God who will not be worshipped by an Image we say that besides all this This whole Doctrine and practise is an innovation in the Christian Church not practis'd not endured in the primitive ages but expresly condemned by them and this is our present undertaking to evince The first notice we find of Images brought into Christian Religion was by Simon Magus indeed that was very Ancient but very heretical and abominable but that he brought some in to be worshipped we find in Theodoret and S. Austin S. Irenaeus tells That the Gnosticks or Carpocrations did make images and said that the form of Christ as he was in the flesh was made by Pilate and these Images they worshipped as did the Gentiles These things they did but against these things the Christians did zealously and piously declare We have no Image in the world said S. Clemens of Alexandria It is apparently forbidden to us to exercise that deceitful art For it is written Thou shalt not make any similitude of any thing in Heaven above c. And Origen wrote a just Treatise against Celsus in which he not onely affirms That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion but that they ought not and were by God forbidden to do so To the same purpose also Lactantius discourses to the Emperor and confutes the pretences and little answers of the Heathen in that manner that he leaves no pretence for Christians under another cover to introduce the like abomination We are not ignorant that those who were converted from Gentilism and those who lov'd to imitate the customs of the Roman Princes and people did soon introduce the Historical use of Images and according to the manner of the world did think it honourable to depict or make Images of those whom they had in great esteem and that this being done by an esteem relying on Religion did by the weakness of men and the importunity of the Tempter quickly pass into inconvenience and superstition yet even in the time of Iulian the Emperor S. Cyril denies that the Christians did give veneration and worship to the Image even of the Cross it self which was one of the earliest temptations and S. Epiphanius it is a known story tells that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture as it were of Christ or some Saint in the Church against the Authority of Scripture He cut it in pieces and advis'd that some poor man should be buried in it affirming that such Pictures are against Religion and unworthy of the Church of Christ. The Epistle was translated into Latine by S. Hierome by which we may guess at his opinion in the question The Council of Eliberis is very ancient and of great fame in which iâ— is expresly forbidden that what is worshipped should be depicted on the walls and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches S. Austin complaining that he knew oâ— many in the Church who were Worshippers of Pictures calls them Superstitious and addes that the Church condemns such customs and strives to correct them and S. Gregory writing to Serenus Bishop of Massilia says he would not have had him to break the Pictures and Images which were there set for an historical use but commends him for prohibiting any one to worship them and enjoyns him still to forbid it But Superstition by degrees creeping in the Worship of Images was decreed in the seventh Synod or the second Nicene But the decrees of this Synod being by Pope Adrian sent to Charls the Great he convocated a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francfurt who discussed the Acts pass'd at Nice and condemn'd them And the Acts of this Synod although they were diligently suppressed by the Popes arts yet Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus Blondus Adon Aymonius â—and Regino famons Historians tell us That the Bishops of Francfurt condemn'd the Synod of Nice and commanded it should not be called a General Council and published a Book under the name of the Emperor confuting that unchristian Assembly and not long since this Bookâ— and the Acts of Francfurt â— were published by Bishop Tillius by which not onely the infinite fraud of the Roman Doctors is discover'd but the worship of Images is declar'd against and condemned A while after this Ludovicus the son of Charlemain sent Claudius a famous Preacher to Taurinum in Italy where he preach'd against the worshipping of Images and wrote an excellent book to that purpose Against this book Ionas Bishop of Orleans after the death of Ludovicus and Claudius did write In which he yet durst not assert the worship of them but confuted it out of Origen whose words he thus cites Images are neither to be esteemed by inward affection nor worshipped with outward shew and out of Lactantius these Nothing is to be worshipped that is seen with mortal eyes Let us adore let us worship nothing but the name alone of our onely Parent who is to be sought for in the Regions above not here below And to the same purpose he also alleges excellent words out of Fulgentius and S. Hierom and though he would have Images retain'd and therefore was angry at Claudius who caus'd them to be taken down yet he himself expresly affirms that they ought not to be worshipped and withall adds that though they kept the Images in their Churches for history and ornament yet that in France the worshipping of them was had in great detestation And though it is not to be denied but that in the sequel of Ionas his book he does something prevaricate in this question yet it is evident that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for almost nine hundred years after Christ and in Germany it was condemned for almost MCC years as we find in Nicetas We are not unskill'd in the devices of the Roman Writers and with how much artifice they would excuse this whole matter and palliate the crime imputed to them and elude the Scriptures expresly condemning this Superstition But we know also that the arts of Sophistry are not the ways of Salvation And therefore we exhort our people to follow the plain words of Scripture and the express Law of God in the second Commandment and add also the exhortation of S. Iohn Little children keep your selves from Idols To conclude it is impossible but that it must be confessed that the worship of Images was a thing unknown to the primitive Church in the purest times of which they would not allow the making of them as amongst divers others appears in the Writings of Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen Sect. IX AS an Appendage to this we greatly reprove the custom of the Church of Rome in picturing God the Father and the most holy and undivided Trinity which besides that iâ— ministers infinite scandal to all sober minded men and gives the new Arrians in Polonia and Antitrinitarians great and ridiculous entertainment
The Church of Rome teaches Doctrinesâ— which in many things are destructive of Christian Society in general and oâ— Monarchy in special Both which the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland does by her Doctrines greatly and Christianly support 260 A DISSUASIVE FROM POPERY To the People of IRELAND The Introduction THe Questions of difference between Our Churches and the Church of Rome have been so often disputed and the evidences both sides so often produc'd that those who are strangers to the present constitution of affairs it may seem very unnecessary to say them over again and yet it will seem almost imâ—impossible to produce any new matter or if we could it will not be probable that what can be newly alleged can prevail more than all that which already hath been so often urged in these Questions But we are not deterr'd from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the same medicaments are with successe applyed to a returning or an abiding Ulcer and the Preachers of Gods word must for ever be ready to put the People in mind of such things which they already have heard and by the same Scriptures and the same reasons endeavour to destroy their sin oâ— prevent their danger and by the same word of God to extirpate those errors which have had opportunity in the time of our late disorders to spring up and grow stronger not when the Keepers of the field slept but when they were wounded and their hands cut ofâ—â— and their mouths stopp'd lest they should continue or proceed to do the work of God thoroughly A little warm Sun and some indulgent showers of a softer rain have made many weeds of erroneous Doctrine to take root greatly and to spread themselves widely and the Bigots of the Roman Church by their late importune boldness and indiscreet frowardness in making Proselytes have but too manifestly declar'd to all the World that if they were rerum potiti â— Masters of our affairs they would suffer nothing to grow but their own Colocynths and Gourds And although the Natural remedy for this were to take away that impunity upon the account of which alone they do encrease yet because we shall never be Authors of such Counsels but confidently rely upon God the Holy Scriptures right reason and the most venerable and prime Antiquity which are the proper defensatives of truth for its support and maintenance yet we must not conceal from the People committed to our charges the great evils to which they are tempted by the Roman Emissaries that while the King and the Parliament take care to secure all the publick interests by instruments of their own we also may by the word of our proper Ministery endeavour to stop the progression of such errors which we know to be destructive of Christian Religion and consequently dangerous to the interest of souls In this procedure although we shall say some things which have not been alwayes plac'd before their eyes and others we shall represent with a fittingness to their present necessities and all with Charity too and zeal for their souls yet if we were to say nothing but what hath been often said already we are still doing the work of God and repeating his voice and by the same remedies curing the same diseases and we only wait for the blessing of God prospering that importunity which is our duty according to the avice of Solomon In the Morning sow thy seed and in the Evening withhold not thy hand for thou knowest not whether shall prosper either this or that or whether they both shall be alike good CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Roman Church in the Controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive Sect. I. IT was the challenge of St. Augustine to the Donatists who as the Church of Rome does at this day inclos'd the Catholick Church within their own circuits Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel it self or out of the Letters of the Apostles Read it thence and we believe it Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith the Old and New Testament the words of Christ and the words of the Apostles For nothing else can be the Foundation of our Faith whatsoever came in after these for is est it belongs not unto Christ. To these we also add not as Authors or Finishers but as helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the Senâ—iments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God in the Ages next after the Apostles Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private opinion even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr but that we all acknowledge that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of Doctrine and sound words which was at first delivered to the Saints and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosom of Christ and seal'd the true faith with their lives and with their deaths and by both gave testimony unto Jesus and had from him the testimony of his Spirit And this method of procedure we now choose not only because to them that know well how to use it to the Sober and the Moderate the Peaceable and the Wise it is the best the most certain visible and tangible most humble and satisfactory but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity Indeed the present Roman Doctrines which are in difference were invisible and unheard-of in the first and best antiquity and with how ill success their quotations are out of the Fathers of the first three Ages every inquiring Man may easily discern But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages where secular interest did more prevail and the writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of controversie and ambiguous senses fitted to their own times and questions full of proper opinions and such variety of sayings that both sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring sayings for themselves respectively Now although things being thus it will be impossible for them to conclude from the sayings of a number of Fathers that their doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alleged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then matter of faith or a Doctrine of the Church for if it had these had been Hereticks accounted and not have remain'd
Instrument of Union how they were yet constrain'd to it by their Chiefs being obnoxious to the Pope how a while after they dissolv'd that Union and to this day refuse to own this Doctrine are things so notoriously known that they need no further declaration We add this only to make the conviction more manifest We have thought fit to annex some few but very clear testimonies of Antiquity expresly destroying the new Doctrine of Purgatory S. Cyprian saith Quando istinc excessum fuerit nullus jam locus poenitentiae est nullus satisfaction is effectus When we are gone from hence there is no place left for repentance and no effect of satisfaction S. Dionysius calls the extremity of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The end of all our agonies and affirms That the Holy men of God rest in joy and in never failing hopes and are come to the end of their holy combates S. Iustin Martyr affirms That when the soul is departed from the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserv'd but the souls of the just into Paradise where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels S. Ambrose saith that Death is a haven of rest and makes not our condition worse but according as it finds every man sort reserves him to the judgement that is to come The same is affirm'd by S. Hilary S. Macarius and divers others they speak but of two states after death of the just and the unjust These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgement of the great day the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of rest S. Gregory Nazianzen expresly affirms that after this life there is no purgation For after Christs ascension into Heaven the souls of all Saints are with Christ saith Gennadius and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the Catholick Church In what place soever a man is taken at his death of light or darkness of wickedness or vertue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠in the same order and in the same degree either in light with the just and with Christ the great King or in darkness with the uujust and with the Prince of Darkness said Olimpiodorus And lastly we recite the words of S. Leo one of the Popes of Rome speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord being interrupted by any obstacles falls from the gift of the present Indulgence viz. of Ecclesiastical Absolution and before he arrive at the appointed remedies that is before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfactions ends his temporal life that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd when he is devested of his body he cannot obtain He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory what they paid not here and of being cleansed there who were not clean here And how these words or of any the precedent are reconcileable with the Doctrines of Purgatory hath not yet entred into our imagination To conclude this particular We complain greatly that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false is yet with all the faults of it passed into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent But besides what hath been said it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth even so saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours If all the dead that die in Christ be at rest and are in no more affliction or labours then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory is as false as it is uncomfortable To these words we add the saying of Christ and we relie upon it He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into judgment but passeth from death unto life If so then not into the judgment of Purgatory If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life then not from death to the terminable pains of a part of Hell They that have eternal life suffer no intermedial punishment judgment or condemnation after death for death and life are the whole progression according to the Doctrine of Christ and Him we choose to follow Sect. V. THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being Primitive and Apostolick that we know the very time it began to be own'd publickly for an opinion and the very Council in which it was said to be passed into a publick Doctrine and by what arts it was promoted and by what persons it was introduc'd For all the world knows that by their own parties by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches Declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of faith till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope Innocent the third MCC years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Iohanes de Bassolis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the Primitive ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgment of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus says that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of faith as Bellarmine confesses and Henriquez affirms that
into the body of Christ Whether a Church mouse does eat her Maker Whether a man by eating the consecrated symbols does break his fast For if it be not bread and wine he does not and if it be Christs body and bloud naturally and properly it is not bread and wine Whether it may be said the Priest is in some sense the Creator of God himself Whether his power be greater than the power of Angels and Archangels For that it is so is expresly affirmed by Cassenaeus Whether as a Bohemian Priest said that a Priest before he say his first Mass be the Son of God but afterward he is the Father of God and the Creator of his body But against this blasphemy a book was written by Iohn Huss about the time of the Council of Constance But these things are too bad and therefore we love not to rake in so filthy chanels but give onely a general warning to all our Charges to take heed of such persons who from the proper consequences of their Articles grow too bold and extravagant and of such doctrines from whence these and many other evil Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently do issue As the tree is such must be the fruit But we hope it may be sufficient to say That what the Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation is absolutely impossible and implies contradictions very many to the belief of which no faith can oblige us and no reason can endure For Christs body being in heaven glorious spiritual and impassible cannot be broken And since by the Roman doctrine nothing is broken but that which cannot be broken that is the colour the taste and other accidents of the elements yet if they could be broken since the accidents of bread and wine are not the substance of Christs body and bloud it is certain that on the Altar Christs body naturally and properly cannot be broken And since they say that every consecrated Wafer is Christs whole body and yet this Wafer is not that Wafer therefore either this or that is not Christs body or else Christ hath two bodies for there are two Wafers But when Christ instituted the Sacrament and said This is my body which is broken because at that time Christs body was not broken naturally and properly the very words of Institution do force us to understand the Sacrament in a sense not natural but spiritual that is truly sacramental And all this is besides the plain demonstrations of sense which tells us it is bread and it is wine naturally as much after as before consecration And after all the natural sense is such as our blessed Saviour reprov'd in the men of Capernaum and called them to a spiritual understanding the natural sense being not onely unreasonable and impossible but also to no purpose of the spirit or any ways perfective of the soul as hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in this Article Sect. VI. OUr next instance of the novelty of the Roman Religion in their Articles of division from us is that of the half Communion For they deprive the people of the chalice and dismember the institution of Christ and praevaricate his express law in this particular and recede from the practise of the Apostles and though they confess it was the practise of the primitive Church yet they lay it aside and curse all them that say they do amiss in it that is they curse them who follow Christ and his Apostles and his Church while themselves deny to follow them Now for this we need no other testimony but their own words in the Council of Constance Whereas in certain parts of the world some temerariously presume to affirm that the Christian people ought to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine and do every where communicate the Laity not onely in bread but in wine also Hence it is that the Council decrees and defines against this error that although Christ instituted after supper and administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread aud wine yet this notwithstanding And although in the primitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds Here is the acknowledgment both of Christs institution in both kinds and Christs ministring it in both kinds and the practise of the primitive Church to give it in both kinds yet the conclusion from these premises is We command under the pain of Excommunication that no Priest communicate the people under both kinds of bread and wine The opposition is plain Christs Testament ordains it The Church of Rome forbids it It was the primitive custom to obey Christ in this a later custom is by the Church of Rome introduc'd to the contrary To say that the first practise and institution is necessary to be followed is called Heretical to refuse the later subintroduc'd custom incurrs the sentence of Excommunication and this they have pass'd not onely into a law but into an Article of Faith and if this be not teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and worshipping God in vain with mens traditions then there is and there was and there can be no such thing in the world So that now the question is not whether this doctrine and practise be an INNOVATION but whether it be not better it should be so Whether it be not better to drink new wine than old Whether it be not better to obey man than Christ who is God blessed for ever Whether a late custom be not to be preferr'd before the ancient a custom dissonant from the institution of Christ before that which is wholly consonant to what Christ did and taught This is such a bold affirmative of the Church of Rome that nothing can suffice to rescue us from an amazement in the consideration of it especially since although the Institution it self being the onely warranty and authority for what we do is of it self our rule and precept according to that of the Lawyer Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituuntur docentur homines yet besides this Christ added preceptive words Drink ye all of this he spake it to all that receiv'd who then also represented all them who for ever after were to remember Christs death But concerning the doctrine of Antiquity in this point although the Council of Constance confess the Question yet since that time they have taken on them a new confidence and affirm that the half Communion was always more or less the practise of the most Ancient times We therefore think it fit to produce testimonies concurrent with the saying of the Council of Constance such as are irrefragable and of persons beyond exception Cassander affirms That in the Latine Church for aboue a thousand years the body of Christ and the blood of Christ were separately giuen◠the body apart and the blood apart after the consecration