a multitude of Credends here accuse her silence reservedness So Doctor Taylor observes in his Disswasive * c. 1 §. 3. p. 39. That because the Doctrines were so dangerous uncertain invidious by the advice of the Bishop of Modena the Council of Trent left all the Doctrines all the Cases of Conscience quite alone and slubbered or better passed over the whole matter in this Question in general and recommendatory terms That they established no Doctrine neither curious nor incurious nor durst they i. e. the Council bold enough in other matters decree the very Foundation of this whole matter the Churches Treasure And so all this our Author's Questions about this Treasure which amount to Ten of the Fifteen Queries he proposeth p. 518 c. and saith That when be once seeth those Questions satisfactorily answered he may then think better of our Doctrine are beside the purpose and to be cancell'd if he intends only to encounter the professed Doctrine of the Roman Church But we on the other side say That these men deal not fairly who for defending their discession from the Church of Rome and from the Communion of their Fore-Fathers urge such Doctrines as none in staying in this Communion are obliged to maintain and that the less this Church hath determined or required our assent to in this point the more freely may any holding what ever seems to him the most probable submit to her Decrees and hath the less cause to accuse or reproach her § 40 All then that the Council hath stated and asserted in this matter is this ‖ See Con. Trid. Sess 25. Deer de Indulg as Doctor Holden F. Veron and others have observed who have endeavour'd for the frustrating such Discourses as these to sever points of Faith from School-Opinions Indulgentias conferendi potestatem ab ipsomet Christo Ecclesiae concessam fuisse at que hujusmodi potestate antiquissimis etiam temporibus Ecclesiam usam fuisse Hunc usum Christiano populo esse maxime salutarem Sacrorum Conciliorum authoritate probatum in Ecclesiâ retinendum Fosque Anathemate Synodum damnare qui aut inutiles esse asserunt aut eas concedendi in Ecclesiâ potestatem esse negant This is all the Council hath determined And upon this F. Veron in his Rule of Catholiek Faith ‖ c. 17. justly contends That no more ought to be proposed to separatists to be believed than what the profession of the Catholick Faith and the General Councils engage them to That it is sufficient to render one a true Child of the Church if he submit to these and that other Questions wherein the Council is silent are impertinencies and digressions § 41 Now because the Council in this her Decree we see defends her present Doctrine and Practice by that of Ancient times and by what is approved in former Councils if we look into Antiquity concerning this matter we may there easily discover thus much 1. That severe and long Penances were then imposed on greater sinners some way proportionable to their faults and these not only for satisfaction of the Church and the Scandal many times given to it in publick sins but chiefly for the Satisfaction of Gods Justice and appeasing his wrath for Reconciliation unto Him Remission of their sins and Eternal punishment due thereto and for begetting in them a true and solid Repentance and Contrition for their Sin and so for saving their Souls For which I refer the Reader to what hath been said before § 16. and the many testimonies of the Fathers collected by Morinus De Paenitent l. 3. c. 11 12 and l. 10. c. 24. To which effects these Penances were esteemed very advantageous and though not as to all of them any proper Satisfactions yet a means very beneficial for perfecting the Sinner's Repentance and Sorrow for sin and procuring the application to them of the Merits and Satisfactions of Christ Gods Mercy and Justice still accompanying one another as in respect of Christs sufferings and satisfactions paid for our sins by Him so in respect of some temporal sufferings of our own either freely offered and tendered by our selves or if not Prevented by these inflicted on us by God to such a degree as seemeth meet to his Divine Majesty § 42 2. We may find That there were then somtimes Indulgences granted of such Penances all or part to some Persons thought rightly qualified for them upon certain just causes of a greater advancement of piety and Gods Glory and Service thereby either in respect of such Persons private or some other publick and greater good Which cause was thought a sufficient motive for such a relaxation and prevalent with God for ratifying such indulgent act of the Church-Governors to whom our Lord hath committed in his stead the power of binding and loosing Sinners whereby the same punishment of sin due to the Divine Justice is presumed to be remitted by God to persons if being as they appear sufficiently contrite upon such Indulgence granted as would have been upon the Penances performed for else if such punishment in Gods Court and not only that of the Church had not been taken away by them the Indulgence conceded as a favour would have been really much to the Penitents loss whilst after it those heavier punishments remaine to be inflicted on and undergone by them from which their much easier Penances if not indulged would have discharged them And so this power of the Keys would have been rather to Destruction than Edification § 43 To come to some Instances Such was St. Paul's Indulgence or Remission in the person of Christ as he saith ‖ 2 Cor. 2.10 or by the Commission of Quorum remiseritis * Jo. 20.23 of part of the Penance that was formerly imposed by him upon the incestuous Corinthian as for the scandal given to the Heathen and the Church so also chiefly for the saving of his Soul 1 Cor. 5.5 Yet such remission of them was not without several just Motives inciting the Apostle thereto and which he judged more acceptable to God so more effectual for procuring the application of Christs Merits for this Sinners pardon than the remainder of his Penance had it been fulfilled Such as were the gratifying the Intercessions for this person of the Saints in Corinth and preventing their apprehensions of the Apostles too great severity the excessive sorrow and confusion appearing already in the Penitent and least perhaps through a despondency of mind he should throw off the Christian Faith and abandon himself to vice in all which the Apostle saw Satans wiles See 2 Cor. 2.6 7 11. § 44 Such again were the Indulgences used in the Primitive times upon several judged by them just causes moving the Church-Governors thereto either for the private good of the Penitent or publick of Religion 1st Such anciently were in respect of the private good of the Penitent 1. An extraordinary diligence and fervour in their performing
to prescribe him penance infirma est quae autem a moriente petitur timeo ne ipsa moriatur And again ‖ De Tempore Serm. 57. Agens Paenitentiam ad ultimum reconciliatus si securus hinc exit ego non sum securus And Nunquid dico damnabitur non dico Sed dico etiam liberabitur Non. Et quid dicis mihi Nescio non praesumo non promitto And so if we put the case that one lives a wicked life for three-score or four-score years yet I suppose will a Protestant Minister on his death bed exhort such a one to Repentance nor pronounce it fruitless therefore neither may they expect the Catholick should do this when such a person dying in that Church adds to his Repentance the Sacraments Confession of his sins to the Priest the receiving his Absolution the Holy Communion and Extrem unction § 8 Lastly if after all this said here this Author or Bishop Taylor can produce some Testimonies out of other Catholick Writers to this purpose that Repentance considered meerly as an affirmative praecept and abstracted from all those necessary ends mentioned before in respect of all which God conditionally requires it it not obligatory as in case of necessity under Mortal sin if deferr'd any longer save only in articulo mortis Yet this seems far from ingenuous dealing either from such Testimonies to deduce in general these Authors affirming that God hath commanded no man to repent sooner than the Article of his death ‖ See Rom. Idolat c. 3. p. 181. or if such things were rightly deduced from these Authors therefore to accuse the Church of such a Doctrine Since where the Doctors of the Roman Church are divided in their opinion and her Councils are not found to have stated any thing therein here either none of these opinions may be charged on the Church or else in Charity that rather ought to be so which to us seems the more reasonable and true Most of the Doctors of the Church in any Age are not Writers nor of these Writers the major part School-men or Casuists or applying themselves to their Subtilties And so long as the Church I mean in her Councils cannot be charged with a doctrine that seems to us malignant and corrupt it seems vain to tell men such a doctrine is taught by several in the Church when as its Subjects have many other Teachers in the same Church that with its allowance and Countenance instruct them otherwise and better For Example What Catholicks are there that do not receive from their Teachers frequent Exhortations to a speedy repentance for their sins and Reformation of their lives the chiefest Common-place in Divinity and amongst whom they do not first lay this Foundation of Repentance from dead works Heb. 6.1 as the Apostle calls it But here especially those who defend their separation from the Communion of a Church by reason of its erroneous or corrupt Doctrines are not excused at all in their shewing such Doctrines taught by some in it but only if they make appear that these are taught by It and the belief of them also exacted from its subjects For where the Church hath determined no such corrupt Doctrine we may still abide in this Church and believe otherwise or if we be of its Clergy teach what is better Much less then may we complain for such gross and corrupt doctrine taught by some when a greater number of others give us that which is more pure and refined And this here said somtimes these men when it is for their Advantage seem to be sensible of as this Author speaking of the manner of the Sacraments conferring Grace ex opere operato Although saith he ‖ c. 3. p. 109. Cassander produce some particular Testimonies against it of persons in that Church yet we must appeal for the sense of their Church to the decrees of the Council of Trent But this he said when he conceiv'd the Council to maintain a grosser sense of Opus Operatum than several of their Writers And from these Considerations I conceive may be returned a reasonable answer to Bishop Taylors defence made in his disswasive ‖ chap. 2. Sect. 1. for his charging as he doth very frequently that which he calls though indeed it is not in that manner as he relates it without their limitations a Common opinion of the Roman Doctors or Casuists upon the Roman Church He there saith for his defence of charging the Opinions of the School-men upon the Church That if by the Doctrine of the Roman Church we mean such things only as are decreed in their Councils it is to be considered that but few things are determined in their Councils Here for his purpose he saith few things but elsewhere the multitude of them is exclaimed against by himself and others But if few hence it follows that few are required of him for enjoying the communion of that Church to be asserted or believed But not that therefore a Common opinion of Casuists is to be adopted or pronounced by him a Doctrine of the Church lest her Doctrines should be few Again he saith That if they the Roman Doctors will not be reproved for any thing but what we prove to be false in the Articles of their simple belief they take a Liberty to say and to do what they list and to corrupt all the world by their Rules of Conscience I Answer That That so many of these Doctors as he can prove to err in any thing he may also take as much liberty to reprove but not reprove or defame the Roman Church or disswade her Communion for that error which she doth not own Lastly He saith That their own men tell us it is the Doctrine of the Church when they say Communis omnium It is the doctrine of all their men I Answer Communis omnium is only opinio or sententia and that in such things wherein he cannot deny the Church to have left to all their Liberty to think so or the contrary But when these men would say it is the Doctrine of the Church he cannot but know their comcom expression not communis omnium but that such point is De side from which none may dissent Again this their Opinio omnium must admit many limitations First Of such School-men or Casuists as have writ of such a Question and this extended only to those of such time as the Author writ in not the present when perhaps such opinion better considered may be changed Secondly Of so many of them as he hath seen and as such person apprehends their sense in which perhaps too much addiction to his own opinion may cause a mistake And in this particular point concerning Repentance what ever Reginaldus and Navarr say though they say it only with limitations omitted by Doctor Taylor yet that it is not Sententia Communis Omnium is clearly shewed before I say therefore this Injustice of some late Protestant Writers
in loading all the supposed Common Opinions of School-men or Casuists upon the back of the Church if well considered might save them for the future much labour in raking into particular Authors and picking out some odious sentences when their design is not the disswading men from the reading or crediting such Roman Authors in all that they say for which such search were pertinent but from the Communion of the Roman Church as to which it signifies nothing § 10 2. For the Second Of the Roman Repentance or Contrition that it doth not include 2. Of Reformation of life necessary to Repentance or oblige any to a forsaking of their sins or a Reformation of life The contrary to this is evident and obvious in the Council of Trent See Session 4. c. 4. Declarat S. Synodus Contritionem non solum cessationem a peccato vitae novae propositum inchoationem i. e. from the beginning of the Contrition sed veteris etiam odium continere And Sess 6. c. 14. Docendum est in Paenitentiâ contineri non modo cessationem a peccatis or a new life so far it goes along with Protestants verum etiam Sacramentalem Confessionem saltem in voto suo tempore faciendam Sacerdotalem Absolutionem itemque Satisfactionem per Jejunia c. Thus much it goes beyond Protestants and requires more in a sincere Repentance and a return into the grace and favour of God than they do Again Sess 14. can 13. Si quis dixerit optimam paenitentiam esse tantum novam vitam as some Protestants are there supposed to say and Catholicks say so with them excepting the tantum Et pro peccatis quoad paenam temporalem minime Deo per Christi merita satisfieri paenis ab eo inflictis patienter toleratis vel a Sacerdote injunctis vel sponte susceptis ut jejuniis orationibus c. Anathema sit Here also as it saith nova vita with the Protestants so in the rest it presents to God somthing beyond them Again Sess 14. c. 8. speaking of the Penitents satisfaction Habeant autem saith it Sacerdotes prae oculis ut satisfactio quam imponunt non sit tantum ad novae vitae custodiam or as before ut vitiosi habitus male vivendo comparati contrariis virtutum actionibus tollantur sed etiam ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam castigationem Here are satisfactions or Penances required by the Church for preserving of the Penitents nova vita which perhaps Protestants will allow but exacted further ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam too This Protestants do not press See Sess 14. c. 4. in the Definition of Contrition one clause to be Propositum non peccandi de caetero in which also is included and pressed by Confessors a resolution to avoid and remove for the future the former usual nearest occasions of sinning Again see in the Description afterward * Ibid. of Attrition this to be one clause Voluntas non peccandi a Velleitas being not sufficient And see before c. 2. Novitas vitae made the end of all the Labours of Repentance Ad quam tamen novitatem integritatem per Sacramentus Paenitentia sine magnis nostris fletibus laboribus Divinâ id exigente justitiâ pervenire nequaquam possumus So Sess 6. c. 6. One of the Dispositions for obtaining Justification is said to be Repentance and in it expresly propositum inchoandi novam vitam servandi mandata And when Justification is so attained Nemo saith the Council quantumvis justificatus liberum se esse ab observatione mandatorum putare debet And afterward Nemo sibi in solâ fide you know against whom this was levelled blandiri debet putans fide solâ se haeredem esse constitutum urging that of St. Peter-Saetagite ut per bona opera certam vestram vocationem electionem faciatis § 11 And in the Councils mentioning bona opera here it is strange to see of what contrary errors and seducements the Roman Church is impeached by her Adversaries Heretofore her Religion was decried for that Catholicks held Justification by and trusted for Salvation in the merit of their good works that they did them indeed this was not denied but did them with a saulty intention and for a wrong end And two of Bellarmin's five Books of Justification are written against Protestants in defence of the necessity and of the merit of good Works and the Possibility of the observing Gods Commands as to a cessation from all Mortal sin But now they are assaulted on the other side and now Catholicks are discovered to hold no Necessity of Good Works of a New life or forsaking of sin Now for Salvation with them it serves the turn only to procure a Sigh or two a very little sorrow for our sin past confess be absolved sin on and so to Heaven Again it was the accusation of Protestants heretofore ‖ See Calv Institut 3. l. 4. c. §. 2. Chemnit Exam conc Trident. De Paenitent c. 4. in their magnifying of justifying Faith that the rigidness of the Roman Contrition drave men to despaire and left their Consciences very unsettled and tortured in not knowing the just measure or quantity of it necessary for the remission of their sin And Bellarmin spends two Chapters De Paenitent l. 2. cap. 10 11. to free the Roman Church of this Charge And now a complaint is brought against the Littleness easiness of the Roman Contrition How shall it please them § 12 We see Contrition is defined in the Council of Trent in order to receiving the Sacrament of Penances Animi dolor detestatio propeccato commisso cum proposito non peccandi de caetero which purpose is supposed also to include an actual cessation from Sin before Absolution and the Sacrament for that distance of time between our exercising this Contrition and our receiving of the Sacrament Cessatio a peccato novae vitae propositum inchoatio saith the Council what more would these men have The Continuation of an actual new life This is that which is to follow the effect of the Sacraments the infusion of Sanctifying Grace our Justification our new Birth and Regeneration by them When Repentance is required by Protestants to the Baptisme of the Adulti doth it include an actual good life to precede such Baptisme See Dr. Hammonds description of this Repentance in his Practical Catechisme c. 6. § 2. p. 311. The resolving to forsake sin and live Godly is supposed before Baptisme to make the person capable of it On the other side the actual forsaking of sin is the consequent task of him that makes a right use of the Grace of Baptism for his whole life after Thus He. And p. 313. The forsaking of the heart which he calls a little before a general Cordial removing of sin is here meant by Repentance i. e. before Baptism and the forsaking in the actions is that to which the
or where an obex is have such boni motus as may remove it See him Ibid. Dist 14. q. 2. 3ly Ex opere operato In opposition not only to merit but any disposition at all in the receiver i. e. so that no disposition though necessary as a causa sine quâ non to the effect or as to removing some obstacles that may hinder it yet is the efficient or instrument at all actually conferring or immediatly conveying the Sacramental Grace but this is solely the opus operatum of the Sacrament And of this speaks the Eighth Canon of the Council of Trent * Sess 7. nor hath Cassander applied any other sense to it as this Author pretends he hath ‖ p. 209. The words are Si quis dixerit per ipsa novae legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non gratiam sed solam fidem divinae promissionis ad gratiam conscquendam sufficere Anathema sit against that proposition of the Reformers mentioned by Soave p. 264. That by the Sacraments Grace is not given in vertue of the administration of them called Opus Operatum but that it sufficeth for obtaining such Grace only to believe the promise of it and against those Reformed Propositions set down before by him p. 233. That the Sacraments are not necessary but men may attain the effect of them by Faith only And That the Sacrament hath never given Grace or remission of sins but only the faith of the Sacrament In which Eighth Canon the Council affirms Solam fidem non sufficere not as if Faith were altogether needless to such Sacramental effect for therefore it saith non solam but not it alone suffieicnt without the Sacrament without it i. e. as it solely ex opere operato conferring the Grace to which Faith also at the same time necessarily pre-disposeth 4ly Ex opere operato in opposition to any dispositions as necessary at all in the subject but then these School-men do mean of Infants not of Adulti because in all these last there is an Obstacle of Mortal sin to be removed and this cannot possibly be so without the dispositions of Faith and Repentance 5ly Ex opere operato In opposition to the Sacraments of the Old Testament in which Grace is said to be received from the disposition of the Suscipient called opus operantis which was then signified also by these Sacraments but not conferred The contrary whereof is verified in the Sacraments of the New § 30 Now if things be found as they are here related I desire his Protestant Reader would consider with what integrity this Author doth affirm p. 202. this to be the Doctrine of the Roman Church That the efficacy of Sacraments doth not depend upon the preparation of the receiver but the bare administration or the external work done Again p. 203. That the Sacraments of the new Law do confer grace ex opere operato i. e. by the thing it self without any dependence therein upon the internal motion or preparation of mind in him that doth partake of them Again how faithfully he deduceth from Bellarmine saying That the Catholicks do not wholly exclude preparations in the receiver but only ab efficientia from the efficiency of the Sacramental Grace p. 204. That the Efficacy of the Sacraments which as I understand him is their actual producing such an effect in conferring grace doth not at all depend upon the qualification of the receiver Again ‖ p. 206. That the preparation of our minds for the use of the Sacraments is unnecessary For if grace saith he be effectually conferred by the force of the bare external action which is acknowledged by them all what need can there be of a due preparation of mind by the exercise of Faith Prayer Repentance c From all which his conclusion is that the Roman Doctrine obstructs the sincerity of Devotion In all which expressions if this Author means that according to the Roman Doctrine no qualification or disposition in the Suscipient is the instrument that effects or confers the Sacramental Grace it is true but nothing to his purpose or to his conclusion drawn from it viz. That such Doctrine obstructs Devotion But if he means that such disposition is not the efficient cause of such Grace and therefore it is not necessary at all to the effect as his words sound it is indeed much to his purpose and infers his conclusion but is most untrue For many things are necessary to an effect besides the efficient cause thereof To make use of an instance himself mentions Fire is the only efficient of the burning of wood not the driness of the matter yet is driness in the wood as well as heat in the fire necessary to the effect And one may as truly argue in this as he doth in the other If the burning be effectually i.e. efficiently wrought by the fire what need can there be of dryness in the matter Or the efficacy i. e. the efficiency of the fire in its burning doth not at all depend on the qualification of the matter or such qualification concurrs not to the efficiency therefore such qualification is to such effect no other way necessary § 31 Secondly Consider with what truth he relates p. 206. That Catholicks when saying the internal disposition of mind is necessary to reremove impediments do not mean by this internal disposition the exercise of Faith Prayer Repentance c. by no means saith he when as Bellarmin in that Chapter this Author cites and therefore read saith the expresly contrary and that six or seaven times over to this purpose Opus operatum excludere fidem motum internum ab efficientiâ gratiae Sacramentalis non tamen excludere simpliciter fidem motum internum or in other places fidem paenitentiam ita ut Sacramenta ut ipsi calumniantur conferant gratiam accipientibus ea sine side sine internâ conversione cordis But saith he they mean That there be no mortal sin unconfessed Now such mortal sin may be confessed without Faith or Repentance or any other disposition to remove the obstacle of such mortal sin And next That saith he there be no actual opposition in the will to the Sacrament which he explains thus As for instance when he is going to be baptized he resolves with himself that he will not be baptized or while he is baptizing that he will not believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost Thus he Now if any reflect on what we have proved before is this ingenuous dealing Is not this writing Controversies for Ladies for Women for Laicks and such as cannot or from a contrary interest will not make a search into the truth of his Relations See again what fidelity he useth p. 209. after his rejecting the common Doctrine of the Roman Authors to search that of the Roman Church rather in the Council of Trent in his citing of the Eighth Canon of the Seventh Session thereof to this purpose
been amply shewed in the Vindication of the Second and Third Point The Subjects of the Roman Catholick Church then are in this matter thus instructed 1. That the due effect of the Sacrament of Penance repaired unto by such delinquent is necessary to the Remission of such sin and its Eternal Punishment 2. That this effect is not conferred on all that are Confessed as this Author seems to take for granted that it is ‖ See p. 206. 498. but only among these on the rightly pre-disposed by Faith and a true and acceptable Repentance Which Repentance includes not only sorrow for sin but an actual amendment of life and ceasing from sin where life longer continued and for the sorrow Sine magnis nostris fletibus laboribus divinâ id exigente justitia ad hanc novitatem integritatem viz. remission of sin and former state of regeneration pervenire nequaquam possumus saith the Council of Trent ‖ Sess 14. c. 2. 3. That when all is done the person is not absolutely certain that he hath attained such a worthy and sincere Repentance Contrition or Attrition as infallibly receives the effect and benefit of the Sacrament 4. That if there should happen any defect therein the best way to compleat such Contrition ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam castigationem saith the Council * Sess 14. c. 8. is the exercise of much Penance and Mortification and the surest sign of such Contrition compleated is a change of life and perseverance therein and the surest means again for such perseverance ad novae vitae custodiam infirmitatis medicamentum saith the Council ‖ Ibid. are Penances and Mortifications § 37 5. As to Penances their removing or taking away punishments and so just Indulgences of Penance doing the same They are taught First That no such Indulgence relates at all to quitting the punishment Eternal Secondly That no Penances or Indulgences are beneficial to the removing any Temporal punishment so long as the person by his sin unrepented of is still liable to the Eternal and suppose they were yet this infinitely greater debt still uncancelled renders the discharge of the other not valuable Thirdly That the remission of the Eternal depends chiefly on the sincerity of their Repentance and Conversion to God and change of life as hath been shewed before And this thing viz. lest by any defect of these there should be some flaw in the pardon of the Eternal punishment keeps all pious Sons of this Church perpetually on their guard notwithstanding what-ever Indulgences are passed concerning the Temporal to make good on their part the conditions that are required from them for the cancelling thereof And if by the Money and Friends this Author speaks of as a means of evading these punishments be meant Alms-deeds and other mens Prayers it is granted That both for the procuring Grace and the Remission of Sin and of these punishments attending it they help much And in this respect granted again that the Rich both as to giving Alms and by them procuring the intercessions of such as are relieved have a great advantage And very fit they should having so many disadvantages and running so many hazards from their Wealth other waies But then the Poor are no way inferiour to them who as they want the one so are freed from the other And we are told by our Lord that more Rich incur these Eternal or Temporal punishments by the Temptations of their wealth than escape them by the Charitable distribution of it § 38 From these things it appears that how easie soever the releasment of such punishment is amongst Catholicks it is made much more easie or less difficult among Protestants For 1st For Sin and the Eternal punishment if Protestants require repentance sorrow for sin and an actual change or reformation of life Catholicks as hath been shewed § 10 c. require also these and much more namely a necessary repair to the Sacrament of Penance Confession Absolution and for the greater securing of their Contrition or Repentance of which none can be absolutely certain fletus labores penances mortifications and dignos fructus paenitentiae and these not only ad novae vitae custodiam but ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam 2ly 2 Cor. 7.11 For the Temporal punishment 1. Catholicks hold after the Eternal remitted such a punishment to remain still uncancelled Protestants deny it and throw all punishment whatever into the Pardon of the Sin and as soon as the sentence Dominus transtulit peccatum tuum is past 2 Sam. 12.13 clear all accounts 2ly Catholicks hold many faithful Souls such as have been more imperfect in their repentance and negligent in Christian-duties here as it must be granted of those who all find mercy some are much more than others to be detained after death for some time in a state of Purgation Protestants send all that go not to Hell and the greatest misery straight to Heaven and the most supreme happiness 3ly Catholicks make divers Penances and Satisfactions imposed or also voluntarily assumed necessary for the discharge of such temporal punishment that by judging of themselves they may prevent that of God 1 Cor. 11.31 But Protestants by denying such punishments have also no need of such Penances and so release them to their Subjects 4. And lastly If in some of her Indulgences the Roman Church is said by them to sell these Pardons of Temporal Punishments very cheap the Protestants give them to all for nothing This of the 4th Point § 39 V. Come we to the Fifth The Roman Doctrine concerning Indulgences 5. Of Indulgences beneficial only to those in the state of Grace charged by this Author ‖ p. 518. with many gross Absurdities and as excusing Roman-Catholicks from performing the best parts of their Religion i. e. saith he enjoyning Penances accounted among them fruits of true Repentance severe mortification Fasting frequent Prayers and Almes * p. 526. To the Contrary of this I shall shew to his abused Reader That neither the Absurdities pretended by him nor the omission of any necessary Duty follow either from the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences or the commonly allowed Practice And 1st For the Doctrine of this Church If this Author had done her justice so far as to accuse or question no more than what he found to be her doctrine in her Councils concerning this point and if he had said here for righting the Church what he hath said else-where ‖ p. 209. when for his own advantage That though some Testimonies of particular persons may be produced for several opinions yet we must appeal for the sense of this Church to the Decrees of its Councils how many leaves might he have spared from his discourse on this subject as wholly impertinent Indeed so compendious and cautious have the Church's Decrees been in this matter as that those Protestants who complain at other times of her oppressing their Faith with
For the remission of which Penances the Person is required first to examine the quality of his sins and to excite a Contrition sutable thereto to repair to the Sacrament of Penance Confession and Absolution and also to perform such penances as may be thought salutary and medicinal to the conquering his lusts and preventing the like miscarriages for the time to come and all this to be done by him to render himself capable of the benefit of an Indulgence I say after all this inveighing against such a practice of the Roman Church wherein as usually in all other Points contested she only stands upon her guard and defence of Customs descending to her from Ancient Times and the Accusers and Invaders are the other Party with what greater severity do the Protestant Ministers treat a Person that after the losing his Baptismal Grace labours under mortal sin What Penances what better thing than those Roman pious Works which they deride do they impose They indeed as Catholicks also exhort such a person to repentance of his sin and amendment of his life and tell him as Catholicks also do that these are necessary but then the surest way to acquiring a true repentance and the chiefest means of working in him a reformation of life i. e. solitude penance mortifications abstinences c. they press not to him and of the necessity also of the Churches Keys for remission of such Mortal sin committed after Baptism they do not inform him They tell him that he needs fear no further reckonings for his sin as to any punishment or sufferings for it if once repented of that sin all its punishments are wiped off at once for saith our Author * p. 519. Quest 2. how can that fault be said to be remitted which is yet punished and therefore that our doing any penance for avoiding such punishment is needless The Indulgences in the Catholick Church only somtimes used for remitting such penances yet this not without commutation are cried out of ‖ Rom. Idol p. 526. as excusing them from doing the best parts of their Religion Yet among Protestants such penances are remitted always in their being never at all imposed and yet their piety and Religion thrives well enough without them and they are neither required as the best nor any part of it They cry out of the lightening somtimes of mens burdens in the Church of Rome by Indulgences but themselves will not touch those lighter burdens mentioned before that are laid on them for gaining these Indulgences with one of their fingers Nothing is done right in the Church of Rome whilst among them nothing is done at all and therefore in the other is nothing done right § 81 To Conclude these discourses let all pious Christians in general beware of such a destructive and Negative Way of Religion as to so great a part of the Churches Practicals Which thus endeavours to pull down all that stands before it but it self builds nothing and under pretence of reforming Religion and Devotions only defaceth them and so leaves the ruines thereof to be trampled upon by Atheists Here are speaking of the most part and those that stand at a farther distance from the Roman Church no Mental prayer no Purgation or Mortification in order thereto no Abstraction of life no Contemplation no state of perfection no Aspirations no Active or Passive Vnions talked of No Evangelical Councils but those so called help precepts to some particular persons of which none finds himself to be one no recommending of solitude of single life of quitting the possession and cares of Riches Vt soliciti sint quae sunt Domini quo modo placeant Deo 1 Cor. 7.32 and ut facultatem praebeat sine impedimento Dominum obsecrandi No Sacerdotal Confession and so no Casuists to satisfie scruples so no liability of such to be misconstrued in stating such points as the Roman Casuists are most shamefully by Protestants citing their words and defalking Circumstances which continually alter the state of the Question No Penances or Satisfactions to appease Gods wrath for their sins those of Christ being sufficient and so no need of Indulgences No Sacrifice of the Altar No Corporal presence of our Lords Body there and so no solemn Ceremonies attending it No Adoration there and so no questioning of them for Idolatry No Sacrament of Penance for deliverance from Mortal sin and so no Grace expected from the Opus operatum of it When people are sick no care of confessing them or of not letting them depart hence without their Viaticum Jam. 5.15 and without Extreme Vnction in the name of the Lord. No recommending themselves to the Prayers of Saints to help them with their Intercessions to God No Purgatory or present Middle State of any faithful Souls however departed hence with imperfect reformation of life but all Christians sent immediatly to Hell that do not go immediatly to Heaven and to the Beatifical Vision of God and so no Prayers no Oblations no All-Souls-days no Anniversaries for benefiting of such Souls No saving so as by fire No sufferings to be endured hereafter if the most extreme be once escaped and what ever soul departing hence is not worthy of the lowest Misery 1 Cor. 3.15 instantly ascends into the highest Bliss And there too no Degrees of Glory but in Christ all equal But then if it be considered how few of those who seem to dye penitent are well prepared by reason of their repentance and imperfect reformation of manners to enter immediatly to the fruition of Gods presence and possession of eternal joyes and how much many Protestants disparage a death-bed Repentance whilst thus they send no Souls to Purgatory they send the more to Hell In extremes they are the one way or the other whilst the Church guided by Scripture expounded by Tradition goes in a middle way rather inclined to mercy than rigour Again No Vowes no macerations of the Body no Vigils no Observing Fasts hardly any Festivals much less their Octaves But every one left to pray to repent after his own way fast when he pleaseth do good works out of gratitude to him who hath done and suffered for him all that God requires to believe firmly and without wavering the remission of all his sins how hainous soever and so to magnifie the more Gods Mercy and Christs Merits to read the Scriptures without asking the Eunuck's Question Quomodo possum intelligere nisi quis ostenderit mihi c. and not to doubt but that God will illuminate him in the understanding of them as much as is necessary when as he stops his ears to the instructions of those Missioners sent by our Lord to teach him in them No such numerous Catalogue of the Articles of their Faith or Determinations of former obliging Councils nor yoke of Assent or Belief imposed but boasting of their indulging to all men liberty of opinon in those things where the former Church they say hath used Tyranny No sure Tradition save only that of the Scriptures for this alone serves their turn no Church-Infallibility and I had almost said no Church-Authority A fine contrived way of Religion for invading others and no need of defending it self For on Affirmes lies the Proofe All these Church-Practices before Luthers appearance are thrown off by many for I cannot say it of all Those among them I hope will consider whom these things concern Nor have they any reverence to their gray hairs or their great antiquity But for their defence against this not to be denied they bring in Antichrist to farther them bring him not into the world only in such early days but into the Church and in the Church place him also in the chiefest Chair therof in the latter end of the Fourth Age or beginning of the Fifth for many of these Customs rejected by them are then found in the Church and there he hath sate ever since and given laws to Christianity if we will believe them for a thousand years till the Reformation appeared notwithstanding our Lords Promise to the Church of Portae inferi non pravalebunt And since this his coming all these things are found Superstition Wil-worship Mandata Hominum with these Reformers and upon the same account many other Sects Sub-reformers of the Reformed are hard at work to pull down the remainder of Church Government Ceremonies Discipline which these first Demolishers have yet left standing And having thus dismissed and rid their hands of all these former Church-Customs they have now the leisure to make sport with them too and call them to an account And for fitting the Churches Tenants and Practices the better for their drollery they mis-relate and mis-represent them so far as that they can manifest them unreasonable and ridiculous and the extravagancy of any Casuist or Schoolman is applyed and imputed to the Church whilst the Protestant Reader though otherwise never so prudent and knowing yet unstudied and unexperienced in these things believes their relation as a truth and the Learned amongst Catholicks are astonished to see the Churches Doctrine so disguised and falsified Tuautem exaltare Domine in virtute tuâ and as there want not many to invade thy Truth so raise up alwaies those that may defend it with the strength not which they have of themselves that is none but which they receive from Thee who usest to confound the Wise of this world with things weak and despised that no flesh may glory in thy sight And as for the Enemies of thy Church and Truth whoever they be Imple facies eorum ignominiâ Domine ut quaerant nomen tuum
these still accepted by God through his Sons Satisfactions § 76 To go on with the Eleventh Qu. 11. Here we repeat the same again How comes this Holy Man to do such large Penances with regard to Gods Justice and Wrath if the sanctification of Christ were of so infinite a nature And if he practice mortifications and penances is he not sufficiently rewarded for them If he be how come these to help the other his Friend which he is abundantly recompensed for himself Here I ask also How come our prayers to procure from God some benefit to others when for the Charity of them we our selves likewise are rewarded by him a thing not doubted of The same pious work or suffering may obtain a manifold recompence and that as to several persons by way of Impetration from Gods bounty and mercy which enlargeth its self without bounds See Bellarm De Indulg l. 1. c. 2. §. 2. Propositio how far it pleaseth But it is granted that when we speak of a strick compensation or satisfaction made to Gods Justice thus no work or suffering of ours that is equivalently satisfactory only for anothers debt suppose of temporal punishments can be also of our own for none can so pay to Gods Justice two debts with that sum which is due for one of them only § 77 In the Twelfth We ask If the satisfaction of Christ doth only obtain Grace for this Holy man to do penance himself Q. 12. for averting the temporal punishment of his own sin But who saith thus how can the application or acception of this Holy Mans penances free another from the temporal punishment of his sin without his doing any penance Or have his penances being joyned with Christs satisfactions greater power with God for this other person than the satisfactions of Christ have for himself Whatever the Authors meaning is in this Question which perhaps I do not rightly comprehend Christs satisfactions alone are affirmed both for Common Penitents and Saints all sufficient and not only do obtain grace for Saints to satisfie themselves for a temporal punishment but also when applyed by an Indulgence do procure a remission of such temporal punishment to them without their own Penances or Satisfactions § 78 We continue in the Thirteenth the same demand Qu. 13. Why the satisfaction of Christ may not serve But who are they that say it may not See before § 47. without this Holy Mans penances to remit only the other persons temporal punishment for his sin when the satisfaction of Christ was sufficient alone to remit both eternal and temporal to that person in the Sacrament of Baptisme Or was the force of it spent then that it needs a fresh supply afterwards from this Holy Mans penances But if then it could be applyed to a higher end without any other help why not where it is to have far less efficacy We have now passed through all his Questions concerning the Churches Treasure many of them as they seem to me very irreverent and impertinent of which as I said he may accept of that Answer in his application of them to Indulgences which he gives us in ours to the Sacrament The last Question yet remains § 79 Viz How came this treasure of the Church i. e. the superfluities Qu. 15. as he calls them of Christs satisfactions for the temporal punishment of sin which are applyed in Indulgences into the Popes keeping and who gave him the Keys of them when every Priest is trusted in the Sacrament of Penance with the treasure of Christs necessary satisfaction for the remitting of the eternal punishment R. After I have first told him for the language is used by him here that I know no Roman Divine that stiles Christs satisfactions for the remitting of Sin and the eternal punishment necessary and of the temporal superfluous I Answer That in the doubt what persons have the lawful power of concedâ—ng Indulgences it is sufficient that Protestants then be satisfied when they are first agreed to admitt them Mean while what needs our Author trouble himself or us with such a question The Pope surely hath as much power of and right to keep the Keys as any Of those Indulgences then which he concedes none needs dispute the validity But not to leave this unspoken to I say 1st That as not the Concession of Indulgences so neither the Exercise of the power of Absolution this also being an Act of Jurisdiction and Judicature i.e. neither the application of Christs Merits and Satisfactions for the eternal nor for the temporal punishment of Sin doth belong to the Inferiour Clergy but dependently from the Bishops and Governours of the Church which Commission they receive also with a reservation of several Cases wherein they may not absolve Next for Church-Governours Not only the Pope but other Bishops de facto have conceded Indulgences in ancient times and do still But whether the conceding of them doth belong to all Bishops Jure Divino or only to the suprem Governour the Pope is disputed among the Schoolmen The Council of Trent though there they were much disputed hath determined nothing about the Limits of such Episcopal Jurisdictions but left them to the former current Ecclesiastical Customs and Practices Several limitations and restraints of them have been made by the supreme Bishop of the Church the Successor of St. Peter to whom in the first place our Lord committed the Keys Tibi dabo Claves not only with a Precedency to but Power and Authority over the rest and have been made to very good ends that things might be done with better order and discussion and with less confusion and relaxation of Discipline as it is also particularly in this granting of Indulgences And so long as the Bishops acquiesce therein such questions as this seem rather moved to the disturbance of the Churches peace than any edification in the Christian Faith And so I leave it The Roman School-Divines to this and several other of his questions have not been silent nor wanted his Predecessors the wit to ask them before him If he looks so much into their Books as he pretends why takes he no notice of their Answers Is it not because he finds so much Reason in them as he is loth to divulge to his party unless he could do it with greater satisfaction § 80 This to his questions But now after all these Invectives against the Roman Indulgengences i. e. against the remitting of some Penances and this not gratis but for some other Pious Works done in liue thereof perhaps so many times Visiting a Church and therein for some time offering up his Devotions Fasting on certain days giving so much Alms and the like and for a Cause that in advancing some publick or private good bears some proportion to that which is remitted or also far exceeds it as warring against Infidels oppressing the Church Conversion of Hereticks building of Churches Hospitals c. And again
That it affirms the Sacraments to confer Grace ex opere operato so as to render Faith or other dispositions in the receiver needless and mean while concealing one half of the Canon that plainly shews the contrary Si quis dixerit per ipsa novae Legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non conferri gratiam so farr he repeats it sed solam fidem divinae promissionis ad gratiam consequendam sufficere this he omits and the Sola is not at all considered by him As if from the Catholicks saying Sola fides non justificat he should prove that they hold Faith not necessary at all to Justification What this Canon opposetli and how it is distinguished from the Twelfth I think I have given a satisfying account before ‖ § 29. Yet after this see with what a strange confidence he concludes p 211. I dare now appeal saith he to the most indifferent Judg whether what I objected to them concerning the efficacy of Sacraments whether the minds of the receivers of them be prepared or no were not so far from being a calumny that there is not so much as the least mistake in it if the doctrine of the Council of Trent be embraced by them Thus he Tergens os suum dicit non sum operatus malum § 33 Bellarmin and the Roman Writers affirm that this truth That the Sacraments are the instrumental cause of conferring Grace is Divine Revelation and Bellarmin spends two Chapters in producing the Scriptures that evidence it and so saith That the particular way or manner of their conferring Grace is a thing not necessary to be determined or understood no more than that of the Trinity is or of several other Articles of Faith Yet Here see p. 204. how solicitous this Author is to be informed of the manner as if the whole issue of the business depended on this whether the Sacraments be physical or moral causes whether by a power inherent or assistant whether they produce Grace or only the union of it c. and how candidly he declaims against the imposing such absurd unreasonable and unintelligible things to be believed and brings in the Alcoron and his wit-conferring Cap to be admitted with the like credulity But takes no notice that such effect is proved or pretended by these Catholick Authors to be Divine Revelation which they will not allow to the Alcoran or to his Cap nor shews he the falsity of such an assertion in the disproving of their Texts urged for it § 34 The Roman Doctors affirm that so one be in the state of Grace and so have the habit of Charity and consequently that also of Devotion an actual or sensible devotion provided he use his best endeavour to be so devout is not necessarily required for receiving the benefit of the Sacrament and the reason is given by them because this indeed seems too rigorous and would cause too many scruples in mens minds concerning the preparation of a right devotion See this matter thus stated by Arnauld's Adversary ‖ Arnauld de la freq Communion part 3. c. 1. who is held to speak the most diminutively of a necessary preparation This is the Doctrine of the Saints saith he that a man that hath not the devotion and fervor of Charity he desireth but seems tepid to himself is not obliged therefore to abstain from the Communion provided he endeavour his best to excite himself to devotion and humbly presents himself in hope of benefit thereby And again c. 9. One often thinks he hath no Devotion and yet ceaseth not to have it True Devotion is not a certain facility to apply ones self to it and a contentment that one resents from it but it is an effective will and desire to please God Now the Communicant here being required by these Doctors to be in the state of Grace and to use his best endeavour to be also actually and sensibly Devout see how ingenuously this Author conceals these two circumstances and chargeth on them the admitting persons to the benefit of the Sacraments that are impenitent and void of any Devotion p. 207. If want of devotion saith he doth not hinder Grace being received what arguments can men use to perswade persons to it who will undergo so strict an examination of himself and endeavour to raise his mind to a due preparation for the participation of Sacraments if he knows before hand that he shall certainly receive Grace by the Sacraments without it i. e. without an endeavour to raise his mind to a due Devotion But what Roman Doctor reacheth this Again p. 211. Whether one have any Devotion or no he is sure of Grace if he doth but partake of their Sacraments and need not trouble himself much about Devotion since his work may be done without it Never any Doctrine was certainly better contrived for the satisfaction of impenitent Sinners than theirs is representing the indevout and the impenitent as the same the indevout through infirmity or through neglect appearingly or really all included § 35 The like integrity this Author useth in his relation concerning Extreme Vnction and its effect p. 212. where he saith Not so much as the use of Reason is required for the effect of the blessed Sacrament of Extreme Vnction And then descants ‖ p. 213. A hard case for those who dye in mortal Sin for if they could but express any sign of contrition by the motion of an eye or a finger all were well enough and they are sure to receive Grace And p. 214. To make all sure at last the Exereme Vnction very sweetly conveys grace into them whether they be sensible or not Whereas in candid and serious dealing instead of jesting he ought to have represented the Roman Doctrine thus 1. That for the Application of this Sacrament the use of Reason in the Suscipient is not necessarily required if the person immediatly before when having the use of Reason appeared Contrite and desired it ‖ See before §. 27 And 2. That all such persons only as have that true and acceptable contrition known only to God whereof they give external signs do receive Grace or the effect of this Sacrament but no other Let this suffice for the Third Point § 36 IV. For the Fourth Point The easiness in the Roman Church 4. Of the Eternal Punishment of Sin not easily changed into a Temporal by this feat of the Sacraments ex opere operato remitting sin and conferring Grace to change the Eternal punishment of sin which is surely remitted with the sin it self into a temporal one or to change Hell-torments into those of Purgatory and then the easiness of getting out of these too with a little money or friends See Rom. Idol p. 185 186. The contrary of this viz. That the procuring the pardon of Mortal Sin committed after Baptisme and consequently of the eternal punishment thereof these two being alwaies remitted together is no such easie thing hath