her Maker Whether a man by eating the consecrated symbols does break his fast For if it be not bread and wine he does not and if it be Christ's body and bloud naturally and properly it is not bread and wine Whether it may be said the Priest is in some sense the Creator of God himself Whether his power be greater than the power of Angels and Archangels For that it is so is expresly affirmed by Cassenaeus Whether as a Bohemian Priest said that a Priest before he say his first Mass be the Son of God but afterward he is the Father of God and the Creator of his body But against this blasphemy a book was written by John Huss about the time of the Council of Constance But these things are too bad and therefore we love not to rake in so filthy chanels but give only a general warning to all our Charges to take heed of such persons who from the proper consequences of their Articles grow too bold and extravagant and of such doctrines from whence these and many other evil Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently do issue As the tree is such must be the fruit But we hope it may be sufficient * to say That what the Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation is absolutely impossible and implies contradictions very many to the belief of which no faith can oblige us and no reason can endure For Christ's body being in heaven glorious spiritual and impassible cannot be broken And since by the Roman doctrine nothing is broken but that which cannot be broken that is the colour the taste and other accidents of the elements yet if they could be broken since the accidents of bread and wine are not the substance of Christ's body and bloud it is certain that on the Altar Christ's body naturally and properly cannot be broken * And since they say that every consecrated Wafer is Christ's whole body and yet this Wafer is not that Wafer therefore either this or that is not Christ's body or else Christ hath two bodies for there are two Wafers * But when Christ instituted the Sacrament and said This is my body which is broken because at that time Christ's body was not broken naturally and properly the very words of Institution do force us to understand the Sacrament in a sense not natural but spiritual that is truly sacramental * And all this is besides the plain demonstrations of sense which tells us it is bread and it is wine naturally as much after as before consecration * And after all the natural sense is such as our blessed Saviour reprov'd in the men of Capernaum and called them to a spiritual understanding the natural sense being not only unreasonable and impossible but also to no purpose of the spirit or any ways perfective of the soul as hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in this Article SECT VI. Half Communion tho' confessed to be otherwise in Christs institution and primitive practice required upon pain of Excommunication The Question now is not so much whether it be a new as a better practice than what Christ instituted Council of Constance Cassander Aquinas c. acknowledge the Novelty Pope Gelasius calls it sacrilege Greek Church communicates the people in the Chalice OUR next instance of the novelty of the Roman Religion in their Articles of division from us is that of the half Communion For they deprive the people of the Chalice and dismember the institution of Christ and praevaricate his 〈◊〉 law in this particular and recede from the practice of the Apostles and though they confess it was the practice of the primitive Church yet they lay it aside and cur so all them that say they do amiss in it that is they curse them who follow Christ and his Apostles and his Church while themselves deny to follow them Now for this we need no other testimony but their own words in the Council of Constance Whereas in certain parts of the word some temerariously presume to affirm that the Christian people ought to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine and do every where communicate the Laity not only in bread but in wine also ---- Hence it is that the Council decrees and defines against this error that although Christ instituted after supper and administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread and wine yet this notwithstanding ---- And although in the primitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds Here is the acknowledgment both of Christs institution in both kinds and Christs ministring it in both kinds and the practice of the primitive Church to give it in both kinds yet the conclusion from these premisses is We command under the pain of Excommunication that no Priest communicate the people under both kinds of bread and wine The
opposition is plain Christs Testament ordains it The Church of Rome forbids it It was the primitive custom to obey Christ in this a later custom is by the Church of Rome introduced to the contrary To say that the first practice and institution is necessary to be followed is called Heretical to refuse the latter subintroduc'd custom incurrs the sentence of Excommunication and this they have pass'd not only into a law but into an Article of Faith and if this be not teaching for doctrines the Commandments of men and worshipping God in vain with mens traditions then there is and there was and there can be no such thing in the world So that now the question is not whether this doctrine and practice be an INNOVATION but whether it be not better it should be so Whether it be not better to drink new wine than old Whether it be not better to obey man than Christ who is God blessed for ever Whether a late custom be not to be preferr'd before the antient a custom dissonant from the institution of Christ before that which is wholly consonant to what Christ did and taught This is such a bold affirmative of the Church of Rome that nothing can suffice to rescue us from an amazement in the consideration of it especially since although the Institution it self being the only warranty and authority for what we do is of it self our rule and precept according to that of the Lawyer Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituuntur docentur homines yet besides this Christ added preceptive words Drink ye all of this he spake it to all that received who then also represented all them who for ever after were to remember Christs death But concerning the doctrine of Antiquity in this point although the Council of Constance confess the Question yet since that time they have taken on them a new confidence and affirm that the half Communion was always more or less the practice of the most Antient times We therefore think it fit to produce testimonies concurrent with the saying of the Council of Constance such as are irrefragable and of persons beyond exception Cassander affirms That in the Latin Church for above a thousand years the body of Christ and the blood of Christ were separately given the body apart and the blood apart after the consecration of the mysteries So Aquinas also affirms According to the antient custom of the Church all men as they communicated in the body so they communicated in the blood which also to this day is kept in some Churches And therefore Paschasius Ratbertus resolves it dogmatically That neither the flesh without the blood nor the blood without the flesh is rightly communicated because the Apostles all of them did drink of the chalice And Salmeron being forc'd by the evidence of the thing ingenuously and openly confesses That it was a general custom to communicate the Laity under both kinds It was so and it was more There was antiently a Law for it Aut integra Sacrament a percipiant aut ab integris arceantur said Pope Gelasius Either all or none let them receive in both kinds or in neither and he gives this reason Quia divisio unius ejusdem mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest pervenire The mystery is but one and the same and therefore it cannot be divided without great sacrilege The reason concludes as much of the Receiver as the Consecrator and speaks of all indefinitely THUS it is acknowledged to have been in the Latin Church and thus we see it ought to have been And for the Greek Church there is no question for even to this day they communicate the people in the Chalice But this case is so plain and there are such clear testimonies out of the Fathers recorded in their own Canon Law that nothing can obscure it but to use too many words about it We therefore do exhort our people to take care that they suffer not themselves to be robb'd of their portion of Christ as he is pleased sacramentally and graciously to communicate himself unto us SECT VII Publick Prayers in an unknown Tongue the Roman practice As easie to reconcile Adultery to the seventh Commandment as this practice to the fourteenth Chap. of the first to the Corinthians Testimonies of the Fathers against it That such Service does not Edifie A dumb Priest may serve as well for them that understand not as he that speaks aloud for the first can do all the Signs and Ceremonies and the other does no more to them The words both of Civil and Canon Law against it Heathen Priests and Hereticks Turks and Jews agree with the Roman practice AS the Church of Rome does great injury to Christendom in taking from the people what Christ gave them in the matter of the Sacrament so she also deprives them of very much of the benefit which they might receive by their holy prayers if they were suffered to pray in publick in a Language they understand But that 's denyed to the common people to their very great prejudice and injury CONCERNING which although it is as possible to reconcile Adultery with the seventh Commandment as Service in a Language not understood to the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians and that therefore if we can suppose that the Apostolical age did follow the Apostolical rule it must be concluded that the practice of the Church of Rome is contrary to the practice of the Primitive Church Yet besides this we have thought fit to declare the plain sense and practice of the succeeding Ages in a few testimonies but so pregnant as not to be avoided Origen affirms that the Grecians in their prayers use Greek and the Romans the Roman language and so every one according to his Tongue prayeth unto God and praiseth him as he is able S. Chrysostom urging the precept of the Apostle for prayers in a Language understood by the hearer affirms that which is but reasonable saying If a man speaks in the Persian Tongue and understands not what himself says to himself he is a Barbarian and therefore so he is to him that understands no more than he does And what profit can he receive who hears a sound and discerns it not It were as good he were absent as present For if he be the better to be there because he sees what is done and guesses at something in general and consents to him that ministers It is true this may be but this therefore is so because he understands something but he is only so far benefited as he understands and therefore all that which is not understood does him no more benefit that is present than to him that is absent and consents to the prayers in general and to what is done for all faithful people But If indeed ye meet for the 〈◊〉 of the Church those things ought to be spoken which the hearers understand
read Arabick of which the people know nothing But Christians never did so till they of Rome resolved to refuse to do benefit to the souls of the people in this instance or to bring them from intolerable ignorance SECT VIII Worship of Images What they call giving them due honour This worship first brought in by Hereticks Opposed by the first Fathers Epiphanius his zeal against it Forbidden by the Council of Eliberis First decreed by the second Council of Nice Condemned by the Synod of Frankford convened by Charles the Great under whose name a Book was published against that Nicene Synod and the worship of Images Against which the Primitive Christians were so prejudic'd that they would not allow Images to be made THE Church of Rome hath to very bad purposes introduc'd and impos'd upon Christendom the worship and veneration of Images kissing them pulling off their hats kneeling falling down and praying before them which they call giving them due honour and veneration What external honour and veneration that is which they call due is express'd by the instances now reckon'd which the Council of Trent in their Decree enumerate and establish What the inward honour and worship is which they intend to them is intimated in the same Decree By the Images they worship Christ and his Saints and therefore by these Images they pass that honour to Christ and his Saints which is their due that is as their Doctors explain it Latria or Divine worship to God and Christ. Hyperdulia or more than service to the Blessed Virgin Mary and service or doulia to other canoniz'd persons So that upon the whole the case is this Whatever worship they give to God and Christ and his Saints they give it first to the image and from the image they pass it unto Christ and Christ's servants And therefore we need not to enquire what actions they suppose to be fit or due For whatsoever is due to God to Christ or his Saints that worship they give to their respective Images all the same in external semblance and ministery as appears in all their great Churches and publick actions and processions and Temples and Festivals and endowments and censings and pilgrimages and prayers and vows made to them NOW besides that these things are so like Idolatry that they can no way be reasonably excused of which we shall in the next Chapter give some account besides that they are too like the religion of the Heathens and so plainly and frequently forbidden in the Old Testament and are so infinitely unlike the simple and wise the natural and holy the pure and the spiritual religion of the Gospel besides that they are so infinite a scandal to the Jews and Turks and reproach Christianity it self amongst all strangers that live in their communion and observe their rites besides that they cannot pretend to be lawful but with the laborious artifices of many Metaphysical notions and distinctions which the people who most need them do least understand and that therefore the people worship them without these distinctions and directly put confidence in them and that it is impossible that ignorant persons who in all Christian countreys make up the biggest number should do otherwise when otherwise they cannot understand it and besides that the thing it self with or without distinctions is a superstitious and forbidden an unlawful and unnatural worship of God who will not be worshipped by an Image we say that besides all this This whole Doctrine and practice is an innovation in the Christian Church not practis'd not endured in the primitive ages but expresly condemned by them and this is our present undertaking to evince THE first notice we find of Images brought into Christian Religion was by Simon Magus indeed that was very Antient but very heretical and abominable but that he brought some in to be worshipped we find in Theodoret and ‖ S. Austin S. Irenaeus tells That the Gnosticks or Carpocratians did make Images and said that the form of Christ as he was in the flesh was made by Pilate and these Images they worshipped as did the Gentiles These things they did but against these things the Christians did zealously and piously declare We have no Image in the world said S. Clemens of Alexandria It is apparently forbidden to us to exercise that deceitful art For it is written Thou shalt not make any similitude of any thing in Heaven above c. And Origen wrote a just Treatise against Celsus in which he not only affirms That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion but that they ought not and were by God forbidden to do so To the same purpose also Lactantius discourses to the Emperor and confutes the pretences and little answers of the Heathen in that manner that he leaves no pretence for Christians under another cover to introduce the like abomination We are not ignorant that those who were converted from Gentilism and those who lov'd to imitate the customs of the Roman Princes and people did soon introduce the Historical use of Images and according to the manner of the world did think it honourable to depict or make Images of those whom they had in great esteem and that this being done by an esteem relying on Religion did by the weakness of men and the importunity of the Tempter quickly pass into inconvenience and superstition yet even in the time of Julian the Emperor S. Cyril denies that the Christians did give veneration and worship to the Image even of the Cross it self which was one of the earliest temptations and S. Epiphanius it is a known story tells that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture as it were of Christ or some Saint in the Church against the Authority of Scripture He cut it in pieces and advis'd that some poor man should be buried in it affirming that such Pictures are against Religion and unworthy of the Church of Christ. The Epistle was translated into Latin by S. Hierome by which we may guess at his opinion in the question THE Council of Eliberis is very antient and of great fame in which it is expresly forbidden that what is worshipped should be depicted on the walls and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches S. Austin complaining that he knew of many in the Church who were Worshippers of Pictures calls them Superstitious and adds that the Church condemns such customs and strives to correct them and S. Gregory writing to Serenus Bishop of Massilia says he would not have had him to break the Pictures and Images which were there set for an historical use but commends him for prohibiting any one to worship them and enjoyns him still to forbid it But Superstition by degrees creeping in the Worship of Images was decreed in the seventh Synod or the second Nicene But the decrees of this Synod being by Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great he convocated
a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francford who discussed the Acts pass'd at Nice and condemn'd them And the Acts of this Synod although they were diligently suppressed by the Popes arts yet Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus Blondus Adon Aymonius and Regino famous Historians tell us That the Bishops of Francford condemn'd the Synod of Nice and commanded it should not be called a General Council and published a Book under the name of the Emperor confuting that unchristian Assembly and not long since this Book and the Acts of Francford were published by Bishop Tillius by which not only the infinite fraud of the Roman Doctors is discover'd but the worship of Images is declar'd against and condemned A while after this Ludovicus the son of Charlemain sent Claudius a famous Preacher to Taurinum in Italy where he preach'd against the worshipping of Images and wrote an excellent book to that purpose Against this book Jonas Bishop of Orleans after the death of Ludovicus and Claudius did write In which he yet durst not assert the worship of them but confuted it out of Origen whose words he thus cites Images are neither to be esteemed by inward affection nor worshipped with outward shew and out of Lactantius these Nothing is to be worshipped that is seen with mortal eyes Let us adore let us worship nothing but the name alone of our only Parent who is to be sought for in the Regions above not here below And to the same purpose he also alleges excellent words out of Fulgentius and S. Hierom and though he would have Images retain'd and therefore was angry at 〈◊〉 who caus'd them to be taken down yet he himself expresly affirms that they ought not to be worshipped and withall adds that though they kept the Images in their Churches for history and ornament yet that in France the worshipping of them was had in great detestation And though it is not to be denied but that in the sequel of Jonas his book he does something prevaricate in this question yet it is evident that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for almost nine hundred years after Christ and in Germany it was condemned for almost 1200 years as we find in 〈◊〉 WE are not unskill'd in the devices of the Roman Writers and with how much 〈◊〉 they would excuse this whole matter and palliate the crime imputed to them and elude the Scriptures expresly condemning this Superstition But we know also that the arts of Sophistry are not the ways of Salvation And therefore we exhort our people to follow the plain words of Scripture and the express Law of God in the second Commandment and add also the exhortation of S. John Little children keep your selves from Idols To conclude it is impossible but that it must be confessed that the worship of Images was a thing unknown to the primitive Church in the purest times of which they would not allow the making of them as amongst divers others appears in the Writings of Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen SECT IX Picturing God the Father and the Holy Trinity a scandalous practice in the Roman Church It is against the Doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church and of the wiser Heathens who had no Images or Pictures of their gods AS an Appendage to this we greatly reprove the custom of the Church of Rome in picturing God the Father and the most holy and undivided Trinity which besides that it ministers infinite scandal to all sober-minded men and gives the new Arrians in Polonia and Anti-Trinitarians great and ridiculous entertainment exposing that sacred Mystery to derision and scandalous contempt It is also which at present we have undertaken particularly to remark against the doctrine and practice of the primitive Catholick Church S. Clemens of Alexandria says that in the Discipline of Moses God was not to be represented in the shape of a Man or of any other thing and that Christians understood themselves to be bound by the same Law we find it expresly taught by Origen Tertullian Eusebius Athanasius S. Hierom S. Austin Theodoret Damascen and the Synod of Constantinople as it is reported in the 6. Action of the second Nicene Council And certainly if there were not a strange spirit of contradiction or superstition or deflexion from the Christian Rule greatly 〈◊〉 in the Church of Rome it were impossible that this practice should be so countenanc'd by them and defended so to no purpose with so much scandal and against the natural reason of mankind and the very Law of Nature it self For the Heathens were sufficiently by the light of Nature taught to abominate all Pictures or Images of God Sed nulla effigies simulacraque nulla Deorum Majestate locum sacro implevere timore They in their earliest ages had no Pictures no Images of their Gods Their Temples were filled with majesty and a sacred fear and the reason is given by Macrobius Antiquity made no Image viz. of God because the supreme God and the mind that is born of him that is his Son the eternal Word as it is beyond the Soul so it is above Nature and therefore it is not lawful that Figments should come thither 〈◊〉 Callistus relating the heresie of the Armenians and Jacobites says they made Images of the Father Son and Holy Ghost quod perquam ab sur dum est Nothing is more absurd than to make Pictures or Images of the Persons of the holy and adorable Trinity And yet they do this in the Church of Rome For in the windows of their Churches even 〈◊〉 Countrey-villages where the danger cannot be denied to be great and the scandal insupportable nay in their books of Devotion in their very Mass-books and breviaries in their Portuises and Manuals they picture the holy Trinity with three noses and four eyes and three faces in a knot to the great dishonour of God and scandal of Christianity it self We add no more for the case is too evidently bad but reprove the error with the words of their own Polydore Virgil Since the world began never was any thing more foolish than to picture God who is present every where SECT X. Setting up the Pope as universal Bishop an Innovation Among the Apostles the first Church-Governours no Prerogative of one over the rest a remarkable testimony of S. Cyprian to prove it Bishops succeeded the Apostles without Superiority of one over another by Christs Law The Pope has invaded their rights and diminished their power many ways Primitivs Fathers make every Bishop to have a share of power not from another Bishop but from Christ and are against one Bishops judging and forcing another Bishop to obedience Popes opposed when they interposed their authority in the affairs of other Churches THE last Instance of Innovations introduc'd in Doctrine and Practice by the Church of Rome that we shall represent is
against the invasion of the rights of the Church of Arles by Anastasius and the question being in the exercise of Jurisdiction and about the institution of Bishops does fully declare that the Bishops of Rome had no superiority by the laws of Christ over any Bishop in the Catholick Church and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him than Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocese AND therefore all the Church of God whenever they reckoned the several orders and degrees of Ministery in the Catholick Church reckon the Bishop as the last and supreme beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For as the whole Hierarchy ends in Jesus so does every particular one in its own Bishop Beyond the Bishop there is no step till you rest in the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls Under him every Bishop is supreme in spirituals and in all power which to any Bishop is given by Christ. S. Ignatius therefore exhorts that all should obey their Bishop and the Bishop obey Christ as Christ obeyed his Father There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine institution But as Origen teaches The Apostles and they who after them are ordain'd by God that is the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church and the Prophets have the second place The same also is taught by P. Gelasius by S. Hierom and Fulgentius and indeed by all the Fathers who spake any thing in this matter Insomuch that when Bellarmine is in this question press'd out of the book of Nilus by the Authority of the Fathers standing against him he answers Papam Patres non habere in Ecclesiâ sed Filios omnes The Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church for they are all his Sons NOW although we suppose this to be greatly sufficient to declare the Doctrine of the primitive Catholick Church concerning the equality of power in all Bishops by Divine right yet the Fathers have also expresly declared themselves that one Bishop is not superiour to another and ought not to judge another or force another to obedience They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops or by tyramical power drives his collegues to a necessity of obedience since every Bishop according to the licence of his own liberty and power hath his own choice and cannot be judged by another nor yet himself judge another but let us all expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ who only and alone hath the power of setting us in the Government of his Church and judging of what we do This was spoken and intended against Pope Stephen who did then begin dominari in clero to lord it over God's heritage and to excommunicate his brethren as Demetrius did in the time of the Apostles themselves but they both found their reprovers Demetrius was chastised by Saint John for this usurpation and Stephen by S. Cyprian and this also was approv'd by S. Austin We conclude this particular with the words of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome who because the Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal Bishop said It was a proud title prophane sacrilegious and Antichristian and therefore he little thought that his successors in the same See should so fiercely challenge that Antichristian title much less did the then Bishop of Rome in those Ages challenge it as their own peculiar for they had no mind to be or to be esteemed Antichristian Romano pontisici oblatum est sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assumpsit His predecessors it seems had been tempted with an offer of that title but none of them ever assumed that name of singularity as being against the law of the Gospel and the Canons of the Church NOW this being a matter of which Christ spake not one word to S. Peter if it be a matter of Faith and Salvation as it is now pretended it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent But though he was silent of any intention to do this yet S. Paul was not silent that Christ did otherwise for he hath set in his Church primùm Apostolos first of all Apostles not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles but all the Apostles were first It is also evident that S. Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence but he was as S. Chrysostom truly says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did all things with the common consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by special authority or principality and if he had any such it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him had succeeded him in it rather than the Bishop of Rome and it being certain as the Bishop of Canaries confesses That there is in Scripture no revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it and we being there told that S. Pet. was at Antioch but never that he was at Rome it being confessed by some of their own parties by Cardinal Cusanus Soto Driedo Canus and Segovius that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church nor that Christs institution of this does any other way appear that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the Primitive Church but that the holy Fathers both of Africa and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen when they began to interpose with a presumptive Authority in the affairs of other Churches and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Roman Bishop as with a brother not as their superiour and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preeminence with the Bishops of Rome and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome and after all this since it is certain that Christ who foreknows all things did also know that there would be great disputes and challenges of this preeminence did indeed suppress it in his Apostles and said not it should be otherwise in succession and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vicars more than what he commanded concerning all Bishops it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so but that it is more than probable that he never intended any such thing and that the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great schism and usurped a title which is not their due and challenged an Authority to which they have no right and have set themselves above others who are their equals and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving and have made great preparation for
Church which is but the private opinion of one or more yet because we are now speaking of the infinite danger of souls in that communion and the horrid Propositions by which their Disciples are conducted to the disparagement of good life it is sufficient to allege the publick and allowed sayings of their Doctors because these sayings are their Rule of living and because the particular Rules of Conscience use not to be decreed in Councils we must derive them from the places where they grow and where they are to be found BUT besides you will say That this is but the private opinion of some Doctors and what then Therefore it is not to be called the Doctrine of the Roman Church True we do not say It is an Article of their Faith but a rule of manners This is not indeed in any publick Decree but we say that although it be not yet neither is the contrary And if it be but a private opinion yet is it safe to follow it or is it not safe For that 's the question and therein is the danger If it be safe then this is their rule A private opinion of any one grave Doctor may be safely followed in the questions of Vertue and Vice But if it be not safe to follow it and that this does not make an opinion probable or the practice safe Who says so Does the Church No Does Dr. Cajus or Dr. Sempronius say so Yes But these are not safe to follow for they are but private Doctors Or if it be safe to follow them though they be no more and the opinion no more but probable then I may take the other side and choose which I will and do what I list in most cases and yet be safe by the Doctrine of the Roman Casuists which is the great line and general measure of most mens lives and that is it which we complain of And we have reason for they suffer their Casuists to determine all cases severely and gently strictly and loosly that so they may entertain all spirits and please all dispositions and govern them by their own inclinations and as they list to be governed by what may please them not by that which profits them that none may go away scandaliz'd or 〈◊〉 from their penitential chairs BUT upon this account it is a sad reckoning which can be made concerning souls in the Church of Rome Suppose one great Doctor amongst them as many of them do shall say it is lawful to kill a King whom the Pope declares Heretick By the Doctrine of probability here is his warranty And though the Church do not declare that Doctrine that is the Church doth not make it certain in Speculation yet it may be safely done in practice Here is enough to give peace of conscience to him that does it Nay if the contrary be more safe yet if the other be but probable by reason or Authority you may do the less safe and refuse what is more For that also is the opinion of some grave Doctors If one Doctor says it is safe to swear a thing as of our knowledge which we do not know but believe it is so it is therefore probable that it is lawful to swear it because a grave Doctor says it and then it is safe enough to do so AND upon this account who could find fault with Pope Constantine the IV. who when he was accus'd in the Lateran Council for holding the See Apostolick when he was not in Orders justified himself by the example of Sergius Bishop of Ravenna and Stephen Bishop of Naples Here was exemplum bonorum honest men had done so before him and therefore he was innocent When it is observ'd by Cardinal Campegius and Albertus Pighius did teach That a Priest lives more holily and chastely that keeps a Concubine than he that hath a married Wife and then shall find in the Pope's Law That a Priest is not to be removed for fornication who will not or may not practically conclude that since by the Law of God marriage is holy and yet to some men fornication is more lawful and does not make a Priest irregular that therefore to keep a Concubine is very lawful especially since abstracting from the consideration of a man's being in Orders or not fornication it self is probably no sin at all For so says Durandus Simple fornication of it self is not a deadly sin according to the Natural Law and excluding all positive Law and Martinus de Magistris says to believe simple fornication to be no deadly sin is not heretical because the testimonies of Scripture are not express These are grave Doctors and therefore the opinion is probable and the practice safe When the good people of the Church of Rome hear it read That P. Clement 8. in the Index of Prohibited books says That the Bible publish'd in vulgar Tongues ought not to be read and retain'd no not so much as a compend of the History of the Bible and Bellarmine says that it is not necessary to salvation to believe that there are any Scriptures at all written and that Cardinal Hosius saith Perhaps it had been better for the Church if no Scriptures had been written They cannot but say that this Doctrine is probable and think themselves safe when they walk without the light of Gods Word and rely wholly upon the Pope or their Priest in what he is pleas'd to tell them and that they are no way oblig'd to keep that Commandment of Christ Search the Scriptures Cardinal Tolet says That if a Nobleman be set upon and may escape by going away he is not tied to it but may kill him that intends to strike him with a stick That if a man be in a great passion and so transported that he considers not what be says if in that case he does blaspheme he does not always sin That if a man be beastly drunk and then commit fornication that fornication is no sin That if a man desires carnal pollution that he may be eas'd of his carnal temptations or for his health it were no sin That it is lawful for a man to expose his bastards to the Hospital to conceal his own shame He says it out of Soto and he from Thomas Aquinas That if the times be hard or the Judge unequal a man that cannot sell his wine at a due price may lawfully make his Measures less than is appointed or mingle water with his wine and sell it for pure so he do not lie and yet if he does it is no mortal sin nor obliges him to restitution Emanuel Sà affirms That if a man lie with his intended wife before Marriage it is no sin or a light one nay quinetiam expedit si multum illa differatur it is good to do so if the benediction or publication of Marriage be much deferr'd That Infants in their cradles may be made Priests is the
as is to be seen in their Breviaries Missals Hours of our Lady Rosary of our Lady the Latany of our Lady called Litania Mariae the Speculum Rosariorum the Hymns of Saints Portuises and Manuals These only are the instances which amongst many others presently occur Two things only we shall add instead of many more that might be represented THE first is That in a Hymn which they from what reason or Etymology we know not neither are we 〈◊〉 call a Sequence the Council of Constance did invocate the Blessed Virgin in the same manner as Councils did use to invocate the Holy Ghost They call her the Mother of Grace the remedy to the miserable the fountain of mercy and the light of the Church Attributes proper to God and incommunicable they sing her praises and pray to her for graces they sing to her with the heart they call themselves her sons they declare her to be their health and comfort in all doubts and call on her for light from Heaven and trust in her for the destruction of Heresies and the repression of Schisms and for the lasting Confederations of peace THE other thing we tell of is That there is a Psalter of our Lady of great and antient account in the Church of Rome it hath been several times printed at Venice at Paris at Leipsich and the title is The Psalter of the Blessed Virgin compil'd by the Seraphical Doctor S. Bonaventure Bishop of Alba and Presbyter Cardinal of the Holy Church of Rome But of the Book it self the account is soon made for it is nothing but the Psalms of David an hundred and fifty in number are set down alter'd indeed to make as much of it as could be sense so reduc'd In which the name of Lord is left out and that of Lady put in so that whatever David said of God and Christ the same prayers and the same praises they say of the Blessed Virgin Mary and whether all that can be said without intolerable blasphemy we suppose needs not much disputation THE same things but in a less proportion and frequency they say to other Saints O Maria Magdalena Audi vot a laude plena Apud Christum chorum istum Clementer concilia Vt fons summae pietatis Quite lavit à peccatis Servos suos atque tuos Mundet dat â veniâ O Mary Magdalen hear our prayers which are full of praises and most clemently reconcile this company unto Christ That the Fountain of Supreme Piety who cleansed thee from thy sins giving pardon may cleanse us who are his servants and thine These things are too bad already we shall not aggravate them by any further Commentary but apply the premises NOw therefore we desire it may be considered That there are as the effects of Christs death for us three great products which are the rule and measure of our prayers and our confidence 1. Christs merits 2. His Satisfaction 3. His Intercession By these three we come boldly to the Throne of Grace and pray to God through Jesus Christ. But if we pray to God through the Saints too and rely upon their 1. Merit 2. Satisfaction 3. And Intercession Is it not plain that we make them equal with Christ in kind though not in degree For it is 〈◊〉 avowed and practis'd in the Church of Rome to rely upon the Saints Intercession and this intercession to be made valid by the Merits of the Saints We pray thee O S. Jude the Apostle that by thy Merits thou wouldst draw me from the custom of my sins and snatch me from the power of the Devil and advance me to the invisible powers and they say as much to others And for their Satisfactions the treasure of the Church for Indulgences is made up with them and the satisactions of Christ So that there is nothing remaining of the honour due to Christ our Redeemer and our Considence in him but the same in every kind is by the Church of Rome imputed to the Saints And therefore the very being and Oeconomy of Christianity is destroyed by these prayers and the people are not cannot be good Christians in these devotions and what hopes are laid up for them who repent to no purpose and pray with derogation to Christ's honour is a matter of deepest consideration And therefore we desire our charges not to be seduc'd by little tricks and artifices of useless and laborious distinctions and protestations against evidence of fact and with fear and trembling to consider what God said by the Prophet My people have done two great evils they have for saken me fortem vivum the strong and the living God fontem vivum so some copies read it the living fountain and have digged for themselves cisterns that is little phantastick helps that hold no water that give no refreshment or as S. Paul expresses it they worship and invocate the creature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the Creator so the word properly signifies and so it is us'd by the Apostle in other places And at least let us remember those excellent words of S. Austin Tutius jucundius loquar ad meum Jesum quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum Dei I can speak safer and more pleasantly or chearfully to my Lord Jesus than to any of the Saints and Spirits of God For that we have Commandment for this we have none for that we have example in Scriptures for this we have none there are many promises made to that but to this there is none at all and therefore we cannot in faith pray to them or at all rely upon them for helps WHICH Consideration is greatly heightned by that prostitution of Devotion usual in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to every Upstart to every old and new Saint And although they have a story among themselves That it is ominous for a Pope to Canonize a Saint and he never survives it above a twelve-month as Pietre Mathieu observes in the instances of Clement the IV. and Adrian the VI. yet this hinders not but that they are tempted to do it frequently But concerning the thing it self the best we can say is what Christ said of the Samaritans They worship they know not what Such are S. Fingare S. Anthony of 〈◊〉 S. Christopher Charles Borromaeus Ignatius Loyola Xaverius and many others of whom Cardinal Bessarion complain'd that many of them were such persons whose life he could not approve and such concerning whom they knew nothing but from their Parties and by pretended Revelations made to particular and hypochondriacal persons It is a famous saying of S. Gregory That the bodies of many persons are worshipped on Earth whose souls are tormented in Hell and Augustinus gustinus Triumphus affirms That all who are canonized by the Pope cannot be said to be in Heaven And this matter is beyond dispute for Prateolus tells that Herman the Author of the Heresie of the Fratricelli was
for twenty years together after his death honoured for a Saint but afterwards his body was taken up and burnt But then since as Ambrosius Catharinus and Vivaldus observe if one Saint be call'd in question then the rest may what will become of the Devotions which are paid to such Saints which have been canonized within these last five Centuries Concerning whom we can have but slender evidence that they are in Heaven at all And therefore the Cardinal of Cambray Petrus de Alliaco wishes that so many new Saints were not canoniz'd They are indeed so many that in the Church of Rome the Holy-days which are called their Greater Doubles are threescore and four besides the Feasts of Christ and our Lady and the Holy-days which they call Half double Festivals together with the Sundays are above one hundred and thirty So that besides many Holy-days kept in particular places there are in the whole year about two hundred Holy-days if we may believe their own Gavantus which besides that it is an intolerable burthen to the poor Labourer who must keep so many of them that on the rest he can scarce earn his bread they do also turn Religion into Superstition and habituate the People to idleness and disorderly Festivities and impious celebrations of the day with unchristian merriments and licentiousness We conclude this with those words of S. Paul How shall we call on him on whom we have not believed Christ said Ye believe in God believe also in me But he never said Ye have believed in me believe also in my Saints No For there is but one Mediator between God and man the man Christ Jesus And therefore we must come to God not by Saints but only by Jesus Christ our Lord. SECT X. Of the horrible Incantations and charms used by the Priests in Exorcising persons posses'd The whole manner how they cast out Devils set down at large and several remarks upon it THERE is in the Church of Rome a horrible impiety taught and practised which so far as it goes must needs destroy that part of holy life which consists in the holiness of our Prayers and indeed is a Conjugation of Evils of such evils of which in the whole world a society of Christians should be least suspected we mean the infinite Superstitions and Incantations or Charms us'd by their Priests in their Exorcising possessed persons and conjuring of Devils THERE was an Ecclesiastical book called Ordo Baptiz andi cum modo Visitandi printed at Venice A. D. 1575. in which there were damnable and diabolical Charms insomuch that the Spanish Inquisitors in their Expurgatory Index printed at Madrid A. D. 1612. commanded deleatur tota exorcismus Luciferina cujus initium est Adesto Domine tui famuli that all that Luciferian Exorcism be blotted out But whoever looks into the Treasure of Exorcisms and horrible Conjurings for that is the very title of the Book printed at Colein A. D. 1608. shall find many as horrid things and not censur'd by any Inquisitors as yet so far as we have ever read or heard Nay that very Luciferina or Devilish Exorcism is reprinted at Lyons A. D. 1614. in the institutio baptizandi which was restored by the Decree of the Council of Trent So that though it was forbidden in Spain it was allowed in France But as 〈◊〉 as that are allowed every where in the Church of Rome The most famous and of most publick use are The Treasure of Exorcisms of which we but now made mention the Roman Ritual The Manual of Exorcisms printed at Antwerp A. D. 1626. with Approbation of the Bishop and privilege of the Archdukes the Pastorals of several Churches especially that of Ruraemund and especially the Flagellum Daemonum The Devils whip by Father Hierom Mengus a Frier Minor which the Clergy of Orleans did use in the Exorcising of Martha Brosser A. D. 1599. the story whereof is in the Epistles of Cardinal D'Ossat and the History of the Excellent Thuanus NOW from these Books especially this last we shall represent their manner of casting out Devils and then speak a word to the thing it self Their manner and form is this First They are to try the Devil by Holy water Incense Sulphur Rue which from thence as we suppose came to be called Herb of Grace and especially S. Johns wort which therefore they call Devils flight with which if they cannot cast the Devil out yet they may do good to the Patient for so Pope Alexander the first promis'd and commanded the Priests to use it for 〈◊〉 sanctifying and pacifying the people and driving away the snares of the Devil And to this it were well if the Exorcist would rail upon mock and jeer the Devil for he cannot endure a witty and a sharp taunt and loves jeering and railing no more than he loves holy water and this was well tried of old against an Empuse that met Apollonius Tyanaeus at Mount Caucasus against whom he rail'd and exhorted his company to do so NEXT to this the Exorcist may ask the Devil some questions What is his name How many of them there are For what cause and at what time he entered and for his own learning by what persons he can be cast out and by what Saint adjur'd who are his particular enemies in Heaven and who in Hell by what words he can be most 〈◊〉 for the Devils are such fools that they cannot keep their own counsel nor choose but tell and when they do they always tell true He may also ask him by what Covenant or what Charm he came there and by what he is to be released Then he may call Lucifer to help him and to torment that Spirit for so they oast out Devils by Belzebub the Prince of the Devils and certainly Lucifer dares not but obey him Next to this the Exorcist is cunningly to get out of the Devil the confession of some Article of Faith for the edification of the standers by whom he may by this means convince of the truth of Transubstantiation the reality of Purgatory or the value of Indulgences and command him to knock his head three times against the ground in adoration of the Holy Trinity But let him take heed what Reliques he apply to the Devil for if the Reliques be 〈◊〉 the Devil will be too hard for him However let the Exorcising Priest be sure to bless his Pottage his Meat his Ointment his Herbs and then also he may use some Schedules or little rolls of Paper containing in them holy words but he must be sure to be exercis'd and skilful in all things that belong to the conjuring of the Devil These are the preparatory documents which when he hath observ'd then let him fall to his prayers NOW for the prayers they also are publickly describ'd in their Offices before cited and are as followeth The Priest ties his stole about the neck of the possessed with three knots and
a very great charity to your soul I must confess I was on your behalf troubled when I heard you were fallen from the Communion of the Church of England and entred into a voluntary unnecessary schism and departure from the Laws of the King and the Communion of those with whom you have always lived in charity going against those Laws in the defence and profession of which your Husband died going from the Religion in which you were Baptized in which for so many years you lived piously and hoped for Heaven and all this without any sufficient reason without necessity or just scandal ministred to you and to aggravate all this you did it in a time when the Church of England was persecuted when she was marked with the Characterisms of her Lord the marks of the Cross of Jesus that is when she suffered for a holy cause and a holy conscience when the Church of England was more glorious than at any time before Even when she could shew more Martyrs and Confessors than any Church this day in Christendom even then when a King died in the profession of her Religion and thousands of Priests learned and pious men suffered the spoiling of their goods rather than they would forsake one Article of so excellent a Religion So that seriously it is not easily to be imagined that any thing should move you unless it be that which troubled the perverse Jews and the Heathen Greek Scandalum crucis the scandal of the Cross You stumbled at that Rock of offence You left us because we were afflicted lessened in outward circumstances and wrapped in a cloud but give me leave only to remind you of that sad saying of the Scripture that you may avoid the consequent of it They that fà ll on this stone shall be broken in pieces but they on whom it shall fall shall be grinded to powder And if we should consider things but prudently it is a great argument that the sons of our Church are very conscientious and just in their perswasions when it is evident that we have no temporal end to serve nothing but the great end of our souls all our hopes of preferment are gone all secular regards only we still have truth on our sides and we are not willing with the loss of truth to change from a persecuted to a prosperous Church from a Reformed to a Church that will not be reformed lest we give scandal to good people that suffer for a holy conscience and weaken the hands of the afflicted of which if you had been more careful you would have remained much more innocent BUT I pray give me leave to consider for you because you in your change considered so little for your self what fault what false doctrine what wicked and dangerous proposition what defect what amiss did you find in the Doctrine and Liturgy and Discipline of the Church of England For its doctrine It is certain it professes the belief of all that is written in the Old and New Testament all that which is in the three Creeds the Apostolical the Nicene and that of Athanasius and whatsoever was decreed in the four General Councils or in any other truly such and whatsoever was condemned in these our Church hath legally declared it to be Heresie And upon these accounts above four whole ages of the Church went to Heaven they baptized all their Catechumens into this faith their hopes of heaven was upon this and a good life their Saints and Martyrs lived and died in this alone they denied Communion to none that professed this faith This is the Catholick faith so saith the Creed of Athanasius and unless a company of men have power to alter the faith of God whosoever live and die in this faith are intirely Catholick and Christian. So that the Church of England hath the same faith without dispute that the Church had for 400 or 500 years and therefore there could be nothing wanting here to saving faith if we live according to our belief 2. For the Liturgy of the Church of England I shall not need to say much because the case will be very evident First Because the disputers of the Church of Rome have not been very forward to object any thing against it they cannot charge it with any evil 2. Because for all the time of King Edward VI. and till the eleventh year of Queen Elizabeth your people came to our Churches and prayed with us till the Bull of Pius Quintus came out upon temporal regards and made a Schism by forbidding the Queens Subjects to pray as by Law was here appointed though the prayers were good and holy as themselves did believe That Bull enjoyned Recusancy and made that which was an act of Rebellion and Disobedience and Schism to be the character of your Roman Catholicks And after this what can be supposed wanting in order to salvation We have the Word of God the Faith of the Apostles the Creeds of the Primitive Church the Articles of the four first general Councils a holy Liturgy excellent Prayers perfect Sacraments Faith and Repentance the ten Commandments and the Sermons of Christ and all the precepts and counsels of the Gospel We teach the necessity of good works and require and strictly exact the severity of a holy life We live in obedience to God and are ready to die for him and do so when he requires us so to do We speak honourably of his most holy Name we worship him at the mention of his Name we confess his Attributes we love his Servants we pray for all men we love all Christians even our most erring Brethren we confess our sins to God and to our Brethren whom we have offended and to Gods Ministers in cases of Scandal or of a troubled Conscience We communicate often we are enjoyned to receive the holy Sacrament thrice every year at least Our Priests absolve the penitent our Bishops ordain Priests and confirm baptized persons and bless their people and intercede for them and what could here be wanting to Salvation what necessity forced you from us I dare not suspect it was a temporal regard that drew you away but I am sure it could be no spiritual BUT now that I have told you and made you to consider from whence you went give me leave to represent to you and tell you whither you are gone that you may understand the nature and conditions of your change For do not think your self safe because they tell you that you are come to the Church You are indeed gone from one Church to another from a better to a worse as will appear in the induction the particulars of which before I reckon give me leave to give you this advice if you mean in this affair to understand what you do it were better you enquired what your Religion is than what your Church is for that which is a true Religion to day will be so to morrow and for ever but that which is a holy
Church to day may be heretical at the next change or may betray her trust or obtrude new Articles in contradiction to the old or by new interpretations may clude antient truths or may change your Creed or may pretend to be the Spouse of Christ when she is idolatrous that is adulterous to God Your Religion is that which you must and therefore may competently understand You must live in it and grow in it and govern all the actions of your life by it and in all questions concerning the Church you are to chuse your Church by the Religion and therefore this ought first and last to be enquired after Whether the Roman Church be the Catholick Church must depend upon so many uncertain enquires is offered to be proved by so long so tedious a method hath in it so many intrigues and Labyrinths of Question and is like a long line so impossible to be perfectly strait and to have no declination in it when it is held by such a hand as yours that unless it be by material enquiries into the Articles of the Religion you can never hope to have just grounds of confidence In the mean time you can consider this if the Roman Church were the Catholick that is so as to exclude all that are not of her communion then the Greek Churches had as good turn Turks as remain damned Christians and all that are in the communion of all the other Patriarchal Churches in Christendom must also perish like Heathens which thing before any man can believe he must have put off all reason and all modesty and all charity And who can with any probability think that the Communion of Saints in the Creed is nothing but the Communion of Roman Subjects and the Article of the Catholick Church was made up to dispark the inclosures of Jerusalem but to turn them into the pale of Rome and the Church is as limited as ever it was save only that the Synagogue is translated to Rome which I think you will easily believe was a Proposition the Apostles understood not But though it be hard to trust to it it is also so hard to prove it that you shall never be able to understand the measures of that question and therefore your salvation can never depend upon it For no good or wise person can believe that God hath tied our Salvation to impossible measures or bound us to an Article that is not by us cognoscible or intends to have us conducted by that which we cannot understand and when you shall know that Learned men even of the Roman party are not agreed concerning the Catholick Church that is infallibly to guide you some saying that it is the virtual Church that is the Pope some that it is the representative Church that is a Council Some that it is the Pope and the Council the virtual Church and the representative Church together Some that neither of these nor both together are infallible but only the essential Church or the diffusive Church is the Catholick from whom we must at no hand dissent you will quickly find your self in a wood and uncertain whether you have more than a word in exchange for your soul when you are told you are in the Catholick Church But I will tell you what you may understand and see and feel something that your self can tell whether I say true or no concerning it You are now gone to a Church that protects it self by arts of subtilty and arms by violence and persecuting all that are not of their minds to a Church in which you are to be a Subject of the King so long as it pleases the Pope In which you may be absolved from your Vows made to God your Oaths to the King your Promises to Men your duty to your Parents in some cases A Church in which men pray to God and to Saints in the same Form of words in which they pray to God as you may see in the Offices of Saints and particularly of our Lady a Church in which men are taught by most of the principal Leaders to worship Images with the same worship with which they worship God and Christ or him or her whose Image it is and in which they usually picture God the Father and the holy Trinity to the great dishonour of that sacred mystery against the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church against the express doctrine of Scripture against the honour of a Divine Attribute I mean the immensity and spirituality of the Divine Nature You are gone to a Church that pretends to be Infallible and yet is infinitely deceived in many particulars and yet endures no contradiction and is impatient her children should enquire into any thing the Priests obtrude You are gone from receiving the whole Sacrament to receive it but half from Christs Institution to a humane invention from Scripture to uncertain Traditions and from antient Traditions to new pretences from prayers which ye understood to prayers which ye understand not from confidence in God to rely upon creatures from intire dependence upon inward acts to a dangerous temptation of resting too much in outward ministeries in the external work of Sacraments and of Sacramentals you are gone from a Church whose worshipping is simple Christian and Apostolical to a Church where mens consciences are loaden with a burden of Ceremonies greater than that in the days of the Jewish Religion for the Ceremonial of the Church of Rome is a great Book in Folio greater I say than all the Ceremonies of the Jews contained in Leviticus c. You are gone from a Church where you were exhorted to read the Word of God the holy Scriptures from whence you found instruction institution comfort reproof a treasure of all excellencies to a Church that seals up that fountain from you and gives you drink by drops out of such Cisterns as they first make and then stain and then reach out and if it be told you that some men abuse Scripture it is true for if your Priests had not abused Scripture they could not thus have abused you but there is no necessity they should and you need not unless you list any more than you need to abuse the Sacraments or Decrees of the Church or the messages of your friend or the Letters you receive or the Laws of the Land all which are liable to be abused by evil persons but not by good people and modest understandings It is now become a part of your Religion to be ignorant to walk in blindness to believe the man that hears your Confessions to hear none but him not to hear God speaking but by him and so you are liable to be abused by him as he please without remedy You are gone from us where you were only taught to worship God through Jesus Christ and now you are taught to worship Saints and Angels with a worship at least dangerous and in some things proper to God for your Church worships the Virgin