a General Council confirm'd by another As the Council of Basil confirm'd by Pope Nicolas V. was esteemed a Schismatical and Seditious Conventicle and reprobated by the last Lateran Council confirm'd by Pope Leo X. (f) Binii notis in Concil Constantiens Bâ—ll de Concil Auâ—t l. 2. c. 17. which at Rome is accounted a General Council So that unless Errors become Truth and Contradictions be reconciled when determin'd by a Pope and Council we may conclude that not only the Pope himself but a General Council confirm'd by him hath err'd It plainly appears by what hath been said that those have actually err'd whom the Church of Rome supposes to be her only infallible Guides From whence it unavoidably follows that the Church of Rome hath err'd First in all those Points which have been erroneously defin'd by them Secondly In supposing them to be Infallible I shall not stay to shew of what use Councils either General or Provincial are how far their Authority extends and what great Benefit may accrue to the Church by them tho they be suppos'd not to be Infallible But shall proceed to the next Proposition viz. II. That the Errors of the Church of Rome were not slight and in matters of small moment but so gross and enormous when the Reformation was set on foot that there was a necessity of reforming them This will be evident First By unquestionable Testimonies Secondly By taking a particular view of the Errors themselves First By Testimonies of unquestionable Authority of Persons who could neither be mistaken through Ignorance nor byass'd by Interest or Affection to represent Matters worse than indeed they were But who were on the contrary as well acquainted with the State of the Roman Church as any Persons in the World who were promoted to the greatest Honours in it whose worldly Interests ingaged them above all other men to maintain its Reputation and Authority and who not only liv'd but died in Communion with it Such were their learned Doctors their Bishops and Cardinals their Princes and Emperors their Popes and General Councils tho the two last are not to be reckon'd for single Witnesses but for the Voice of their Church the one being their Church Representative the other according to their Divinity their Church Virtual Of those many which offer themselves I shall content my self to produce a few and those shall be such as were either cotemporary with or who liv'd within about a hundred years of the Reformation passing over those who were at a greater distance from it John Gerson the renowned Chancellor of Paris in a Sermon to the Council of Constance applies to the modern Church of Rome these words of the Prophet Ezekiel Thou didst trust in thine own beauty and plaiedst the Harlot because of thy renown and pour'dst out thy Fornications on every one that pass'd by And in all thy Abominations thou hast not remember'd the days of thy youth Thou hast built thy brothel house at every head of the way and hast made thy beauty to be abhorr'd Behold therefore I will deliver thee into the hands of those that hate thee And after he had told them what were the sad Symptoms of approaching Ruine he advises them to a great and notable Reformation of Manners as the only means to prevent it (a) John Gerson Serm. de â—ignâ—â— ruinâ— Ecclesiae And because saith he some may say that the Church is founded upon a Rock and therefore in no danger of ruin He declares more particularly what were those Enormities in which the Church-men especially needed to be reform'd and then exhorts the Council either to reform all Estates of the Church in a General Council or command them to be reform'd in Provincial Synods that by their Authority the Church might be repaired and the House of God purg'd from all Vncleanness Vices and Errors (b) Declarat Defect viror Ecclesiast The same Author earnestly press'd Pope Alexander V. to set himself to reform those Corruptions and Abuses which as he says were the Plague of the Church and without the removal of which 't was in vain to expect Peace (c) Serm. coram Alexand in die Ascens Domini Nic. Clemangis another Parisian Doctor writ several Books upon this Subject in which he represents to the World the deplorable State of the Roman Church and the necessity of Reforming it (d) De Corrupto Statu Ecclesia de Reparaâ—â—â—â— Ruinâ— Eccles Add to these single Testimonies the solemn Appeal of the whole University of Paris from Pope Leo X. to a General Council in defence of the Pragmatick Sanction In which they set forth how that the Councils of Constance and Basil made many Decrees especially about the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical State as well in the Head as in the Members which in those days especially seem'd to stand in need of Reformation And how among other things the Sacred Council of Basil consider'd how by the antient Fathers Sacred Canons and wholsome Decrees were made for the happy Government of the Ecclesiastical State which as long as they were observ'd the vigour of Ecclesiastical Discipline continued Religion Piety and Charity flourish'd But after that men through Ambition and Covetousness began to contemn the Decrees of the Holy Fathers there follow'd Deformities in the Church many of which they afterwards enumerate and then appeal from the Pope to a future General Council (e) Fascic rerum expeâ—end ac sugiend Richer Hist Concil General l. 4. part 2. p. 84. And 't is observable that this Appeal was made in the year 1517. the very same year in which Luther began to preach against the horrible Abuses of Indulgences If we pass on to Bishops and Archbishops tho their Interest ingag'd them more strongly to oppose it yet we shall find several even among them who were so sensible of the necessity of Reformation that they earnestly call'd for it and endeavour'd to promote it Frederick Archbishop of Salerno Jerome Archbishop of Brunswick and Joh. Matth. Gibertus Bishop of Verona plainly declar'd that they had a great Sense of the Corruptions of the Church by the Articles of Reformation which together with the rest of the Select Council they deliver'd to Pope Paul III. (f) Richer Hiâ—t Concil General l. 4. part 2. p. 136. In a Book Intitled Onus Ecclesiae written by John Suffragan Bishop of Saltzburgh in the year 1519. that is but two years after Luther began the Reformation we have for many Chapters together a most direful Description of the corrupt State of the Church (g) Onus Ecclesiâ— c 19 20 21 c. In the Council of Trent the Bishop of Conimbria said For these 150 years the World hath demanded a Reformation in the Head and the Members and hitherto hath been deceived that now it was time they should labour in earnest and not by Dissimulation (h) History of the Council of Trent l. 6. p. 558. And Dudithius an
Hungarian Bishop pray'd the Hungarians and Polonians That for God's sake and for the Charity every Christian oweth to the Church they would not abandon so honest just and profitable a Cause but that every one would put down in writing what he thought might be constituted for the Service of God without any respect of man not reforming one part but the whole Body of the Church in the Head and the Members (i) P. 5â—8 If from Bishops we ascend to Cardinals tho to their Pride and Luxury and Pomp and Grandeur nothing could give a greater blow than a due Reformation yet to such a wretched State was the Church reduced that many of them did not only acknowledge the necessity of Reforming it but in some measure contributed their endeavours toward it Gaspar Cardinal Contarene John Peter Cardinal Theatine James Cardinal Sadolete and Reginald Pool Cardinal of England were of the number of the Select Council that presented the Articles of Reformation to Pope Paul III. (k) Richer Hist Concil General l. 4. part 2. p. 156. The College of Cardinals at the death of Alexander VI. before they entred the Conclave for the Election of a new Pope took an Oath that if any of them should be chosen he should immediately before the Publication of his Election bind himself under pain of Perjury and a Curse to call a Council within two years for the Reformation of the Church (l) Richer Hist Concil General l. 4. part 1. c. 2. which Oath was taken by Julius II. (m) Id. l. 4. part 1. c. 3. p. 334. who was chosen Pope and when it appear'd afterward that he made no conscience of keeping it seven years having pass'd without any mention of a Council in the year 1511. nine Cardinals who had withdrawn themselves from Rome by reason of his Insolencies by the assistance of the Emperor Maximilian and Lewis XII King of France call'd the Second Pisan Council to that purpose (n) Id. Petrus de Alliaco Cardinal of Cambray wrote a Book for the Reformation of the Church (o) Fascic rerum expetend aâ— fugiend and Ludovicus Cardinal of Arles who presided in the Council of Basil zealously endeavoured it The Cardinals who call'd the first Pisan Council to extinguish the Schism rais'd by the two Anti-Popes Benedict XIII and Gregory XII vow'd that they would to the utmost of their power procure that he that should be chosen Pope should reform the Church and that till a due and sufficient Reformation of the universal Church was made as well in the Head as in the Members he should not suffer the Council to be dissolv'd (p) Richer Hist Concil General l. 2. p. 102. Tho the Testimonies already produc'd are beyond Exception yet behold greater Witnesses than these I mean Popes themselves who above all men in the World abhor'd all Proposals of Reformation as that which would throw them down from their usurp'd Dominion and put a stop to their lawless Tyrannies To such an Excess were the Romish Corruptions grown and so evident was the necessity of reforming them that they were forc'd to confess it who most desir'd to deny it To this purpose Paul III. appointed a select Council of Prelates to collect those Abuses which were most Notorious and Pernicious and present them to him that he might correct them (q) Id. l. 4. part 2. p. 136. Pope Marcellus II. said that he resolv'd to make a severe and intire Reformation but died before he could let the World know whether he intended to be as good as his word (r) Hist Counc of Trent l. 5. Paul IV. who succeeded him promised to reform not verbally but really the Head Members Clergy Laity Princes and People (Å¿) Hist Counc of Trent l. 5. Alexander V. as soon as he was chosen by the Pisan Council promised to set himself to the Work and to chuse good and learned Men out of every Nation to consult with the Cardinals about it (t) Concil Pisan sess 21. apud Richer Pope Adrian VI. was free and ingenuous in confessing the abominable Corruptions of the Church and especially of the Court of Rome and professed that he took the Papacy upon him to the end that he might reform the Universal Church (u) Sleidan Comment l. 4. Richer Hist Concil general l 4. par 2. p. 129 Fascic reâ—um expetend c. f. 173. What Testimony of greater Authority can be desired than these already mentioned unless it be the concurrent voice of the Church representative in a general Council To which I now proceed The first Pisan Council as it is commonly reckoned though it was indeed the second were resolved to reform the Church which Alexander V. as was said before who was chosen by and presided in that Council promised to assist them in (w) Concil Pisan sess 17. 21. apud Richerium apud Binium sess 16 20. The Council of Constance which followed five Years after decreed That the Pope which was then to be chosen should together with the Council or those which should be deputed by the several Nations reform the Church before the Council should be dissolved and the matters about which it was thought fit the Reformation should be made were reduced to eighteen Heads (x) Concil Constant sess 40. In the Council of Basil the Pope gave his Legate full power of concluding all such things as appertained to the reformation of the Ecclesiastical State (y) Concil Basel sess 1. Bin. And whereas there were six things which that Council resolved mainly to prosecute two of them were these 1. That the Church should be reformed in the Head and Members 2. That the antient Discipline as much as possible should be restored (z) Richer hist Concil general l. 3. c. 2. The second Council at Pisa declared That the reformation of the Church was most necessary and passed this Decree upon it That the Holy Synod would not nor could dissolve it self till the Universal Church should be reformed both in Faith and Manners as well in the Head as in the Members (a) Sess 3. apudi Richerium l. 4. par 1. p. 430. Where it is observable That the Reformation decreed by this Council as so highly necessary did extend to Faith as well as to Manners And so did also that which was required by many other great Men of the Roman Communion as shall be afterward shewed when I descend to particulars It cannot be expected that I should ascend higher in the Ecclesiastical State since a general Council is the highest Authority of the Church on Earth by which we see the necessity of a Reformation is confirmed and that not by one single Council only but by four successively three of which were confirmed by Popes The first Pisan by Alexander V. the Council of Constance by Martin V. the Council of Basil by Nicolas V. and so much of it as concerned the Reformation and much more by Eugenius
IV. who was deposed by it If therefore a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot err it is infallibly certain and according to the Principles of the Church of Rome an Article of Faith That the Reformation of the Church was necessary Should we now pass from the Clergy to the Laity from Bishops Cardinals Popes and Councils to Secular States Kings and Emperors we should find That they were also highly sensible of the Corruptions and Abuses Usurpations and Oppressions of the Church of Rome and many of them zealous and active in their endeavours to reform them What great complaints were made by many of our Kings of England against the Encroachments of Rome How often did they petition the Pope for a redress but finding no relief from thence Edward the Third and Richard the Second did in part right themselves and their Subjects by the Statutes of Provisoes and Praemunire * 27 Edw. 3. c. 1. 25 Edw. 3. 16 Rich. 2. c. 5. 13 R. 2. c. 3. See Cook upon these Statutes Institut par 3. c. 56. Charles VII King of France as a Fence to the French Church against the Mischiefs which flowed from the Court of Rome set up the pragmatick Sanction which when Pope Pius II. endeavoured to overthrow he appealed from him to a General Council (b) Richer Hist Concil general l. 4. par 1. c. 1. p. 36 37 c. Lewis XI was indeed decoyed by the Popes fair Promises to revoke that Sanction but soon after seeing his errour he commanded it again to be observed * Richer Hist Concil general l. 4. c. 1. s 13. After the death of Lewis the three Estates of the Kingdom assembled at Tours besought Charles VIII who succeeded him to maintain the Pragmatick in its full strength †Id. s 15. Which he not only consented to but resolved to make a further progress in reforming the Church and to that purpose consulted the College of Divines at Paris (c) Id l. 4. c. 2. Lewis XII who followed next coyned his Money with this Inscription Perdam Babylonis nomen I will destroy the name of Babylon (d) Thâ—ani Hist l. 1 p 11. by which he plainly declared what his Judgment then was of Rome The zeal of Sigismund the Emperour for the Reformation was abundantly manifest by his indefatigable pains in procuring the Council of Constance and assisting in it By protecting the Council of Basil against the attempts of Eugenius and by labouring with other Princes to promote it but especially by that Reformation he made in many things himself Maximilian I. made bitter Complaints of many scandalous Abuses of the Roman Court and commanded the redress of them under pain of his heavy displeasure (g) Fascic rerum expetend aâ— fugiend s 170. The Emperor Ferdinand proposed to the Council of Trent by his Embassadors twenty Points concerning Worship Manners and Discipline which he desired might be reformed (h) History of the Council of Trent l. 6. p. 513. and in a Letter to the Pope and another to his Legates in the Council earnestly pressed for an effectual Reformation (i) l. 7. p. 682. The Princes of Germany at the Diet at Nuremberg in the Year 1523. in their Answer to Cherogat the Popes Nuncio insisted upon the reforming of Abuses and correcting of many Errors and Vices which by long tract of time had taken deep root for the effecting of which they demanded a free and general Council And those intolerable burdens as they called them laid upon them by the Court of Rome they reduced to an hundred Heads (*) Sleid. com l. 4. Fascic rerum expetend ac fugiend History of the Council of Trent l. 1. which they called the Hundred Grievances of the German Nation and presented them to the Pope protesting that they neither would nor could endure them any longer To conclude this Head to so monstrous a deformed state was the Western Church degenerated that the Prince the Priest the Clergy the Laity Men of all Conditions and of all Nations Yea if the infallible Oracle Pope Adrian the Sixth spoke truth the whole World groaned after a Reformation (k) Richer l. 4. par 2. p. 130. Secondly The necessity of which will be further evident by taking a particular view of the Corruptions and Errors themselves which for methods sake and to avoid confusion shall be reduced to four general Heads 1. Corruptions in Doctrine 2. In Worship 3. In Manners 4. In Discipline In treating of which it will plainly appear that their Errors were not small and of light importance but so gross and in matters of such high moment that there was an absolute necessity of reforming them 1. Gross Corruptions in Doctrine Many Doctrines were imposed as Articles of Faith which have not the least Foundation in Scripture Reason or Primitive Antiquity and many others which are not only Strangers to all these but contrary to the common sense and Experience of Mankind I shall instance in some of them 1. The Infallibility of the Bishop or Church of Rome We have before seen that this Doctrine hath no Foundation in Scripture and by consequence can be no Article of Faith Yea that there is no pretence of Reason why the Bishop and Church of Rome should be infallible rather than the Bishop and Church of Constantinople and all those fine flourishes they are wont to make of the expediency of this Doctrine for the ending of Controversies and the safe conducting of Souls to Heaven may be as well accounted for by making the Church of England or any other Church infallible That no such Doctrine was owned by the antient Church we may be assured both because the Fathers in those many Heresies which in their times arose never betook themselves to this easie and compendious remedy for the suppressing of them but chose the more tedious and laborious way of confuting them by Scripture by Reason and Catholick Tradition and because the Asian and African Bishops did in some Points so resolutely dissent from the Roman Bishop and Church that they chose rather to break Communion than to comply with them therein Had any such thing in those dayes been believed would the African Illyrican and Dalmatian Bishops have renounced Communion with Vigilius Bishop of Rome for consenting to the condemnation of the three Chapters (a) Petrus de Marca dissertat de Epist Vigilii s 8. Would the blessed Polycarpus have dissented from Pope Eleutherius Irenaeus from Pope Victor S. Cyprian from Pope Stephen Can any Man who is not forsaken of his Reason imagine That such Men as these would have behaved themselves so towards the Pope as they did had they not thought themselves as infallible Judges as he But what need I contend for this when such great men of the Church of Rome as Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica Gerson Chancellor of Paris Almain Alphonsus de Castro yea Pope Adrian VI. himself teach us as even
A DISCOURSE Concerning the NECESSITY OF REFORMATION With Respect to the Errors and Corruptions OF THE Church of Rome AMONG the many Errors of the Church of Rome there is one especially that puts a baâ— not only to the Reformation of her self but of all other Churches which depend upon her and that is the Doctrine of her Infallibility If she cannot err neither she nor any other Church that follows her conduct can stand in need of being reform'd for where there can be no Error there can be nothing amiss and where there can be nothing amiss there can be no need of Reformation 'T is therefore needful to remove this Prejudice in order to the clearing of the way to the ensuing Discourse When the Romanists assert that their Church is Infallible and theirs only we may in reason expect that they should produce good Proof that their Church is so highly privileged above all other Churches This they say they do and their Proofs they tell us are so convincing that they may pass for no less than Demonstrations But alas when we come to examine them we find our selves strangely disappointed instead of Demonstrations we meet with nothing that amounts to so much as Probability Their pretended Proofs are taken from Scripture from Reason and from the Authority of the ancient Church I. Those from Scripture are many but all of them as impertinent as that of their Angelical Doctor to prove that all men are not equally bound to have an explicite Faith because 't is said Job 1. 14. that the Oxen were plowing and the Asses were feeding besides them For First They do not prove that any Church now in being is Infallible Secondly Much less that the Church of Rome is First They do not prove that any Church now in being is Infallible I say now in being because we grant that there was a time when even particular Churches were in their Guides Infallible viz. while the Apostles liv'd and took upon them the Government of particular Churches And many of those Scriptures which the Romanists produce for the Infallibility of their present Church peculiarly relate to that time and to those Persons For instance these Promises The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name he shall teach you all things John 1â— 26. and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you I have many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he shall guide you into all Truth for the shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall Joh. 16. 12 13. hear that shall â—e speak and he shall shew you things to come 'T is plain that these Promises are to be limited to the Apostles and those Disciples only who personally convers'd with our Saviour because they were made to those to whom he himself had spoken and to whose remembrance the Holy Ghost was to bring those things he had before told them to those to whom he had many more things to say which they were not yet able to bear to those who had been with Christ from the beginning to those from whom Christ was now going away and whom he had before told of his departure to those to whom the Holy Ghost was to shew things to come a Privilege which the present Roman Church does not I think so much as pretend to And for those other Scriptures which extend to succeeding Ages tho they do for the most part concern the Catholick only and not any particular Church yet they neither assert nor promise any such thing as absolute Infallibility Let it be supposed that St. Paul calls the Church the Pillar and Ground of Truth for these words may as well be connected with 1 Tim. 3. 1â— and apply'd to that Summary of Christian Doctrine which follows must the meaning needs be that the Church cannot err May it not justly lay claim to this Title 1. If it do not actually err tho it is fallible and may err If nothing may be call'd a Pillar that is capable of any defect St. Peters Church in Rome will have no Pillar left to support it Or 2. If it doth not err in things necessary to Salvation That may be truly call'd a Pillar that upholds all that is needful to the being of the House tho it do not support every little part but suffers here and there a Tile or a Stone to fall to the ground Or 3. If together with all necessary Truths it gives support to some Errors As we frequently see those Pillars that uphold the Building together with it they also support other things that are laid upon it and are no better than a nusance and incumbrance to it And such a Pillar of Truth the Romanists must be forc'd to grant the Universal Church hath sometimes been for has it not for some ages maintain'd those Doctrines which the present Church of Rome condemns as erroneous Tho the truth is the Church here spoken of was that in which Timothy was directed how to behave himself and that was the Church of Ephesus or in the largest sense that of Asia of Mr. Rycaâ—t's present State of the Greek Church p. 54. which Ephesus was the Metropolis and that this Church hath fundamentally err'd must needs be granted there being not one family of Christians now to be found in Ephesus From that Promise of our Saviour that the gates of Hell shall Matth. 16 18. not prevail against his Church They can by no means infer Infallibility till they have first prov'd that the gates of Hell prevail against every society yea against every person that is not infallible And when that shall be once prov'd the gates of Hell will be so largely extended and those who enter in at them so numerous that 't is to be fear'd St. Peter will never more be put to the trouble of opening the gates of Heaven for any man 'T is true Christ hath promised to be with his Church always even Matt. 28. 20. to the end of the World But if all those with whom Christ is present are infallible then every sincere Christian in the world is so and then what will become of the Popes Prerogative When the poorest Mechanick in case he be but an honest Christian will be as infallible a Guide of Controversies as he is now by his Flatterers pretended to be And as little to this purpose is that other Promise of our Saviour Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them For if Christ's being in the midst of Matt. 18. 20. them does make them infallible since 't is sure he will never be worse than his word 't is also certain that if but two or three only shall meet together in his name in London they will be when so met together infallible And if Infallibility may be had at home and at
that he should be clearly known If there be then such a Judge is not necessary for that means cannot be necessary without which the end may be attained 1. If Controversies which create disturbance to the Church cannot be determin'd without an infallible Umpire 't is also necessary for the determining of them not only that there be such an Umpire but that we be assured who he is for in this case not to be known and not to be are in effect the same thing so that let there be Judges infallible never so many our Controversies will be never the nearer an end unless we are able to discern who they are Now I cannot imagine at present how they can be known except one of these two ways only either by being clearly revealed by God in Scripture or by God's bearing witness to their Infallibility by Signs and Wonders But God hath neither expresly nor by evident consequence declared in Scripture that he hath any where constituted such a Judge much less hath he told us who he is and where we may find him till therefore they who pretend to it prove their Infallibility by unquestionable Miracles let them not expect that we should take them for such Nor can they in reason blame us for this since the disagreement in this point is so great among themselves that of all other questions it seems most to stand in need of an infallible Judge to determine it 2. If Controversies may be decided by other means then what need of an infallible Judge That cannot be necessary to an end without which the end may be obtain'd And that Controversies may be otherways determin'd is certain because they have been How were all the Controversies decided and the Heresies suppress'd which sprang up in the early Age of the Christian Church Were the Gnosticks the Valentinians the Novatians the Macedonians the Donatists the Arians suppress'd by those who took upon them to be Infallible No such thing was in those days talked of the Bishops and Councils that confuted them did not so much as pretend to any such Privilege The only means they had recourse to was the infallible Rule the Holy Scriptures this was the Judge to which in all their Questions they appeal'd and those who are so perverse as not to be determin'd by it should Elias come and take the Chair neither will they be determin'd by his Sentence for nothing can be objected to render the Scripture ineffectual to this end but the same may with equal force be objected against the Definitions of an infallible Judge And therefore 3. An infallible Judge is no such infallible means for the ending of Controversies as is by the Romanists supposed For 1. When there was such a Judge in the Jewish Church I mean our Blessed Saviour Did his Authority put an end to the Disputes between the Pharisees and the Sadduces and other Sects among them Yea did not that Church then fall into the most damnable Error by rejecting this infallible Teacher 'T will be said the reason of that was because they did not own his Infallibility Be it so and may not then any other infallible Guide be rejected Can it be imagin'd that any other Person 's Infallibility should ever be attested with more unquestionable Credentials than his was But 2. Neither those who have been own'd for Infallible have been so successful to this purpose among them who have own'd them under this Character For 1. The Apostles were thought Infallible by those Churches which they planted and yet Errors and Heresies sprang up in them and they were divided into Parties And tho St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians had endeavour'd to reduce them to Unity yet we find by his second Epistle that that had not put an end to their Divisions Those who know they have a Guide that cannot err may go astray as much as others in case they refuse to follow his conduct 2. The Romanists tell us that their Church cannot err and if they do indeed believe what they profess it will be as effectual for the ending of Differences among themselves as if it were indeed Infallible And yet are there not many Controversies among them And tho they upbraid us with our Divisions are not theirs as many And some of them such as are by the differing Parties reckon'd even Matters of Faith If then their Infallibility were such a Sovereign Cure of Divisions how comes it to pass that no Reconciliation is made between the dissenting Parties among themselves The truth is so far is their pretended infallible Judge from lessening that he encreases their Controversies for no sooner was he talked of but instead of deciding those that were already many were raised that were never before heard of And therefore 3. Such a work of the Holy Spirit upon mens Hearts as would make them meek and humble and charitable and heavenly minded sincere Lovers of Truth desirous to know the will of God and resolv'd to do it would be an expedient much more available for the healing of our Divisions and promoting of Peace than Infallibility of Judgment For from whence come Wars and Fightings among us come they not hence even from our Lusts Scarce ever was any Error broach'd that created disturbance to the Church but 't is manifest it took its rise from and was foster'd and maintain'd either by the Lust of the Flesh or the Lust of the Eye or the Pride of Life Let but mens fleshly worldly and devilish Lusts be once mortified and our Differences will be composed or if any remain they will be such as will be destructive neither of Peace nor Charity Should we therefore argue at the same absurd rate that our Adversuries do might we not as fairly conclude that God hath made every man Pious and Humble and a Doer of his Will as that he hath made one Man or one Church Infallible But now if that which is supposed by the Romanists were all granted If it were necessary to the Peace of the Church that all Controversies should be decided if they cannot be decided without some infallible Umpire and if it were certain that such an Umpire would give a final determination to them yet doth it hence follow that the Church of Rome must be that Umpire Suppose the Church of England were Infallible might it not be as serviceable to these Intents and Purposes III. This pretended Infallibility of the Church of Rome hath as little support from the Doctrine of the Antient Christian Church as it hath from Scripture and Reason Tho the Romanists are wont among those who will take their word to boast much of the Authority of the Fathers yet that they are not able to produce so much as one who speaks to their purpose may be reasonably concluded from the Performances of Cardinal Bellarmine in this matter * Bell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 4. all whose Allegations are so impertinent that the very reading of
them may be sufficient to satisfie an impartial person that nothing can be found in Antiquity that really favours this pretence Yea that the Fathers were of a contrary Judgment and thought that the Church of Rome had no such paramount privilege above other Churches will afterward appear by plain and undeniable proofs If what the Romanists slily suppose and make great advantage of in this Question were true viz. that the Roman is the Catholick Church it would not do their work For tho the Catholick Church is infallibly led by the Holy Ghost into all things necessary to be believ'd and practis'd yet we have no assurance either from Scripture or Reason that she shall not err in other matters But that the Roman and Catholick are the same is an opinion not only condemn'd by the first Council of Nice (a) Can. 6. and which is more was wholly a stranger to the first eight general Councils (b) Novem primis seculis quibus octo universalia concilia habita sunt nunquam auditum aut lectum Romanam Ecclesiam aliâ notione aut significatione sumptam quam pro singulari particulari Ecclesia atque primo membro Ecclesiae universalis Richer l. 1. c. 13. p. 754. ColoÌ„ 1683. that is unknown to the Christian World for 900 years after Christ But 't is moreover as absurd in it self as to say that the part is equal to the whole that the Church of London is the Church of England And till they have prov'd the latter we shall hardly be perswaded to believe the former In the mean time let them take it for a favour that we grant the Church of Rome to be a part of the Catholick Church it being a part so miserably corrupted I thought it needful to premise what hath been said because when we charge the Church of Rome with Errors and for proof of that charge produce many particular Instances her Advocates think it a sufficient answer to tell us alas Sirs you are grosly mistaken as for those Opinions and Practices which you take to be Errors 't is your selves only that err in thinking them to be so for the Church of Rome is so highly privileged that Christ and his Apostles may as soon err as She. Having therefore remov'd this Obstacle out of the way I now proceed to that which I mainly design which I shall comprise under these following heads of Discourse I. That the Church of Rome is not only fallible but hath actually err'd II. That her Errors were not slight and in matters of small moment but so gross and enormous when the Reformation was set on foot that there was a necessity of reforming them III. That no hope was left that the Church of Rome would either reform these Errors in her self or give consent to the reformation of them in any other Church that communicated with her IV. That every particular national Church had a right to reform it self without her leave V. That this right of the Church of England in particular was most unquestionable And therefore as a necessary Conclusion from these Premisses VI. That the Church of England was indispensably bound to reform her self notwithstanding the prohibition of the Church of Rome I. That the Church of Rome not only may err but hath actually err'd This cannot be denied if those in that Church have err'd who as they themselves assert are the only persons that cannot err For if their supposed infallible Guides have mistaken their way how can it otherwise be but that those who blindly follow them must go astray too Now let them place their Infallibility where they please either in the Pope or in a general Council or in both united 't is as certain that they all have err'd as that both parts of a contradiction cannot be true 1. For their Popes 't is a common thing with them to rescind each others Decrees and to make Definitions as opposite one to another as Yea and Nay Thus Pope Stephen VI. abrogated the Decrees and null'd the Acts of Formosus I. (a) Platina in vita Steph. Pope Romanus I. did the like kindness for Stephen (b) Id. in vita Romani Pope John X. reprobated the Acts of Stephen and restor'd those of Formosus (c) Id. in vita Johannis X. Pope Sergius III. was so great an Abhorrer of Formosus and his Acts that he compell'd those Priests who had received orders from him to be re-ordain'd nor would he suffer his dead Body to rest but commanding it to be taken up set it in the Pope's Seat adorn'd with Priestly Robes and pass'd Sentence upon him as if he had been alive and then pulling off the Sacred Vestments and cutting off the three fingers with which he was wont to give his Blessing commanded it to be thrown into Tiber as unworthy of humane Burial (d) Id. in vita Sergii Luitprand l. 1 de reb Imp. Reg. c. 8. Pope Nic. I. decreed that it was not fit for Clergy-men to bear Arms (e) Nam cum discreti sint milites seculi à militibus Ecclesiâ— non convenit militibus Ecclesiae militare secule per quod ad effusionem sanguinis necesse sit pervenire Gratian. Dist 50. c. 5. Pope Vrban the II. exhorted the Bishops to fight against the Amalekites viz. the Turks (f) Baron an 1095. n. 49. and Pope Boniface VIII shewed himself to the people at the Jubilee in an imperial Habit and had a naked Sword carried before him Nor have they only contradicted one another but the same Pope hath contradicted himself too So did Pope Vigilius again and again in the Controversie about the three Chapters (g) Pet. de Marca dissert de decret Vigilii So did Pope Martin V. he confirm'd that Decree of the Council of Constance which set a general Council above the Pope and he set the Pope above a Council in publishing a Bull against Appeals from the Pope to a Council (h) Richer Hist Concil general l. 2. c. 3. s 21 23 25. So did Eugenius IV. Paul III. and many more Nor have they err'd only in points of small importance but even in matters of Faith Pope Liberius consented to the Arian Heresy as S. Athanasius (i) In epistola ad solitariam vitam agentes p. 837 Par. S. Hilary (k) Haec est perfidia Ariana Anathema tibi à me dictum â—iberi sociis tuis iterum tibi Anathema tertio praevaricator Liberi Hil. in Prag col 426. and S. Jerom (l) In Catalogo vir illustr inform us Pope Honorius defended the Heresy of the Monothelites and was condemned for a downright Heretick by the Sixth (n) Richer hist Concil general l. 1. c. 10. s 23 24. Seventh (o) Id. l. 1. c. 11. s 10. and Eighth (p) Id. l. 1. c. 12. s 21. general Councils All which Councils were confirmed by Popes The sixth by Leo II. the seventh by Adrian I. the eighth by
Bellarmine himself acknowledges (b) Bâ—ll de Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 2. that the Pope may not only err but be a Heretick yea and teach Heresie too if he define without a General Council And when a General Council says 't is certain the Pope may err (c) Concilii Basil Respons Synodal de Authorit Concil general supra Pap. Richer l. 3. c. 2. S. 6. And what that Council says of the Pope is experimentally verified of a Council confirm'd by the Pope as hath been before prov'd Nor is this Doctrine to be rejected meerly because it is notoriously False but more especially because of its horrid Consequences as it opens the door to and gives protection to any other the most palpable Error both in Doctrine and Practice For if this be once granted there is no remedy but we must believe Darkness to be Light if the Church of Rome says it is so Yea a Thomas Becket a Garnet or any other the most execrable Traitor must be worshipt for a Saint when the Pope is pleas'd to canonize him 2. Their Doctrine of the Popes sovereign Power over the universal Church That every Christian under pain of Damnation is bound to be subject to him that no Appeals may be made from him that he alone is the supream Judge over all Persons in all Causes Ecclesiastical but that he himself can be judged by no man This Doctrine hath not only been defin'd by Popes themselves as well as their Flatterers and many hundreds of years together put in execution by them but hath moreover been establish'd by such Councils as are by the Romanists accounted General (d) Concil Florent p. 85â— tom 8. apud Binium Concil Lateranens V. Sess 11. And yet is not only destitute of all Authority from Scripture but much may be found in Scripture against it And not only in Scripture but 't is plain from Church History that the Bishops of Rome in the early Ages of Christianity had no Jurisdiction beyond their own Province that for the first 300 years there were but two only viz. Victor and Stephen that took upon them to censure Persons that were of another Diocess and that they themselves were severely censured for it by other Bishops That the eight first General Councils were all both call'd and confirm'd not by Popes but by the Emperors (e) Richer Hist Concil general l. 1. c. 13. p. 753. Review of the Council of Trent l. 3. c. 1. 2. That the Pope hath been oppos'd in many Councils and many Synodical Decrees have been pass'd full sore against his will (f) As in the Council of Chalcedon the second at Constantinople the Council of Constance of Basil c. That he himself was subject to the Laws of the Church and upon his transgression of them obnoxious to censure no less than other Bishops That no Appeals were allow'd to him by the African Bishops That by the ancient Canons every Bishop did order the Affairs of his own Diocess without dependence upon or Subordination to the Bishop of Rome and that all Causes were finally to be determin'd by Provincial Councils (g) Concil Constantinopol 1 Can. 2. Concil Nicaen 1 Can. 5. That many Popes have been anathematiz'd by other Bishops and many judg'd condemn'd and depos'd by Synods All which and many more things which might be mention'd are plainly inconsistent with this pretended universal Empire of the Pope But if nothing could be alleg'd from Scripture or the Doctrine or Practice of the antient Church to the contrary yet the intolerable Evils which unavoidably flow from it cannot but render this Doctrine detestable to all those who have any sincere Love either to Truth or Goodness For whereever this Doctrine is receiv'd a man must think himself in duty bound to entertain Error and to reject the Truth to put Virtue for Vice and Vice for Virtue in case the Pope require him so to do And that the Pope not only may but for many Ages hath commanded men so to do the sad experience of the Christian World is a proof too unanswerable 3. The Doctrine of the Popes Dominion over temporal Princes That if Kings and Emperors oppose themselves to him or turn Hereticks he may depose them absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and give away their Kingdoms to whomsoever he pleases This exorbitant Power hath been challenged by the Pope for many successive Ages (h) Dictates of Greg. VII Dictate 9. That all Princes should kiss the Popes Feet Dictate 12. That the Pope may depose the Emperor Dictate 27. That he may absolve the Subjects of wicked Princes from their Allegiance Binius tom 7. part 1. p. 362. Richer l. 1. c. 13. And when opportunity hath serv'd hath been frequently put in practice by them So Gregory VII excommunicated the Emperor Henry IV. and gave away his Kingdoms to Rudolphus Duke of Sweden (i) Baron an 1080. n. 8. 12. Gregory IX excommunicated the Emperor Frederick II. and absolv'd his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance (k) Bullarium Rom. Tom. 1. p. 89 90. Pope Paul III. excommunicated and deposed Henry VIII King of England and commanded all his Subjects under pain of a Curse to withdraw their Obedience from him (l) Bullar Rom. Tom. 1. p. 514. Pope Pius V. and Gregory XIII damn'd and depos'd Q. Elizabeth and absolv'd her Subjects from their Allegiance (m) Camdens Elizabeth This Doctrine and Practice has been defended by their learned Cardinals Baronius and Perron by their School-men Canonists and by the whole Order of Jesuits Yea 't is no more than what was decreed by divers such Councils as are generally own'd for lawful Representatives of their Church As by the third Lateran Council under Pope Alexander III. (n) Cap. 27. Relaxatos autem se noverint à debito Fidelitatis c. And by the fourth Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III. (o) Si vero Dominus temporalis requisitus monitus ab Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit c. Eadem nihilominus lege servata circa eos qui non habent Dominos principales c. 3. And tho some Romanists are now asham'd to own it yet no less a man than Lessius tells us that if Kings may not be deposed by the Pope then of necessity must the General Council of Lateran have err'd But what can be more manifest than that this Doctrine is contradictory to the Holy Scripture Which tells us in express terms that the King is supream (q) 1 Epist Pet. 2. 13. and commands every Soul to be subject to the highest civil Powers (r) Rom. 13. 1. Nothing can be more repugnant to the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers who taught that the Emperor was the supream Power on Earth that he was subject to God only and that all other Persons were put in subjection under him (Å¿) Tertull. Apolog c. 30. ad Scapuâ—â—m c. 2. that neither Prophet
nor Evangelist no nor Apostle and therefore not S. Peter himself was exempt from subjection to him (t) S. Chrysost ad Rom. c. 13. v. 1. And such as their Doctrine was such was their Practice tho their Emperors were Idolaters and implacable Enemies to the name of Christ yet they thought it not in the Popes Power to set them loose from subjection to them Nor did any Pope in those days pretend to such a Power And therefore they chose rather to dye when they had the greatest Provocations to resist and when the number of the Christians was so great that they were able with ease to have vanquish'd their Enemies (u) Cyprian ad Demetrianum 'T is a Doctrine that is contrary to the Confessions and Practice of the antient Bishops of Rome who took the Emperor for their Lord and Master and yielded themselves his most humble and obedient Servants and Subjects So did Pope Gregory the Great (w) Greg. M. Ep. 2. 62. and before Pope Gelasius I. (x) Gelasii Ep. 8. and after him Pope Agatho †Epist ad Constantinum Imp. Actione 4. Syn. 6. Vide etiam Richerium Hist Concil General l. 1. c. 10 S. â— 6. In short 't is a Doctrine that involves the highest Impiety against God the greatest Injustice toward men that subverts the Foundations of Government and is inconsistent with humane Society No man can recount the Usurpations and Rapines the Perjuries and Murders the Treasons and Rebellions the Confusions and Desolations it hath caus'd in the World 4. The next Instance shall be that which was likewise decreed by the Fourth Lateran Council * Cap. 1. viz. the monstrous Doctrine of Transubstantiation For the belief of which there is no better ground in Scripture than that the Church is transubstantiated or that the Rock in the Wilderness was substantially chang'd into Christ because the Church is call'd Christ's Body (y) Ephes 1. 23. and 't is said that the Rock which follow'd the Israelites was Christ (z) 1 Corinth 10. 4. But because 't is confess'd by many of their own learned Writers we may therefore take it for granted that this Doctrine cannot be prov'd by Scripture Yea that it is contrary to it is manifest because we find in Scripture that the Sacramental Elements after the words of Consecration were pass'd are call'd the Bread and the Cup as they were before (a) 1 Corinth 11. 26 27 28. And if we may believe our Saviour the Wine after it was consecrated and made the Blood of the New Testament was no other for substance than the Fruit of the Vine for after he had said This is my Blood of the New Testament he adds But I say unto you that I will not henceforth drink of the Fruit of the Vine c. (b) Matth. 26. 29. That the Fathers for seven hundred years after Christ believ'd the Elements after Consecration to remain the same for substance is beyond all contradiction prov'd by many Protestant Writers particularly in two short Discourses lately written upon this Subject (i) Letter to Lady T. Discourse against Transubstantiation And that the Popes themselves were of the same Belief in the fifth Century is evident For surely says Pope Gelasius the Sacraments we receive of the Body and Blood of Christ are a divine thing for which we are also by them made Partakers of a divine Nature and yet the Substance or Nature of Bread and Wine does not cease to be (k) Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus Corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per tadem divinae efficimur consortes naturae tamen esse non definit substantia vel natura panis vini De duab nat in Christo Biblioth Patr. Tom. 4. Yea so far was Transubstantiation from being the Doctrine of the Primitive Church that we can meet with nothing like it till near the end of the eighth Century and tho as soon as it was started it was vigorously oppos'd by the most learned men of that time yet by the help of the deplorable Ignorance and Superstition of that and the two next succeeding Ages it was by slow degrees nurs'd up and brought to its full growth till at length it came to be establish'd for an Article of Faith in the Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III. in the year 1215. Nor is it only destitute of the Authority of Scripture and the ancient Church but plainly destructive of our whole Religion by subverting the main Foundation upon which it stands For if that be indeed the Flesh of a Man which we see and feel and taste to be Bread what assurance can we have that there ever was any such Man in the World as Jesus of Nazareth or that he ever wrought one Miracle in it The cerrainty of which depends upon the certainty of our Senses and therefore S. John appeals to them as the great unquestionable Proofs of the Truth of our Religion (a) 1 Epist John 1. 1 2 3. We have therefore the same Assurance that Transubstantiation is False as that the Gospel of Christ is True Nor is it more opposite to Sense than Reason the belief of it implying ten thousand Contradictions To which we may add the horrible Impieties it involves That the glorified Body of our Saviour should be contracted to the crum of a Wafer that he should be perfectly depriv'd of Sense and Reason that he should not be able to defend himself against the Assaults of the most contemptible Vermin that he should be swallow'd down whole and if the Stomach of the Communicant chance to be foul or over-charg'd with Wine that he should be vomited up again Good God! what man who is not quite forsaken of Religion Reason and Sense who is not himself transubstantiated into something below either Man or Beast can believe these things 5. That the Marriage of Priests is unlawful This Doctrine the Church of Rome borrow'd from the antient Hereticks especially from the Manichees who allow'd Marriage to their Hearers as the Church of Rome doth to Lay-men but forbad it to their Elect (a) Hic non dubito ves esse clamaturos invidiamque facturos castitatem perfectam vos vehementer commendare atqui laudare non tamen nuptias prohibere quandoquidem Auditores vestri quorum apud vos secundus est gradus ducere atque habere non prohibentur uxores Aug. de moribus Manichaeorum l. 2. c. 18. as that Church doth to her Priests The first Pope we read of that condemned the marriage of Priests was Siricius almost four hundred Years after Christ though he seems by his Epistles if they are indeed his rather to disswade Priests from it than peremptorily to forbid it (b) Epist 1 4. apud Binium Pope Calixtus II. absolutely forbad Priests Marriage and in case they were married commanded them to be separated (c) Presbyâ—eris Diaconis Subdiaconis Monachis concubinas
it was one kind of Quality others that it was another some placed it in the Essence of the Soul some in the Understanding some in Will c. (m) P. 239. And in case the intention of the Priest be necessary then as the Bishop of Minori unanswerably argued in that Council If a Priest having charge of four or five thousand Souls be an Infidel but a formal Hypocrite and in absolving the Penitent baptizing of Children and consecrating the Eucharist have no intention to do what the Church doth it must be said that the Children are damned the Penitent not absolved and that all remain without the Fruit of the Communion (n) History of the Council of Trent l. 2. p. 241. And what an horrible abuse is it to make such things as these Articles of Faith and impose them upon all Men to be believed under peril of Damnation 7. The Doctrine of Merits That the good Works of justified persons be truly meritorious deserve not only the increase of Grace but eternal Life yea an increase of Glory (a) Concil Trident. Sess 6. Can 32. Whereas the Scripture tells us That our goodness extends not to God (b) Psal 16. 2. That not only all that we do But all that we can suffer is not worthy to be compared with the Glory that shall be revealed (c) Rom. 8. 18. That when we have done all those things which are commanded us we are still unprofitable Servants and have done no more than what was our duty (d) Luk. 17. 10 That we can give nothing to God but what we have first received from him that we are obliged to him for the good we do as well as for that we receive since all our good Works are entirely owing to his Grace are the free Gifts of his Holy Spirit who worketh in us both to will and to do (e) Phil. 2. 13. Yea even Reason it self teaches us That whatsoever we are and whatsoever we have it is all received from him that we can give nothing to him that it should be recompenced to us again that the best Services we can perform are no matter of favour but a Debt we owe him and in case they were wholly our own yet if put in the Ballance with that exceeding and eternal weight of glory would be infinitely too light Though therefore we readily grant That our good Works are not only Conditions but necessary Qualifications by which we are made meet to be partakers of the Inheritance of the Saints in light and without which we are not so much as capable of enjoying it though we do not condemn the Word Merit in that large sense in which it was used by the antient Doctors of the Church as it signifies a Work that is praise-worthy and to which God hath promised a Reward as it denotes a Means appointed by God in order to the bringing us to Heaven Yet we can in no wise grant That any Works of ours are truly and in a proper sense meritorious but whatsoever right is thereby acquired to eternal Life it is founded in the gracious Promise of God who hath declared that he will reward our poor and imperfect services with Glory Honour and Immortality 8. Though every sin be in its own nature deadly yet the distinction of sins into Mortal and Venial is in a sense admitted by Protestants viz. If by Mortal be meant such a grievous sin as actually excludes a Man from the favour of God and puts him into a state of Damnation as all those do mentioned 1 Cor. 6. 9 10. and every other wilful sin By Veniul such a lighter sin for which God in the Gospel Covenant makes allowances and which he will not impute to Condemnation to those who sincerely endeavour to do whatsoever he commands as sins of Ignorance and meer Infirmity But this distinction as it is commonly explained and applyed by the Romish Doctors is plainly destructive of a holy Life and one of the greatest encouragements to Vice For a Venial Sin in their Divinity is a Sin that in its own nature is so light and small that it cannot deprive a Man of the favour of God or render him obnoxious to eternal Death (a) Pâ—â—catum aliquod dicitur Veniale ex natura sua propria ratione est illud quod ex se sua natura est tam leve tam minutum ut non valeat aliquem privare â—ratia divina aut facere illum Dei inimicum aut reddeâ—e illum dignum moâ—te â—terna Alphons de Castro advers Haeres l. 12. fol. 210. And if you ask them What Sins in particular these Venial Sins are scarce any Sin can be named but some or other of their most approved Casuists will tell you It is no more than Venial even lying and slandering false witness and Perjury Theft and Covetousness Gluttony and Drunkenness are placed in the Catalogue of these little harmless Sins Now let these Venial Sins be never so numerous the greatest evils which according to their Doctrine they can expose a Man to are no more than the temporary pains of Purgatory and these they tell us may be bought off at so cheap a rate that there is no Man in such unhappy circumstances but he may purchase his release from them And what then remains to give check to a Mans sinful appetites 9. But for their loosness in Venials some may think they have made amends by the severity of their Doctrine concerning Mortal Sins For no Man as their Church teaches can obtain the pardon of these without confession to a Priest and performing the Penances he imposes for them And this Confession must be compleat not only of the kinds but of the particular Sins together with the circumstances which change the kind that a Penance may be enjoined proportionable to them (b) Conâ—il Trident. Sess 14. c. â— de Pâ—nitent Can. 4. 7. But besides that we find no such sort of Confession required by Christ or his Apostles no nor used in the Church for more than four hundred Years But on the contrary that our blessed Saviour proposes pardon of Sin how Mortal soever upon condition of sincere Repentance and new Obedience besides that the thing it self is unpracticable For how shall an ignorant Mechanick know what those circumstances are that change the kind When perhaps his Confessor is not able to tell him How shall he know which Sins are Mortal and which are Venial when their most learned Casuists are at no agreement among themselves about them but that which one says is Mortal another says is no more than Venial and their seraphical Doctor affirms That many Sins are believed to be Venial that are Mortal and it is a most difficult thing to discern the one from the other (c) Multa enim frequenter ereduntur esse Venialia quae Mortalia sunt difficiâ—limum est in talibus discernere Bonavent l. 2. dist 24. par 2. Dub.
of the Law and the Gospel let him be accursed (c) Proinde sive de Christo â—ive de ejus Ecclesâ—s â—ive de â—uacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitaâ—que nostram c. Aug. contra liâ—eras Petil. l. 3. c. 6. 'T is true the Fathers in their Contests with Hereticks do frequently press them with the Tradition of the Catholick Church But then it must be remembered that the Hereticks against whom they disputed were either such as denied the Authority of the whole or a great part of the Scripture or such as insisted upon Tradition and pleaded that in defence of their Errors that therefore they might beat them at their own Weapons the Fathers confuted them by Tradition too But they never set up Tradition as another word of God or sought thereby to establish any thing as an Article of Faith or a piece of necessary Worship that they thought was not to be found in the Scripture As the Church of Rome does which under pretence of Apostolical Tradition obtrudes upon the Christian World as Matters of necessary Belief and Practice such things as are but of yesterday such things as are doubtful and uncertain such as are childish and triâ—â—ing yea such as are false and impious plainly contrary to Scripture and to Primitive Doctrine and Practice That I may not be over tedious I forbear to mention many other Errors in Doctrine and proceed to the next general Head of Corruptions 2. The Church of Rome hath not only err'd in Doctrines of Faith but hath also grosly â—werv'd from that Rule of Worship which Christ hath given us and from the Practice of the Primitive Church and set up a Worship of their own invention in direct opposition thereunto I shall instance in some Particulars First In having their publick Worship in an unknown Tongue This is expresly condemn'd by our Church as a Practice plainly repugnant to the Word of God and to the Custom of the Primitive Church (d) It is a thing plainly repugnant to the â—ord of God and the Custom of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to administer the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the People Aâ—tâ—cles of Religion Anno 1562. Art 24. That it is plainly repugnant to the Word of God no man can be ignorant who knows what is written in the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which the Apostle so directly and with such variety of Arguments confutes this unreasonable Service that 't is as easie to make midnight and noâ—nday meet as to reconcile them one to the other Nor is it less contrary to the Custom of the Primitive Church That in the first Ages of Christianity every Christian Church had the publick Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments in their own Tongue I need not prove by citing the Testimonies of those Persons who liv'd in those Ages because the learned men of the Church of Rome do themselves confess it which is a Proof more convincing than a thousand other Witnesses Out of many which offer themselves I shall produce a few whose Authority is beyond exception Their great Aquinas grants That it was madness in the Primitive Church to speak in a Tongue not understood because they were rude in Ecclesiastical Rites and did not know those things that were done unless they were expounded But now saith he that all are instructed tho all things are spoken in the Latin Tongue they know what is done in the Church (e) Aqâ—in Comment in 1. ad Corinth c. 14. Sect. 5. Cardinal Bellarmine grants That in the Primitive times because the Christians were few all sang together in the Church and answer'd in the divine Offices but afterward the People encreasing it was left to the Clergy alone to perform Prayers and Praises in the Church (f) Bell. de â—erbâ—â—ei â—â—â— c. 16. Mr. Harding to this Exception of the Protestants S. Paul requires that the People give assent to the Priest by answering to his Prayers made in the Congregation returns this answer Verily in the Primitive Church this was necessary when the Faith was a learning and therefore the Prayers were made then in a common Tongue known to the People for cause of their further instruction who being of late converted to the Faith and of Painims made Christians had need in all things to be taught c. And again Whereas S. Paul seemeth to disallow praying with â— strange Tongue in the common Assembly because of want of edifying and to esteem the utterance of five words or Sentences with understanding of his meaning that the rest may be instructed thereby more than ten thousand words in a strange and unknown Tongue all this is to be referned to the State of that time which is much unlike the State of the Church we be now in They needed instruction we be not ignorant of the chief Pâ—ints of Religion They were to be taught in all things we come not to Church specially and chiefly to be taught at the Service but to pray and to be taught by preaching Their Prayer was not available for lack of Faith and therefore was it to be made in the vulgar Tongue for encrease of Faith our Faith will stand us in better stead if we give our selves to devout Prayer g Artic. 3. Divis 28 30. Thus we see he grants that the publick Prayers were in the Apostolical times in the vulgar Tongue and that 't was necessary they should be but nothing can be more false and absurd than the reason he gives why 't was necessary then and not now Add to these the infallible Testimony of Pope Gregory VII who tho he would not permit the Celebration of Divine Offices in the Sclavonian Tongue yet confess'd that the Primitive Church had them in the vulgar Language h History of the Council of Trent l. 6. p. 578. So that by the Confession of the Romanists themselves the Church of England has in this Point no further departed from the Church of Rome than the Church of Rome hath from the ancient Church If they can instance in any Church in the World that for above five hundred years after Christ worship'd God in a Language that the People did not understand we will yield the Cause And may it not justly be matter of amazement that for the serving of some poor worldly ends the Church of Rome should introduce a Practice that renders the Worship of God useless and insignificant That destroys not only the end of Prayer but is inconsistent with the nature of it That is so absurd and unreasonable that S. Paul thought they deserv'd to be reckon'd Mad-men who in such sort pray to God i 1 Cor. 14. 21. So evident is this that many great men of the Church of Rome acknowledge it would be better to have the publick Offices in the vulgar Tongue So Cardinal Cajetan confesses That according to the
Doctrine of S. Paul 't is more for the edification of the Church that the publick Prayers should be said in a Tongue common to the Clergy and People than in Latin k Ex hac Pauli doctrina habetur quod melius est ad edisicationem Ecclesiae orationes publicas quae audiente populo dicuntur dici lingua communi Clericis Populo quam dici latine Comment in c. 14. Ep. 1. ad Corintle And Mr. Harding says I grant they viz. the People cannot say Amen to the Blessing or Thanksgiving of the Priest so well as if they understood the Latin Tongue perfectly l Artic. 3. Divis 29. And Father Paul thought the Latin Service a great Corruption and Abuse as we may see in his History of the Council of Trent m l. 6. In which he also tells us That in the Roman Pontifical there remaineth yet a Form of the Ordination of Readers in the Church in which it is said that they must study to read distinctly and plainly that the People may understand n Ibid. To conclude this upon these and such like Considerations The Emperor at the Council of Trent requir'd That Divine Service might be so said that it might be understood both by him that said it and by him that heard it †History of the Council of Trent p. 513. 2. Another Corruption is the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass The Church of England doth not quarrel at the name of Sacrifice she not only grants but asserts that the Eucharist is a commemorative and representative Sacrifice And this was the meaning of the ancient Fathers who frequently call it a Remembrance or Commemoration a Resemblance or Representation of the Sacrifice which Christ once offer'd upon the Cross o Euseb Demonst Evang. l. r. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Hom. 17. in Epist ad Heb. And this is as much as Cassander seems to mean by it p Cassand Consult Art â— 24. de Sacrificio Corp. sang Christi But this will not satisfie the present Church of Rome but Christ as they will have it is truly and properly sacrificed that is according to their own notion of a Sacrifice Christ is truly and properly put to death as oft as the Priest says Mass For in a true Sacrifice as Bellarmine tells us q De Missa l. 1. c. 2. c. 27. the thing sacrificed must be destroy'd and if it be a thing that hath Life it must be kill'd And so indeâ—d many of the Romanists roundly assert that Christ every day is by the Mass-Priest Which besides that it is contrary to the Doctrine of the ancient Church and to the words of the Apostle who tells us That Jesus Christ offer'd not himself often as the High Priest enter'd into the Holy place every year with the Blood of others for then must he often have suffer'd from the Foundation of the World But now once in the end of the World hath he appear'd to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself And as it is appointed to men once to dye but after this the Judgment so Christ was once offer'd to bear the sins of many r Heb. 9. 25 26 27 28. And again That after Christ had offer'd one Sacrifice for ever he sate down on the right hand of God And that by one Offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified s Heb. 10. 10 12 14. And whereas the Apostle argues the perfection of Christ's Sacrifice above those of the Law because those were offer'd year by year but the Sacrifice of Christ's Body was offer'd once for all If Christ be dayly sacrific'd in the Mass the Sacrifice of Christ must be much more defective than those of the Law for one Sacrifice of Expiation for the whole Congregation of Israel was thought sufficient for the whole year Whereas the Sacrifice of Christ's Body is repeated every day Yea for one single Person he may be sacrificed a thousand times over and this Sacrifice so often repeated and a thousand times more may perhaps be of so little Virtue as not to procure the release of that one poor Soul out of Purgatory Consider further that this is inconsistent with the end they assign of Sacrifice which is to testifie our subjection to God which cannot be done by offering up God himself in Sacrifice for what we offer in Sacrifice we are not subject to but have the disposal of and dominion over it Besides all this 't is a piece of Worship more absurd and impious than was ever practis'd by the most barbarous Heathen they indeed sometimes offer'd their Sons and Daughters in Sacrifice but we never read that they were so sottish as to make a Sacrifice of their God And therefore our Church hath deservedly condemn'd the Sacrifices of Masses as blasphemous Fables and dangerous Deceits (a) Articles of Religion anno 1562. Aâ—t 31. 3. The solitary Mass in which the Priest alone who Consecrates Communicates can no way be reconciled either with the Doctrine and Institution of Christ who when he had broken the Bread gave it to his Disciples and said take ye eat ye and commanded his Disciples to do as he had done Or with the words of S. Paul to the Corinthians who supposes them to meet together to eat the Lord's Body and commands them to stay one for another (b) 1 Cor. 11. 31. And from this meeting the Sacrament was call'd by the Ancients Synaxis the Collection or gathering together of the Faithful as it is by us still call'd the Communion Furthermore 't is inconsistent with the nature and intendment of the Sacrament which is a Feast of Love and design'd to unite us more closely together in brotherly Love one to another by representing to us by our eating together at the same Table and partaking of one and the same Loaf that we all belong to one Family and are Children of one Father 'T is contrary to the Practice of the Apostles and first Christians who were wont to assemble on the first day of the week to break Bread (c) Act. 20. 7. And that it was unknown to the Christian Church for many Ages is freely confess'd by the Romanists themselves Even Bellarmine grants that we no where expresly read that the Sacrifice was offered by the Ancients without some one or more communicating besides the Priest (d) Bell. de Missa l. 2. c. 9. tho 't is true he says we may by many conjectures collect that it was but how weak his Conjectures are will be evident to any man who will be at the pains to read them Harding confesses that in the Primitive Church the People receiv'd every day with the Priest and that private Mass came in afterward by the negligence and indevotion of the People (e) Article 1. Divis 7. Cassander questions whether solitary Mass came not first into use after the days of Gregory the Great that is more than
six hundred years after Christ and shews how at its first rise it was disallow'd and condemn'd not only by particular Persons but by some Councils (f) Cassand Consult de Solit Missis 'T is plain that it was not in use in the Church of Rome in ancient times and that it cannot be reconcil'd with the Roman Office as it now stands in which the Priest prays and gives thanks not only for himself but for the Communicants And what a mockery is it for the Priest to say The Lord be with you lift up your hearts and let us give Thanks to the Lord God when he hath not so much as one that partakes with him And therefore the Church of England hath upon good grounds abolish'd it and ordain'd that there shall be no Celebration of the Lords Supper except there be a convenient number to communicate (g) Rubrick after the Communion 4. Another instance of gross Corruption in Worship is the half Communion That Christ instituted and administer'd the Eucharist under both kinds and that it was likewise so administer'd by the Primitive Church I need not prove because it is expresly granted by the Council of Constance which sacrilegiously forbad the Cup to the Laity For tho saith the Council Christ instituted and administer'd to his Disciples this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of Bread and Wine and although in the Primitive Church it was receiv'd by the Faithful under both kinds yet notwithstanding for the avoiding of some Dangers and Scandals this Custom is upon reasonable grounds introduc'd that it be received by Lay people under the kind of Bread only And then commands that no Priest shall administer it in both kinds to any Lay-man under pain of Excommunication (a) Concil Const Sess 13. It may be presum'd that the Scandals were great and the Reasons weighty that mov'd the Council to make a Decree in plain defiance to Christ's Institution I shall therefore mention them and leave them to the judgment of the Reader John Gerson who was himself present at the Council in a Treatise which he writ in defence of that Decree hath told us they were these 1. The danger of spilling the Wine 2. The danger in carrying it from place to place 3. In defiling the Vessels which ought to be kept as Sacred things by being touch'd and handled by Lay-men 4. In the long Beards of the Lay-men 5. In keeping the consecrated Wine for the use of the Sick because Vinegar may be generated in the Vessel and so the Blood of Christ would cease to be there and pure Vinegar would be administer'd for the Blood of Christ tho by the way if the consecrated Wine be transubstantiated it seems strange that it should degenerate into Vinegar Besides in Summer Flies may be generated and sometimes it may putrefie and become loathsome and some might loath to drink it because many others had drank of it before 6. Wine would be chargeable especially in such places where it is scarce There would be moreover danger of freezing in Winter and there would be further danger in giving occasions many ways to the People to believe that which is false As that Lay-men as to the receiving of the Sacrament are of equal Dignity with Priests (b) Gerson Tract contra haeres de Commun sub utraque specie These were the frightful Dangers and horrible Scandals which they supposed might arise from permitting the Cup to the Laity And is it not strange that such Reasons as these should move the Council to depart from Christ's Institution especially when confirm'd with that emphatical command drink ye all of it (c) Mat. 26. 27 and when that command had been inviolably observ'd not only by the Primitive but by the whole Church both Greek and Latin Eastern and Western for twelve hundred years after Christ For Cardinal Bona grants that the whole Church both Lay and Clergy for about one thousand two hundred years received in both kinds even in the Church of Rome it self (d) De Rebus Liturgicis l. 2. c. 18. p. 491. And Gregory de Valentia tho a Jesuit tells us that the Custom of communicating in one kind began to be generally received even in the Latin Church not long before the Council of Constance (e) Coepit autem ea consuetudo in Ecclesia Latina esse generalis non multo ante tempore Concilii Constanâ—iensis in quo tandem pro lege ab omnibus eam consuetudinem esse habendam decretum est Greg. de Valent. de legitimo usu Eucharist c. 10. which began in the year 1414. And that this Innovation might be remov'd and the whole Sacrament administer'd according to Christ's Institution was earnestly desired not only by Protestants but by many Popish Princes and Churches as is manifest by their requests to that purpose made to the Pope and the Council of Trent The French Embassador besought the Pope in the name of the King the Church and Prelates of France that he would grant the Communion of the Cup to the People (f) History of the Council of Trent l. 5. p. 4â—9 The Duke of Bavaria at the Council of Trent demanded by his Embassador the Administration of the Eucharist under both kinds and that not for the Sectaries sake to reduce them but to retain those who as yet continued in Communion with them The Bavarian was seconded by the Emperors Embassadors who represented to the Council that not only the Kingdom of Bohemia would never be satisfied without the Cup but that there were Catholicks in Hungaria Austria Moravia Silesia Carinthia Carniola Stiria Bavaria Suevia and other parts of Germany who desired the Cup with great Zeal that therefore his Majesty demanded it not for the Hereticks but for the Catholicks only (g) P. 528 529. Tho these already mentioned are Corruptions which loudly called for a Reformation yet behold greater Abominations than these As 5. The giving Divine Worship to the consecrated Bread in the Eucharist This the Church of England hath declared to be abominable Idolatry (h) The Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural Substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhor'd of all faithful Christians Rubrick after the Communion And that it can be no less is granted by many learned men of the Church of Rome in case the Bread and Wine after Consecration be not really changed into the natural Body and Blood of Christ but remain the very same for substance that they were before And that there is no substantial Change wrought in them we are fully assured by Sense by Reason by Scripture and by the Authority of the ancient Church and if these are not sufficient Grounds of assurance we can be assured of nothing but for ought we know even we our selves and all that is in the World may be nothing but Phantasm and Delusion But suppose that upon due Consecration of the
Witnessing to become Vertues Which is indeed no more than the Church of Rome does For to break Faith with Hereticks to rob and falsely accuse them yea and to murther them too are in their Divinity great Virtues and necessary Duties So far were the Primitive Christians from worshipping of Images that many of the most learned of them thought it was a sin so much as to make them and others who did not scruple the making them yet thought it unlawful to have them in Churches though for no other use than Ornament And when some in the fourth Century thought they might be permitted in Churches they notwithstanding abhorred the thoughts of giving any manner of Worship to them All which are so fully proved by learned Men of our own Church (b) Bishop Taylor Dr. Stillingfleet c. that I forbear to insist upon them Though it is a matter that needs not proof because it is confessed by Cassander That the antient Christians had a great abhorrency for all Veneration of Images (c) Cassand Consult Art 21 It is certain the Pope himself was an enemy to Image-Worship for six hundred Years after Christ for Gregory the Great to a certain Recluse who desired the Image of Christ expresly answered That Images were not to be worshipped And in his Epistle to Serenus Bishop of Marseilles though he blame him for breaking the Images in pieces yet he praises him for that he would not suffer them to be worship'd he thought they might be of use for the instruction of the Ignorant but would not endure that they should be adored For it is one thing saith he to adore a Picture another thing to learn by the History of the Picture what is to be adored If any Man will make Images do not forbid him but by all means avoid the worshipping of them (e) l 9. Epist 9 But after that they were once brought into Churches Men came by little and little to worship them till at length it was established for a Law in the second Council of Nice that they were to be set up in Churches to the end that they might be worshipped and that with true and proper Worship and all those were anathemized who durst say the contrary which Decree was confirmed by the fourth Council at Constantinople and afterwards by the Council of Trent And though the Worship decreed by that Council was of an inferior nature yet in process of time it was advanced by the Church of Rome to that supreme Worship which is proper to God himself For before Luther's time the approved Doctrine of that Church was That the very same Worship was to be given to the Image that was to be given to the person represented by it and therefore to the Images of God and of Christ the Worship of Latria that is That Worship which belongs to God over all blessed for ever And such as their Doctrine was such was their Practice insomuch that Cassander complains That their Worship of Images and their vanity in making and adorning them was nothing inferior to that of the Heathens (f) Consult Cassand Art 21. de Imagin Simulachris We may add If there was any difference between Heathen and Christian Rome it seems to be this that the latter hath outdone the former in this piece of Idolatry Add to this 8. Their solemn Prayers to Saints departed and that not to intercede for them but to bestow upon them those Temporal and Spiritual Blessings they stand in need of which was the practice of the Church of Rome and made a part both of their private and publick Devotions long before the Reformation Now were it so good and profitable to invoke the Saints as the Council of Trent teaches it is strange that so great a Lover of Mankind as S. Paul when he so frequently commands us to pray and hath left so many directions concerning Prayer should wholly forget to teach us this Lesson Can it be supposed a Worship so pleasing to God when God hath not given us the least intimation in his Word that it is so For that it hath no foundation in Scripture we may be assured when so great a Man of the Church of Rome as Cardinal Pâ—rron acknowledges that neither Precept nor Example is there to be found for it and when other learned Doctors of that Church not only confess the same but also give us several Reasons why no mention is made of it either in the Old or New Testament But this is not all There is not only nothing in Scripture for it but much against it For we are there frequently taught to offer up our Prayers to God alone through that one Mediator between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus And had the Fathers been of opinion that Saints might be invoked could they have thought the Invocation of Christ a good Argument to prove his Divinity Would they have accused the Arians of Idolatry for worshipping him because they supposed him to be no more than a Creature Could they be so sottish as to deride the Heathens for worshipping dead men had they themselves worshipped such And would not the Heathens have retorted their Sarcasms When Heathens and Jews both so often reproached the Christians for worshipping one that was crucified had they worshipped not only him but his Apostles and Disciples too would they not much more have reproached them for that But what need of Arguments to prove it when the Fathers themselves plainly tell us that they made their Prayers to God alone (b) Clemens Alexand. Stromat l. 7. p. 721. Paris Edit 1629. Tertull. Apol. c. 30. Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 8. c. 27. 'T is unreasonable to say that the Fathers speak of supream Worship only which the Romanists themselves reserve to God while they allow an inferior Worship to others Because they were not aware of any such difference of Worship All religious Worship was in their account such as was due to God alone The distinctions of worship into supream and subordinate absolute and relative terminative and transient as they have no foundation in Scripture so the Christians of the first Ages were ignorant of they having no such different objects of Religious Worship to which these different Degrees were to be suited And forasmuch as the Romanists themselves make sacrifice proper to God it seems very absurd to make Prayer common to him with others For Sacrifices were not only accompanied with vocal Prayers and Thanksgivings but were themselves real Prayers and Praises they being sacred Rites by which they offered up their Petitions and Thanks to God as their very names Euctical and Eucharistical teach us And when Prayer and Sacrifice are considered apart and compared the one with the other God sets the higher value upon Prayer and desires that rather than Sacrifice (c) Psalm 50. If therefore Sacrifice be a Worship peculiar to God it follows à fortiori that Prayer must be so too As will be