Canonical punishments they expected they should perform what was enjoyn'd them formerly But because all sin is a blot to a mans soul and a foul stain to his reputation we demaud in what does this stain consist In the guilt or in the punishment If it be said that it consists in the punishment then what does the guilt signifie when the removing of it does neither remove the stain nor the punishment which both remain and abide together But if the stain and the guilt be all one or always together then when the guilt is taken away there can no stain remain and if so what need is there any more of Purgatory For since this is pretended to be necessary onely lest any stain'd or unclean thing should enter into Heaven if the guilt and the pain be removed what uncleanness can there be left behind Indeed Simon Magus as Epiphanius reports Haeres 20. did teach That after the death of the body there remain'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a purgation of souls But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an Authentick Doctor themselves can best tell 3. It relies upon this also That God requires of us a full exchange of penances and satisfactions which must regularly be paid here or hereafter even by them who are pardon'd here which if it were true we were all undone 4. That the Death of Christ his Merits and Satisfaction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye nor as it may happen of a long time after All which being Propositions new and uncertain invented by the School Divines and brought ex post facto to dress this opinion and make it to seem reasonable and being the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace of the righteousness of Faith and the infinite value of Christs Death must needs lay a great prejudice of novelty upon the Doctrine it self which but by these cannot be supported But to put it past suspition and conjectures Roffensis and Polydore Virgil affirm That who so searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers shall find that none or very rarely any one of them ever makes mention of Purgatory and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it But for the Catholick Church it was but lately known to her But before we say any more in this Question we are to premonish That there are Two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity The first is That the Ancient Churches in their Offices and the Fathers in their Writings did teach and practice respectively prayer for the dead Now because the Church of Rome does so too and more than so relates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory and for the souls there detain'd her Doctors vainly suppose that when ever the Holy Fathers speak of prayer for the dead that they conclude for Purgatory which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable For it is true the Fathers did pray for the dead but how That God would shew them mercy and hasten the resurrection and give a blessed sentence in the great day But then it is also to be remembred that they made prayers and offered for those who by the◠confession of all sides never were in Purgatory even for the Patriarchs and Prophets for the Apostles and Evangelists for Martyrs and Confessors and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary So we find it in Epiphanius St. Cyril and in the Canon of the Greeks and so it is acknowledged by their own Durantus and in their Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of St. Leo Of which because by their latter doctrines they grew asham'd they have chang'd the prayer for him into a prayer to God by the intercession of St. Leo in behalf of themselves so by their new doctrine making him an Intercessor for us who by their old doctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him of which Pope Innocent being ask'd a reason makes a most pitiful excuse Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed and indeed generally for all it is not now seasonable to discourse but to say this onely that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd the Church of England never did condemn by any express Article but left it in the middle and by her practice declares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead and her interest in the communion of Saints and that the Saints departed are a portion of the Catholick Church parts and members of the Body of Christ but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead infers the belief of Purgatory every man may satisfie himself by seeing the Writings of the Fathers where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause for praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place Which thing is so certain that in the very Roman Offices we mean the Vigils said for the dead which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture speaking of the miseries of this World Repentance and Reconciliation with God the bliss after this life of them that die in Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead and in the Anthemes Versicles and Responses there are prayers made recommending to God the Soul of the newly defunct praying he may be freed from Hell and eternal death that in the day of Iudgment he be not judged and condemned according to his sins but that he may appear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection but not one word of Purgatory or its pains The other cause of their mistake is That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of Iudgment and it is such a fire that destroys the Doctrine of the intermedial Purgatory We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it and so S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion for it was no more so does S. Basil S. Hilary S. Hierom and Lactantius as their words plainly prove as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis affirming that all men Christ only excepted shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgment even the Blessed Virgin her self is to pass through this fire There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers which greatly destroys the Roman Purgatory Sixtus Senensis says and he says very true that Iustin Martyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and S. Bernard did all affirm that before the day of Judgment the souls of men are kept in secret receptacles reserved unto the sentence of the great day and that before then no man receives according to his works done in this life We do not interpose in
this opinion to say that it is true or false probable or improbable for these Fathers intended it not as a matter of faith or necessary belief so far as we find But we observe from hence that if their opinion be true then the Doctrine of Purgatory is false If it be not true yet the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory which is inconsistent with this so generally receiv'd opinion of the Fathers is at least new no Catholick Doctrine not believ'd in the Primitive Church and therefore the Roman Writers are much troubled to excuse the Fathers in this Article and to reconcile them to some seeming concorâ— with their new Doctrine But besides these things it is certain that the Doctrine of Purgatory before the day of Judgment in S. Augustins time was not the Doctrine of the Church it was not the Catholick Doctrine for himself did doubt of it Whether it be so or not it may be inquir'd and possibly it may be found so and possibly it may never so S. Augustine In his time therefore it was no Doctrine of the Church and it continued much longer in uncertainty for in the time of Otho Frisingensis who liv'd in the year 1146. it was gotten no further than to a Quidam asserunt some do affirm that there is a place of Purgatory after death And although it is not to be denied but that many of the ancient Doctors had strange opinions concerning Purgations and Fires and Intermedial states and common receptacles liberations of Souls and Spirits after this life yet we can truly affirm it and can never be convinc'd to err in this affirmation that there is not any one of the Ancients within five hundred years whose opinion in this Article throughout the Church of Rome at this day follows But the people of the Roman Communion have been principally led into a belief of Purgatory by their fear and by their credulity they have been softned enâ—ic'd into this belief by perpetual tales and legends by which they love to be abus'd To this purporse their Priests and Friers have made great use of the apparition of S. Hierom after death to Eusebius commanding him to lay his sack upon the corps of three dead men that they arising from death might confess Purgatory which formerly they had denied The story is written in an Epistle impuâ—ed to S. Cyril but the ill-luck of it was that S. Hierom out-lived S. Cyril anâ— wrote his life and so confuted thaâ— story but all is one for that they believe it never the less But theâ—â— are enough to help it out and if theâ— be not firmly true yet if they bâ— firmly believ'd all is well enough 〈◊〉 the Speculum exemplorum it is said That a certain Priest in an extasie saw the soul of Constantinus Turritanus in the eves of his house tormented with frosts and cold rains and afterwards climbing up to heaven upon a shining pillar And a certain Monk saw some souls roasted upon spits like Pigs and some Devils basting them with scalding lard but a while after they were carried to a cool place and so prov'd Purgatory But Bishop Theobald standing upon a piece of ice to cool his feet was nearer Purgatory than he was aware and was convinc'd of it when he heard a poor soul telling him that under that ice he was tormented and that he should be delivered if for thirty days continual he would say for him thirty Masses and some such thing was seen by Conrade and Udalric in a Pool of water For the place of Purgatory was not yet resolv'd on till S. Patrick had the key of it delivered to him which when one Nicholas borrowed of him he saw as strange and true things there as ever Virgil dreamed of in his Purgatory or Cicero in his dream of Scipio or Plato in his Gorgias or Phaedo who indeed are the surest Authors to prove Purgatory But because to preach false stories was forbidden by the Council of Trent there are yet remaining more certain arguments even revelations made by Angels and the testimony of S. Odilio himself who heard the Devil complain and he had great reason surely that the souls of dead men were daily snatch'd out of his hands by the Alms and Prayers of the living and the sister of S. Damianus being too much pleas'd with hearing of a Piper told her brother that she was to be tormented for fifteen days in Purgatory We do not think that the wise men in the Church of Rome believe these Narratives for if they did they were not wise But this we know that by such stories the people were brought into a belief of it and having served their turn of them the Master-builders used them as false arches and centries taking them away when the parts of the building were made firm and stable by Authority But even the better sort of them do believe or else they do worse for they urge and cite the Dialogues of S. Gregory the Oration of S. Iohn Damascen de Defunctis the Sermons of Saint Augustine upon the Feast of the Commemoration of All-souls which nevertheless was instituted after S. Augustins death and divers other citations which the Greeks in their Apology call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— The Holds and the Castles the corruptions and insinuations of Heretical persons But in this they are the less to be blamed because better arguments than they have no men are tied to make use of But against this way of proceeding we think fit to admonish the people of our charges that besides that the Scriptures expresly forbid us to enquire of the dead for truth the Holy Doctors of the Church particularly Tertul. S. Athanasius S. Chrysost. Isido and Theophylact deny that the souls of the dead ever do appear and bring many reasons to prove that it is unfitting they should saying if they did it would be the cause of many errors and the Devils under that pretence might easily abuse the world with notices and revelations of their own And because Christ would have us content with Moses and the Prophets and especially to hear that Prophet whom the Lord our God hath raised up amongst us our Blessed Jesus who never taught any such Doctrine to his Church But because we are now representing the Novâ—lty of this Doctrine and proving that anciently it was not the Doctrine of the Church nor at all esteemed a matter of faith whether there was or was not any such place or state we add this That the Greek Church did always dissent from the Latines in this particular since they had forg'd this new Doctrine in the laboratories of Rome and in the Council of Basil publish'd an Apology directly disapproving the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory How afterwards they were press'd in the Council of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half consent put into the
amongst them have made can be entred into the records of Councils and publick decrees In these cases we are to consider who teaches them Their Gravest Doctors in the face of the Sun under the intuition of Authority in the publick conduct of souls in their allowed Sermons in their books licens'd by a curious and inquisitive authority not passing from them but by warranty from several hands intrusted to examine them ne fides Ecclesiae aliquid detrimenti patiatur that nothing be publish'd but what is consonant to the Catholick faith And therefore these things cannot be esteem'd private opinions especially since if they be yet they are the private opinions of them all and that we understand to be publick enough and are so their Doctrine as what the Scribes and Pharisees taught their Disciples though the whole Church of the Jews had not pass'd it into a law So this is the Roman Doctrine though not the Roman law Which difference we desire may be observ'd in many of the following instances that this objection may no more interpose for an escape or an excuse But we shall have occasion again to speak to it upon new particulars But this though it be infinitely intolerable yet it is but the beginning of sorrows For the guides of Souls in the Roman Church have prevaricated in all the parts of Repentance most sadly and dangerously The next things therefore that we shall remark are their Doctrines concerning contrition which when it is genuine and true that is a true cordial sorrow for having sinn'd against God a sorrow proceeding from the love of God and conversion to him and ending in a dereliction of all our sins and a walking in all righteousness both the Psalms and the Prophets the Old Testament and the New the Greek Fathers and the Latin have allowed as sufficient for the pardon of our sins through faith in Jesus Christ as our Writers have often prov'd in their Sermons and books of Conscience yet first the Church of Rome does not allow it to be of any value unless it be joyn'd with a desire to confess their sins to a Priest saying that a man by contrition is not reconcil'd to God without their Sacramental or Ritual penance actual or votive and this is decreed by the Council of Trent which thing besides that it is against Scripture and the promises of the Gospel and not only teaches for Doctrine the Commandments of Men but evacuates the goodness of God by their traditions and weakens and discourages the best repentance and prefers repentance towards men before that which the Scripture calls Repentance towards God and faith in our Lord Iesus Christ. But the malignity of this Doctrine and its influence it hath on an evil life appears in the other corresponding part of this Doctrine For as contrition without their ritual and sacramental confession will not reconcile us to God so attrition as they call it or contrition imperfect proceeding from fear of damnation together with their Sacrament will reconcile the sinner Contrition without it will not attrition with it will reconcile us and therefore by this doctrine which is expresly decreed aâ— Trent there is no necessity of Contrition at all and attrition is as good to all intents and purposes of pardon and a little repentance will prevail as well as the greatest the imperfect as well as the perfect So Guâ—lielmus de Rubeo explains this doctrine He that confesses his sins grieving but a little obtains remission of his sins by the Sacrament of Penance ministred to him by the Priest absolving him So that although God working Contrition in a penitent hath not done his work for him without the Priests absolution in desire at least yet if the Priest do his part he hath done the work for the penitent though God had not wrought that excellent grace of contrition in the penitent But for the contrition it self it is a good word but of no severity or affrightment by the Roman Doctrine One contrition one act of it though but little and remiss can blot out any even the greatest sin always understanding it in the sense of the Church that is in the Sacrament of Penance saith Cardinal Tolet. A certain little inward grief of mind is requir'd to the perfection of Repentance said Maldonat And to Contrition a grief in general for all our sins is sufficient but it is not necessary to grieve for any one sin more than another said Franciscus de Victoriâ The greatest sin and the smallest as to this are all alike and as for the Contrition it self any intension or degrâ—e whatsoever in any instant whatsoever is sufficient to obtain mercy and remission said the same Author Now let this be added to the former and the sequel is this That if a man live a wicked life for threescore or â—ourscore years together yet if in the article of his death sooner than which God hath not commanded him to repent he be a little sorrowful for his sins then resolving for the present that he will do so no more and though this sorrow hath in it no love of God but onely a fear of Hell and a hope that God will pardon him this if the Priest absolves him does instantly pass him into a state of salvation The Priest with two fingers and a thumb can do his work for him onely he must be greatly dispos'd and prepar'd to receive it Greatly we say according to the sense of the Roman Church for he must be attrite or it were better if he were contrite one act of grief a little one and that not for one sin more than another and this at the end of a long wicked life at the time of our death will make all sure Upon these terms it is a wonder that all wicked men in the world are not Papists where they may live so merrily and die so securely and are out of all danger unless peradventure they die very suddenly which because so very few do the venture is esteem'd nothing and it is a thousand to one on the sinners side Sect. II. WE know it will be said That the Roman Church enjoyns Confession and imposes Penances and these are a great restraint to sinners and gather up what was scattered before The reply is easie but it is very sad For 1. For Confession It is true to them who are not us'd to it as it is at the first time and for that once it is as troublesom as for a bashful man to speak Orations in publick But where it is so perpetual and universal and done by companies and crouds at a solemn set time and when it may be done to any one besides the Parish-Priest to a Friar that begs or to a Monk in his Dorter done in the ear it may be to a person that hath done worse and therefore hath no awe upon me but what his Order imprints and his Viciousness takes off when we see Women and Boys
to impiety is a stock and fountain of temptations and these which we have reckon'd in the matter of Repentance having influence upon the whole life are yet much greater by corrupting the whole mass of Wisdom and Spiritual Propositions There are indeed many others We shall name some of them but shall not need much to insist on them Such as are 1. That one man may satisfie for another It is the general Doctrine of their Church The Divines and Lawyers consent in it and publikely own it The effect of which is this that some are made rich by it and some are careless But qui non solvit in aere luat in corpore is a Canonical rule and though it was spoken in the matter of publick penances and so relates to the exterior Court yet it is also practis'd and avowed in satisfactions or penances relating to the inward Court of Conscience and penance Sacramental and the rich man is made negligent in his duty and is whip'd upon another mans back and his purse onely is the Penitent and which is worst of all here is a pretence of doing that which is too neer blasphemy but to say For by this Doctrine it is not to be said of Christ alone that he was wounded for our transgressions that he onely satisfied for our sins for in the Church of Rome it is done frequently and pretended daily that by another mans stripes we are healed 2. They teach That a habit of sin is not a sin distinct from those former actions by which the habit was contracted The secret intention of which Proposition and the malignity of it consists in this that it is not necessary for a man to repent speedily and a man is not bound by repentance to interrupt the procedure of his impiety or to repent of his habit but of the single acts that went before it For as for those that come after they are excus'd if they be produc'd by a strong habit and the greater the habit the less is the sin But then as the repentance need not for that reason be hasty and presently so because it is onely to be of single acts the repentance it self need not be habitual but it may be done in an instant whereas to mortifie a habit of sin which is the true and proper repentance there is requir'd a longer time and a procedure in the methods of a holy life By this and such like Propositions and careless Sentences they have brought it to that pass that they reckon a single act of Contrition at any time to be sufficient to take away the wickedness of a long life Now that this is the avowed Doctrine of the Roman Guides of souls will sufficiently appear in the Writings of their chiefeâ—t of which no learned man can be ignorant The thing was of late openly and professedly disputed against us and will not be denied And that this Doctrine is infinitely destructive of the necessity of a good life cannot be doubted of when themselves do own the proper consequents of it even the unnecessariness of present repentance or before the danger of death of which we have already given accounts But the reason why we remark it here is that which we now mention'd because that by the Doctrine of vitious habits having in them no malignity or sin but what is in the single preceding acts there is an excuse made for millions of sins For if by an evil habit the sinner is not made worse and more hated by God and his sinful acts made not onely more but more criminal it will follow that the sins are very much lessened For they being not so voluntary in their exercise and distinct emanation are not in present so malicious and therefore he that hath gotten a habit of drunkenness or swearing sins less in every act of drunkenness or profane oath than he that acts them seldom because by his habit he is more inclin'd and his sins are almost natural less considered less chosen and not disputed against but pass by inadveâ—tency and an untroubled consent easily and promptly and almost naturally from that principle So that by this means and in such cases when things are come to this pass they have gotten an imperfect warrant to sin a great deal and a great while without any new great inconvenience Which evil state of things ought to be infinitely avoided by all Christians that would be sav'd by all means and therefore all such Teachers and all such Doctrines are carefully to be declin'd who give so much easiness not onely to the remedies but to the sins themselves But of this we hope it may be sufficient to have given this short warning 3. The distinction of Mortal and Venial sins as it is taught in the Church of Rome is a great cause of wickedness and careless conversation For although we do with all the ancient Doctors admit of the distinction of sins Mortal and Venial yet we also teach That in their own nature and in the rigor of the Divine Justice every sin is damnable and deserves Gods anger and that in the unregenerate they are so accounted and that in Hell the damned suffer for small and great in a common mass of torment yet by the Divine mercy and compassion the smaller sins which come by surprize or by invincible ignorance or inadvertency or unavoidable infirmity shall not be imputed to those who love God and delight not in the smallest sin but use caution and prayers watchfulness and remedies against them But if any man delights in small sins and heaps them into numbers and by deliberation or licentiousness they grow numerous or are in any sense chosen or taken in by contempt of the Divine Law they do put us from the favour of God and will pass into severe accounts And though sins are greater or less by comparison to each other yet the smallest is a burthen too great for us without the allowances of the Divine mercy But the Church of Rome teaches that there is a whole kind of sins which are venial in their own nature such which if they were all together all in the world conjoyn'd could not equal one mortal sin nor destroy charity nor put us from the favour of God such for which no man can perish etiam si nullum pactum esset de remissione though Gods merciful Covenant of Pardon did not intervene And whereas Christ said Of every idle word a man shall speak he shall give account at the day of judgement and By your words ye shall be justified and By your words ye shall be condemned Bellarmine expresly affirms It is not intelligible how an idle word should in its own nature be worthy of the Eternal wrath of God and Eternal flames Many other desperate words are spoken by the Roman Doctors in this Question which we love not to aggravate because the main thing is acknowledged by them all But now we appeal to the reason and