an Oral Tradition which they themselves had not put in writing They do sometimes refer themselves to such things as they had delivered to particular Churches but by Tradition in the Apostles days and for some Ages after it is very clear that they meant only the conveyance of the Faith and not any unwritten Doctrines They reckoned the Faith was a sacred depositum which was committed to them and that was to be preserved pure among them But it were very easy to shew in the continued Succession of all the first Christian Writers That they still Appealed to the Scriptures That they Argued from them That they Condemned all Doctrines that were not contained in them and when at any time they brought human Authorities to justify their Opinions or Expressions they contented themselves with a very few and those very late Authorities So that their design in vouching them seems to be rather to clear themselves from the Imputation of having innovated any thing in the Doctrine or in the ways of expressing it than that they thought those Authorities were necessary to prove them by For in that case they must have taken a great deal more pains than they did to have followed up and proved the Tradition much higher than they went We do also plainly see that such Traditions as were not founded on Scripture were easily corrupted and on that account were laid aside by the succeeding Ages Such were the Opinion of Christ's Reign on Earth for a Thousand years The Saints not seeing God till the Resurrection The necessity of giving Infants the Eucharist The Divine Inspiration of the 70 Interpreters besides some more important Matters which in respect to those Times are not to be too much descanted upon It is also plain That the Gnosticks the Valentinians and other Hereticks began very early to set up a Pretension to a Tradition delivered by the Apostles to some particular persons as a Key for understanding the secret meanings that might be in Scripture in opposition to which both Irenaeus Tertullian and others Iren. I. 3. c. 1 2 3 4 5. Tertul. de presc Cap. 20 21 25 27 28. make use of Two sorts of Arguments The one is the Authority of the Scripture it self by which they confuted their Errors The other is a Point of Fact That there was no such Tradition In asserting this they appeal to those Churches which had been founded by the Apostles and in which a Succession of Bishops had been continued down They say in these we must search for Apostolical Tradition This was not said by them as if they had designed to establish Tradition as an Authority distinct from or equal to the Scriptures But only to shew the falshood of that pretence of the Hereticks and that there was no such Tradition for their Heresies as they gave out When this whole Matter is considered in all its parts such as 1 st That nothing is to be believed as an Article of Faith unless it appears to have been Revealed by God 2 dly That Oral Tradition appâ—ars both from the Nature of Man and the Experience of former Times to be an incompetent conveâ—er of Truth 3 dly That some Books were written for the conveyance of those Matters which have been in all Ages carefully preserved and esteemed sacred 4 thly That the Writers of the First Ages do always Argue from and Appeal to these Books And 5 thly That what they have said without Authority from them has been rejected in succeeding Ages the Truth of this Branch of our Article is fully made out If what is contain'd in theScripture in express words is theObject of our Faith then it will follow That whatsoever may be proved from thence by a just and lawful consequence is also to be believed Men may indeed Err in framing these Consequences and Deductions they may mistake or stretch them too far but though there is much Sophistry in the World yet there is also true Logick and a certain Thread of Reasoning And the sense of every Proposition being the same whether expressed always in the same or in different words then whatsoever appears to be clearly the sense of any place of Scripture is an Object of Faith tho it should be otherwise expressed than as it is in Scripture and every just Inference from it must be as true as the Proposition it self is Therefore it is a vain cavil to ask express words of Scripture for every Article That was the Method of all the Anciâ—nt Hereticks Christ and his Apostles Argued from the words and passages in the Old Testament to prove such things as agreed with the true sense of them and so did all the Fathers and therefore so may we do The great Objection to this is That the Scriptures are dark That the same place is capable of different Senses the Literal and the Mystical And therefore since we cannot understand the true Sense of the Scripture we must not Arguefrom it but seek for an Interpreterofit on whom we may depend All Sects Argue from thence and fancy that they find their Tenets in it And therefore this can be no sure way of finding out sacred Truth since so many do err that follow it In Answer to this it is to be considered That the Old Testament was delivered to the whole Nation of the Iews that Moses was read in the Synagogue in the hearing of the Women and Children that whole Nation was to take their Doctrine and Rules from it All Appeals wâ—re made to the Law and to the Prophets among them And though the Propâ—â—cies of the Old Testament were in their Stile and whole Contexture dark and hard to be understood yet when so great a Question as this Who was the true Messias came to be examined the proofs urged for it were Passages in the Old Testament Now the Question was How these were to be understood No Appeal was here made to Tradition or to Church-Authority but only by the Enemies of our Saviour Whereas he and his Disciples urge these passages in their true sense and in the consequences that arose out of them They did in that Appeal to the rational Faculties of those to whom they spoke The Christian Religion was at first delivered to poor and simple Multitudes who were both illiterate and weak the Epistles which are by much the hardest to be understood of the whole New Testament were Addressed to the whole Churches to all the Faithful or Saints that is to all the Christians in those Churches These were afterwards read in all thâ—ir Assemblies Upon this it may reasonably be asked Were these Writings clear in that Age or were they not If they were not it is unaccountable why they were addressed to the whole Body and how they came to be received and entertained as they were It is the End of Speech and Writing to make things to be understood and it is not supposable That Men Inspired by the Holy Ghost either could not or would
apprehended but by such as have been at the pains to go through one of the ungratefullest pieces of Study that can be well imagined and have read the Productions of those Ages The understanding the Scriptures or Languages or History were not so much as thought on Some affected Homilies or Discantings on the Rituals of the Church full of many very odd Speculations about them are among the best of the Writings of those Times They were easily imposed on by any new Forgery witness the Reception and Authority that was given to the Decretal Epistles of the Popes of the first Three Centuries which for many Ages maintained its credit tho' it was plainly a Forgery of the Eighth Century and was contrived with so little Art that there is not in them colour enough to excuse the ignorance of those that were deceived by it As it is an easie thing to mislead ignorant multitudes so there is somewhat in Incredible Opinions and Stories that is suited to such a state of Mankind and as Men are apt to fancy that they see Sprights especially in the Night so the more of darkness and unconceivableness that there is in an Opinion it is the more properly calculated for such times The Ages that succeeded were not only times of Ignorance but they were also times of much Corruption The Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century give us dismal Representations of the Corruptions of their times and the scandalous unconstancy of the Councils of those Ages is too evident a proof of what we find said by the Good Men of those days But things fell lower and lower in the succeeding Ages It is an amazing thing that in the very Office of Consecrating Bishops Examinations are ordered concerning those Crimes the very mention of which give horrour De Coitu cum Masculo cum Quadrupedâ—bus The Popes more particularly were such a Succession of Men that as their own Historians have described them nothing in any History can be produced that is like them The Characters they give them are so monstrous that nothing under the authority of unquestioned Writers and the Evidence of the Facts themselves could make them credible But that which makes the Introduction of this Doctrine appear the more probable is that we plainly see the whole Body of the Clergy was every where so Influenced by the management of the Popes that they generally entred into Combinations to subject the Temporalty to the Spiritualty and therefore every Opinion that tended to render the Persons of the Clergy Sacred and to raise their Character high was sure to receive the best entertainment and the greatest incouragement possible Nothing could carry this so far as an Opinion that represented the Priest as having a Character by which with a few words he could make a God The Opinion of Transubstantiation was such an Engine that it being once set on foot could not but meet with a favourable reception from those who were then seeking all possible colours to give credit to their authority and to advance it The numbers of the Clergy were then so great and their contrivances were so well suited to the credulity and superstition of those times that by Visions and wonderful Stories confidently vouched they could easily infuse any thing into weak and giddy Multitudes Besides that the Genius of those Times led them much to the love of Pomp and Shew they had lost the true Power and Beauty of Religion and were willing by outward Appearances to balance or compensate for their great Defects But besides all those general Considerations which such as are acquainted with the History of those Ages know do belong to them in a much higher Degree than is here set forth There are some Specialities that relate to this Doctrine in Particular which will make the Introduction of it appear the more Practicable This had never been condemned in any former Age for as none condemn Errors by Anticipation or Prophesy so the Promoters of it had this Advantage that no formal Decision had been made against them It did also in the outward sound agree with the Words of the Institution and the Phrases generally used of the Elements being changed into the Body and Blood of Christ Outward sound and appearance was enough in Ignorant Ages to hide the Change that was made The step that is made from believing any thing in General with an indistinct and confused Apprehension to a determined way of explaining it is not hard to be brought about The People in General believed that Christ was in the Sacrament and that the Elements were his Body and Blood without troubling themselves to Examine in what Manner all this was done So it was no great step in a dark Age to put a particular Explanation of this upon them And this Change being brought in without any visible Alterations made in the Worship it must needs have passed with the World more easily For in all Times visible Rites are more minded by the People than speculative Points which they consider very little No Alterations were at first made in the Worship the Adoration of the Host and the Processions invented to Honour it came all afterwards Greg. Doâ—râ—t Lib. â— Tit. 42. cap. 10. Honorius IV. who first appointed the Adoration does not pretend to Found it on ancient Practice Only he commands the Priests to tell the People to do it And he at first enjoined only an Inclination of the Head to the Sacrament But his Successor Gregory IX did more resolutely Command it and ordered a Bell to be rung at the Consecration and Elevation to give notice of it that so all those who heard it might kneel and join their Hands and so Worship the Host. The first Controversy about the Manner of the Presence arose incidentally upon the Controversy of Images The Council at Constantinople decreed that the Sacrament was the Image of Christ in which the substance of Bread and Wine remained Those at Nice how furiously soever they fell upon them for calling the Sacrament the Image of Christ yet do no where blame them for saying that the substance of Bread and Wine remained in it For indeed the Opinion of Damascene and of most of the Greek Church was That there was an Assumption of the Bread and Wine into an Vnion with the Body of Christ. The Council of Constantinople brought in their Decision occasionally that being considered as the setled Doctrine of the Church whereas those of Nice did visibly Innovate and Falsify the Tradition For they affirm as Damascene had done before them that the Elements weâ—e called the Antitypes of Christ's Body only before they were consecrated but not after it Which they say none of the Fathers had done This is so notoriously False that no Man can pretend now to justify them in it since there are above twenty of the Fathers that were before them who in plain words call the Elements after Consecration the Figure and Antitype of Christ's
whether formally or substantially or some other way Some Schoolmen thought that the Matter of Bread was destroyed but that the Form remained to be the Form of Christ's Body that was the Matter of it Others thought that the Matter of the Elements remained and that the Form only was destroyed But that to which many inclined was the Assumption of the Elements into an Union with the Body of Christ or a hypostatical Union of the eternal Word to them by which they became as truly a Body to Christ as that which he has in Heaven Yet it was not the same but a different Body Stephen Bishop of Autun was the First that fell on the Word of Transubstantiation Amalric in the beginning of the Thirteenth Century denied in express Words the corporal Presence De Sacram Altaris c. 13. He was condemned in the Fourth Council of the Lateran as an Heretick and his Body was ordered to be taken up and burnt And in opposition to him Transubstantiation was decreed Yet the Schoolmen continued to offer different Explanations of this for a great while after that But in conclusion all agreed to explain it as was formerly set forth It appears by the crude Way in which it was at first explained that it was a Novelty And that Men did not know how to mould and frame it but at last it was licked into shape the whole Philosophy being cast into such a Mould as agreed with it And therefore in the present Age in which that Philosophy has lost its Credit great Pains are taken to suppress the New and freer Way of Philosophy as that which cannot be so easily subdued to support this Doctrine as the Old one was And the Arts that those who go into the New Philosophy take to reconcile their Scheme to this Doctrine shew that there is nothing that subtile and unsincere Men will not venture on For since they make Extension to be of the Essence of Matter and think that Accidents are only the Modes of Matter which have no proper being of themselves it is evident that a Body cannot be without its Extension and that Accidents cannot subsist without their Subject so that this can be in no sort reconciled to Transubstantiation And therefore they would willingly avoid this special Manner of the Presence and only in General assert that Christ is corporally Present But the Decrees of the Lateran and Trent Councils make it evident that Transubstantiation is now a Doctrine that is bound upon them by the Authority of the Church and of Tradition And that they are as much bound to believe it as to believe the corporal Presence it self Thus the going off from the Simplicity in which Christ did deliver the Sacrament and in which the Church at first received it into some sublime Expressions about it led Men once out of the way and they still went farther and farther from it Pious and Rhetorical Figures pursued far by Men of heated Imaginations and of inflamed Affections were followed with Explanations invented by colder and more designing Men afterwards and so it increased till it grew by degrees to that which at last it settled on But after all if the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence had rested only in a Speculation tho' we should have judged those who held it to be very bad Philosophers and no good Criticks yet we could have endured it if it had rested there and had not gone on to be a matter of practice by the Adoration and Processions with every thing else of that kind which followed upon it for this corrupted the Worship The Lutherans believe a Consubstantiation and that both Christ's Body and Blood and the Substance of the Elements are together in the Sacrament That some explain by an Vbiquity which they think is communicated to the Human Nature of Christ by which his Body is every where as well as in the Sacrament Whereas others of them think that since the words of Christ must needs be true in a literal sense his Body and Blood is therefore in the Sacrament but in with and under the Bread and Wine All this we think is ill grounded and is neither agreeable to the words of the Institution nor to the nature of things A great deal of that which was formerly set forth in defence of our Doctrine falls likewise upon this The Vbiquity communicated to the Humane Nature as it seems a thing in it self impossible so it gives no more to the Sacrament than to every thing else Christ's Body may be said to be in every thing or rather every thing may be said to be his Body and Blood as well as the Elements in the Sacrament The impossibility of a Bodies being without extension or in more places at once lies against this as well as against Transubstantiation But yet after all this is only a Point of Speculation nothing follows upon it in practice no Adoration is offered to the Elements and therefore we judge that Speculative Opinions may be born with when they neither fall upon the Fundamentals of Christianity to give us false Ideas of the Essential parts of our Religion nor affect our practice and chiefly when the Worship of God is maintained in its Purity for which we see God has expressed so particular a concern giving it the Word which of all others raises in us the most sensible and the strongest Ideas calling it Iealousie that we reckon we ought to watch over this with much caution We can very well bear with some Opinions that we think ill grounded as long as they are only matters of Opinion and have no Influence neither on Mens Morals nor their Worship We still hold Communion with Bodies of Men that as we judge think wrong but yet do both live well and maintain the Purity of the Worship of God We know the great design of Religion is to govern Men's Lives and to give them right Ideas of God and of the Ways of Worshipping him All Opinions that do not break in upon these are things in which great forbearance is to be used large Allowances are to be made for Mens Notions in all other things and therefore we think that neither Consubstantiation nor Transubstantiation how ill grounded soever we take both to be ought to dissolve the Union and Communion of Churches But it is quite another thing if under either of these Opinions an Adoration of the Elements is taught and practised This we believe is plain Idolatry when an Insensible piece of Matter such as Bread and Wine has Divine Honours paid it when it is believed to be God when it is called God and is in all respects Worshipped with the same Adoration that is offered up to Almighty God This we think is gross Idolatry Many Writers of the Church of Rome have acknowledged that if Transubstantiation is not true their Worship is a strain of Idolatry beyond any that is practised among the most depraved of all the Heathens The only excuse that
the Scriptures Ibid. The Form of Swearing among the Jews 394 Our Saviour's words and St. James's against all Swearing explained 395 When Oaths may be lawfully taken 396 The End of the Table of the Contents AN EXPOSITION OF THE XXXIX ARTICLES OF THE Church of England TITLE Articles whereupon it was agreed by the Archbishops and Byshops of both Provinces and the whole Cleargie in the Convocation holden at London in the yeare of our Lorde GOD 1562. according to the computation of the Church of Englande for the avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the stablishing of consent touching true Religion Put forth by the Queens authoritie The INTRODUCTION THE Title of these Articles leads me to consider 1. The Time the Occasion and the Design of Compiling them 2 dly The Authority that is stampt upon them both by Church and State and the Obligation that lies upon all of our Communion to Assent to them and more particularly the Importance of the Subscription to which the Clergy are obliged As to the 1 st It may seem somewhat strange to see such a Collection of Tenets made the Standard of the Doctrine of a Church that is deservedly valued by reason of her Moderation This seems to be a departing from the Simplicity of the First Ages which yet we pretend to set up for a Pattern In those times the owning the Belief of the Creeds then received was thought sufficient And when some Heresies had occasioned great Enlargements to be made in the Creeds the Third General Council thought fit to set a Bar against all further Additions and yet all those Creeds one of which goes far beyond the Ephesine Standard make but One Article of the Thirty nine of which this Book consists Many of these do also relate to subtile and abstruse Points in which it is not easy to form a clear Judgment and much less can it be convenient to Impose so great a Collection of Tenets upon a whole Church to Excommunicate such as affirm any of them to be erroneous and to reject those from the Service of the Church who cannot Assent to every one of them The Negative Articles of No Infallibility No Supremacy in the Pope No Transubstantiation No Purgatory and the like give yet a further Colour to Exceptions since it may seem that it was enough not to have mentioned these which implied a tacit rejecting of them It may therefore appear to be too rigorous to require a positive condemning of those Points for a very high degree of Certainty is required to affirm a Negative Proposition In order to the explaining this matter it is to be confessed that in the beginnings of Christianity the Declaration that was required even of a Bishop's Faith was conceived in very general Terms There was a Form setled very early in most Churches This St. Paul in one place calls The Form of Doctrine that was delivered in another place The Form of Sound Words Rom. 6.17 1 Tim. 4.6 6 3. 2 Tim. 1.13 which those who were fixed by the Apostles in particular Churches had received from them These words of his do import a Standard or fixed Formulary by which all Doctrines were to be examined Some have inferred from them that the Apostles delivered that Creed which goes under their Name every where in the same Form of Words But there is great reason to doubt of this since the first Apologists for Christianity when they deliver a short Abstract of the Christian Faith do all vary from one another both as to the Order and as to the Words themselves which they would not have done if the Churches had all received one setled Form from the Apostles They would all have used the same Words and neither more nor less It is more probable That in every Church there was a Form setled which was delivered to it by some Apostle or Companion of the Apostles with some Variation of which at this distance of time considering how defective the History of the First Ages of Christianity is it is not possible nor very necessary for us to be able to give a clear Account For Instance In the whole Extent or Neighbourhood of the Roman Empire it was at first of great Use to have this in every Christian's mouth That our Saviour suffered under Pontius Pilate because this fixed the Time and carried in it an Appeal to Records and Evidences that might then have been searched for But if this Religion went at first far to the Eastward beyond all Commerce with the Romans there is not that reason to think that this should have been a part of the shortest Form of this Doctrine it being enough that it was related in the Gospel These Forms of the several Churches were preserved with that Sacred Respect that was due to them This was esteemed the Depositum or Trust of a Church which was chiefly committed to the keeping of the Bishop In the First Ages in which the Bishops or Clergy of the several Churches could not meet together in Synods to examine the Doctrine of every new Bishop the Method upon which the Circumstances of those Ages put them was this The New Bishop sent round him and chiefly to the Bishops of the more Eminent Sees the Profession of his Faith according to the Form that was fixed in his Church And when the Neighbouring Bishops were satisfied in this they held Communion with him and not only owned him for a Bishop but maintained such a Commerce with him as the state of that Time did admit of But as some Heresies sprung up there were Enlargements made in several Churches for the condemning those and for excluding such as held them from their Communion The Council of Nice examined many of those Creeds and out of them they put their Creed in a fuller Form The Addition made by the Council of Constantinople was put into the Creeds of some particular Churches several Years before that Council met So that though it received its Authority from that Council yet those Fathers rather confirmed an Article which they found in the Creeds of some Churches than made a New one It had been an unvaluable Blessing if the Christian Religion had been kept in its first Simplicity The Council of Ephesus took care that the Creed by which men profess their Christianity should receive no new Additions but be fixed according to the Constantinoplitan Standard yet they made Decrees in Points of Faith and the following Councils went on in their steps adding still new Decrees with Anathematisms against the contrary Doctrines and declaring the Asserters of them to be under an Anathema that is under a very heavy Curse of being totally excluded from their Communion and even from the Communion of Jesus Christ. And whereas the New Bishops had formerly only declared their Faith they were then required besides that to declare That they received such Councils and rejected such Doctrines together with such as favoured them who were sometimes meâ—tioned by
Holy Ghost it must be understood of the Father for when the Father is named with Christ sometimes he is called God simply and sometimes God the Father This Argument from the Threefold Salutation appears yet stronger in the Words in which St. Iohn addresses himself to the Seven Churches in the beginning of the Revelations Rev. 1.4 5. Grace and Peace from him which is which was and which is to come and from the seven Spirits which are before his Throne and from Iesus Christ. By the Seven Spirits must be meant one or more Persons since he wishes or declares Grace and Peace from them Now either this must be meant of Angels or of the Holy Ghost There are no where Prayers made or Blessings given in the Name of Angels This were indeed a worshipping them against which there are express Authorities not only in the other Books of the New Testament but in this Book in particular Nor can it be imagined that Angels could have been named before Iesus Christ So then it remains that Seven being a Number that imports both Variety and Perfection and that was the Sacred Number among the Iews this is a Mystical Expression which is no extraordinary thing in a Book that is all over mysterious And it imports one Person from whom all that variety of Gifts Administrations and Operations that were then in the Church did flow And this is the Holy Ghost But as to his being put in order before Christ as upon the supposition of an Equality the going out of the common order is no great matter so since there was to come after this a full Period that concerned Christ it might be a natural way of Writing to name him last Against all this it is objected That the Designation that is given to the first of these in a Circumlocution that imports Eternity shews that the Great God and not the Person of the Father is to be meant But then how could St. Iohn writing to the Churches wish them Grace and Peace from the other Two A few Verses after this the same Description of Eternal Duration is given to Christ and is a strong Proof of his Eternity and by consequence of his Divinity So what is brought so soon after as a Character of the Eternity of the Son may be also here used to denote the Eternal Father These are the Chief Places in which the Trinity is mentioned all together I do not insist on that contested Passage of St. Iohn's Epistle There are great doubtings made about it 1 Joh. 5.7 The main ground of doubting being the Silence of the Fathers who never made use of it in the Disputes with the Arians and Macedonians There are very considerable things urged on the other hand to support the Authority of that Passage yet I think it is safer to build upon sure and undisputable grounds So I leave it to be maintained by others who are more fully persuaded of its being Authentical There is no need of it This matter is capable of a very full Proof whether that Passage is believed to be a part of the Canon or not It is no small Confirmation of the Truth of this Doctrine that we are certain it was universally received over the whole Christian Church long before there was either a Christian Prince to support it by his Authority or a Council to establish it by Consent And indeed the Council of Nice did nothing but declare what was the Faith of the Christian Church with the addition only of the Word Consubstantial For if all the other Words of the Creed settled at Nice are acknowledged to be true that of the Three Persons being of one Substance will follow from thence by a just consequence We know both by what Tertullian and Novatian writ what was the Faith both of the Roman and the African Churches From Irenaeus we gather the Faith both of the Gallican and the Asiatick Churches And the whole proceedings in the Case of Samosatenus that was the solemnest business that past while the Church was under Oppression and Persecution give us the most convincing Proof possible not only of the Faith of the Eastern Churches at that time but of their Zeal likewise in watching against every Breach that was made in so Sacred a part of their Trust and Depositum These things have been fully opened and enlarged on by others to whom the Reader is referred I shall only desire him to make this Reflection on the state of Christianity at that time The Disputes that were then to be managed with the Heathens against the Deifying or Worshipping of Men and those extravagant Fables concerning the Genealogies of their Heroes and Gods must have obliged the Christians rather to have silenced and supprest the Doctrine of the Trinity than to have owned and published it So that nothing but their being assured that it was a Necessary and Fundamental Article of their Faith could have led them to own it in so publick a manner since the Advantages that the Heathen would have taken from it must be too visible not to be soon observed The Heathens retorted upon them their Doctrine of a Man's being a God and of God's having a Son And every one who engaged in this Controversy framed such Answers to these Objections as he thought he could best maintain This as it gave the Rise to the Errors which some brought into the Church so it furnishes us with a Copious Proof of the common Sense of the Christians of those Ages who all agreed in general to the Doctrine though they had many different and some very Erroneous ways of explaining it among them I now come to the special Proofs concerning each of the Three Persons But there being other Articles relating to the Son and the Holy Ghost the Proofs of these Two will belong more properly to the Explanation of those Articles Therefore all that belongs to this Article is to prove that the Father is truly God but that needs not be much insisted on for there is no dispute about it None deny that he is God many think that he is so truly God that there is no other that can be called God besides him unless it be in a larger sense of the word And therefore I will here conclude all that seems necessary to be said on this first Article on which if I have dwelt the longer it was because the stating the Idea of God right being the Fundamental Article of all Religion and the Key into every part of it this was to be done with all the Fulness and Clearness possible In a word to recapitulate a little what has been said The liveliest way of framing an Idea of God is to consider our own Souls which are said to be made after the Image of God An attentive Reflection on what we perceive in our selves will carry us further than any other thing whatsoever to form just and true Thoughts of God We perceive what Thought is but
Deuteronomy The First Book of Chronicles Ecclesiastes or Preacher Ioshua The Second Book of Chronicles Cantica or Song of Solomon Iudges The First Book of Esdras Four Prophets the greater Ruth The Second Book of Esdras Twelve Prophets the less And the other Books as Hierom saith the Church doth read for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet it doth not apply them to Establish any Doctrine Such are these following The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Iudith The rest of the Book of Esther The Book oâ— Wisdom Iesus the Son of Syrach Baruch the Prophet The Song of the Three Children The History of Susanna Of Bel and the Dragon The Prayer of Manasses The First Book of Maccabees The Second Book of Maccabees All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account them Canonical IN this Article are Two important Heads and to each of them a proper consequence does belong The First is That the Holy Scriptures do contain all things necessary to Salvation The Negative Consequence that ariseth out of that is That no Article that is not either Read in it or that may not be proved by it is to be required to be believed as an Article of Faith or to be thought necessary to Salvation The Second is The settling the Canon of the Scripture both of Old and New Testament and the consequence that arises out of that is The rejecting the Books commonly called Apocryphal which though they may be Read by the Church for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners yet are no part of the Canon nor is any Doctrine to be Established by them After the main Foundations of Religion in General in the belief of a God or more specially of the Christian Religion in the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Death Resurrection and Ascension of Christ are laid down The next Point to be settled is What is the Rule of this Faith where is it to be found and with whom is it lodged The Church of Rome and We do both agree that the Scriptures are of Divine Inspiration Those of that Communion acknowledge That every thing which is contained in Scripture is true and comes from God but they add to this That the Books of the New Testament were occasionally written and not with the design of making them the full Rule of Faith but that many things were delivered Orally by the Apostles which if they are faithfully Transmitted to us are to be received by us with the same Submission and Respect that we pay to their Writings And they also believe That these Traditions are conveyed down infallibly to us and that to distinguish betwixt true and false Doctrines and Traditions there must be an infallible Authority lodged by Christ with his Church We on the contrary affirm That the Scriptures are a compleat Rule of Faith and that the whole Christian Religion is contained in them and no where else and although we make great use of Tradition especially that which is most Ancient and nearest the Source to help us to a clear understanding of the Scriptures yet as to Matters of Faith we reject all Oral Tradition as an incompetent mean of conveying down Doctrines to us and we refuse to receive any Doctrine that is not either expresly contained in Scripture or clearly proved from it In order to the opening and proving of this it is to be considered what God's design in first ordering Moses and after him all Inspired Persons to put things in Writing could be it could be no other than to free the World from the Uncertainties and Impostures of Oral Tradition All Mankind being derived from one common Source it seems it was much easier in the first Ages of the World to preserve the Tradition pure than it could possibly be afterwards There were only a few things then to be delivered concerning God as That he was one Spiritual Being That he had Created all things That he alone was to be Worshipped and Served the rest relating to the History of the World and chiefly of the first Man that was made in it There were also great advantages on the side of Oral Tradition the first men were very long-liv'd and they saw their own Families spread extreamly so that they had on their side both the Authority which long Life always has particularly concerning Matters of Fact and the credit that Parents have naturally with their own Children to secure Tradition Two Persons might have conveyed it down from Adam so Abraham Methuselah lived above Three hundred years while Adam was yet alive and Sem was almost an hundred when he died and he lived much above an hundred years in the same time with Abraham according to the Hebrew Here is a great period of Time filled up by Two or Three Persons And yet in that Time the Tradition of those very few things in which Religion was then comprehended was so Universally and Intirely corrupted that it was necessary to correct it by immediate Revelation to Abraham God intending to have a peculiar People to himself out of his Posterity commanded him to forsake his Kindred and Country that he might not be corrupted with an Idolatry that we have reason to believe was then but beginning among them We are sure his Nephew Laban was an Idolater And the danger of mixing with the rest of Mankind was then so great that God ordered a Mark to be made on the Bodies of all descended from him to be the Seal of the Covenant and the Badge and Cognisance of his Posterity By that distinction and by their living in a wandring and unfixed manner they were preserved for some time from Idolatry God intending afterwards to settle them in an Instituted Religion But though the Beginnings of it I mean the Promulgation of the Law on Mount Sinai was one of the most amazing things that ever happened and the fittest to be Orally conveyed down the Law being very short and the Circumstances in the delivery of it most astonishing and though there were many Rites and several Festivities appointed chiefly for the carrying down the Memory of it though there was also in that dispensation the greatest advantage imaginable for securing this Tradition all the main Acts of their Religion being to be performed in one Place and by men of one Tribe and Family as they were also all the Inhabitants of a small Tract of Ground of one Language and by their Constitutions oblig'd to maintain a constant Commerce among themselves They having further a continuance of Signal Characters of God's Miraculous Presence among them such as the Operation of the Water of Jealousy the Plenty of the Sixth Year to supply them all the Sabbatical Year and tilâ— the Harvest of the following Year Together with a Succession of Prophets that followed one another either in a constant course or at least soon after one another but
above all the Presence of God which appeared in the Cloud of Glory and in those Answers that were given by the Urim and Thummim all which must be confessed to be advantages on the side of Tradition vastly beyond any that can be pretended to have been in the Christian Church Yet notwithstanding all these God commanded Moses to write all their Law as the Ten Commandments were by the Immediate Power or Finger of God writ on Tables of Stone When all this is laid together and well considered it will appear That God by a particular Oeconomy intended then to secure Revealed Religion from the doubtfulness and uncertainties of Oral Tradition It is much more reasonable to believe That the Christian Religion which was to be spread to many remote Regions among whom there could be little Communication should have been fixed in its first beginnings by putting it in Writing and not left to the looseness of Reports and Stories We do plainly see That though the methods of knowing and communicating Truth are now furer and better fixed than they have been in most of the Ages which have passed since the beginnings of this Religion yet in every Matter of Fact such additions are daily made as it happens to be Reported and every Point of Doctrine is so variously stated that if Religion had not a more assured bottom than Tradition it could not have that Credit paid to it that it ought to have If we had no greater certainty for Religion than Report we could not believe it very firmly nor venture upon it So in order to the giving this Doctrine such Authority as is necessary for attaining the great ends proposed in it the conveyance of it must be clear and unquestionable otherwise as it would grow to be much mixed with Fable so it would come to be looked on as all a Fable Since then Oral Tradition when it had the utmost Advantages possible of its side failed so much in the conveyance both of Natural Religion and of the Mosaical we see that it cannot be relied on as a certain method of preserving the Truths of Revealed Religion In our Saviour's Time Tradition was set up on many occasions against him but he never submitted to it On the contrary he reproached the Iews with this That they had made the Laws of God of no effect by their Traditions Mat. 15.3 6 9. Joh. 5.39 and he told them That they worshipped God in vain when they taught for Doctrines the Commandments of men In all his Disputes with the Pharisees he appealed to Moses and the Prophets he bade them search the scriptures for in them said he ye think ye have eternal life and they testify of me Ye think is by the Phraseology of that time a word that does not refer to any particular Conceit of theirs but imports That as they thought so in them they had Eternal Life Our Saviour justifies himself and his Doctrine often by words of Scripture but never once by Tradition We see plainly That in our Saviour's Time the Tradition of the Resurrection was so doubtful among the Iews that the Sadducees a formed Party among them did openly deny it The Authority of Tradition had likewise imposed two very mischievous Errors upon the strictest Sect of the Iews that adhered the most firmly to it The one was That they understood the Prophecies concerning the Messias sitting on the Throne of David literally They thought that in imitation of David he was not only to free his own Country from a Foreign Yoke but that he was to subdue as David had done all the Neighbouring Nations This was to them a Stone of Stumbling and a Rock of Offence so their adhering to their Traditions proved their ruin in all Respects The other Error to which the Authority of Tradition led them was their preferring the Rituals of their Religion to the Moral Precepts that it contained This not only corrupted their own Manners while they thought that an Exactness of Performing and a Zeal in Asserting not only the Ritual Precepts that Moses gave their Fathers but those Additions to them which they had from Tradition that were accounted hedges about the Law That this I say might well excuse or atone for the most heinous Violations of the Rules of Justice and Mercy But this had yet another worse effect upon them while it possessed them with such prejudices against our Saviour and his Apostles when they came to see that they set no value on those practices that were recommended by Tradition and that they preferred pure and sublime Morals even to Mosaical Ceremonies themselves and set the Gentiles at liberty from those observances So that the ruin of the Iews their rejecting the Messias and their persecuting his followers arose chiefly from this Principle that had got in among them of believing Tradition and of being guided by it The Apostles in all their Disputes with the Iews make their Appeals constantly to the Scriptures they set a high Character on those of Berea for examining them and comparing the Doctrine that they preached Act. 17.11 with them In the Epistles to the Romans Galatians and Hebrews in which they pursue a thread of Argument with relation to the Prejudices that the Iews had taken up against Christianity they never once argue â—rom Tradition but always from the Scriptures They do not pretend only to disparage Modern Tradition and to set up that which was more Ancient They make no such distinction but hold close to the Scriptures When St. Paul sets out the Advantages that Timothy had by a Religious Education he mentions this That of a Child he had known the holy Scriptures 2 Tim. 3 15 16. which were able to make him wise unto Salvation through Faith which was in Christ Iesus That is the Belief of the Christian Religion was a Key to give him a right understanding of the Old Testament and upon this occasion St. Paul adds All Scripture that is the whole Old Testament is given by Divine Inspiration or as others render the words All the divinely Inspired Scripture is profitable for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works The New Testament was writ on the same design with the Old that as St. Luke expresses it We might know the certainty of those things wherein we have been instructed â—uk 1.4 John 20 31. These things were written saith St. Iohn that ye might believe that Iesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his Name When St. Peter knew by a special Revelation that he was near his End he writ his Second Epistle 2 Pet. 1 15. that they might have that as a mean of keeping those things always in remembrance after his death Nor do the Apostles give us any hints of their having left any thing with the Church to be conveyed down by
taught a Middle Doctrine Asserting an inward Grace but subject to the freedom of the Will And that all things were both decreed and done according to the Prescience of God in which all future Contingents were foreseen He also taught that the first Conversion of the Soul to God was merely an effect of its free choice so that all Preventing-grace was denied by him which came to be the peculiar distinction of those who were afterwards called the Semi-Pelagians Prosper and Hilary gave an account of this System to S. Austin upon which he writ against it and his Opinions were defended by Prosper Fulgentius Orosius and others as Cassian's were defended by Faustus Vincentius and Gennadius In conclusion St. Austin's Opinions did generally prevail in the West only Pelagius it seems retiring tâ— his own Country he had many followers among the Britans But German and Lupus being sent over once and again from France are said to have conquered them so intirely that they were all freed from those Errors Whatever they did by their Arguments the Writers of their Legends took care to adorn their Mission with many very wonderful Miracles of which the gathering all the pieces of a Calf some of which had been drest and the putting them together in its Skin and restoring it again to Life is none of the least The Ruin of the Roman Empire and the disorders that the Western Provinces fell under by their new and brabarous Masters occasioned in those Ages a great decay of Learning So that few Writers of Fame coming after that time St. Austin's great Labours and Piety and the many vast Volumes that he had left behind him gave him so great a Name that few durst contest what had been so zealously and so copiously defended by him And though it is highly probable that Celestine was not satisfied with his Doctrine yet both he and the other Bishops of Rome together with many Provincial Synods have so often declared his Doctrine in those Points to be the Doctrine of the Church that this is very hardly got over by those of that Communion The chief and indeed the only material difference that is between St. Austin's Doctrine and that of the Sublapsarians is That he holding that with the Sacrament of Baptism there was joyned an inward Regeneration made a difference between the Regenerate and the Predestinate which these do not He thought Persons thus regenerate might have all Grace besides that of Perseverance but he thought that they not being predestinated were certainly to fall from that state and from the Grace of Regeneration The other differences are but forced Strains to represent him and the Calvinists as of different Principles He thought that overcoming Delectation in which he put the Efficacy of Grace was as Irresistible though he used not so strong a word for it as the Calvinists do And he thought that the Decree was as Absolute and made without any regard to what the Free-Will would chuse as any of these do So in the main Points the Absoluteness of the Decree the Extent of Christ's Death the Efficacy of Grace and the Certainty of Perseverance their Opinions are the same though their ways of expressing themselves do often differ But if St. Austin's Name and the Credit of his Books went far yet no Book was more read in the following Ages than Cassian's Collations There was in them a clear Thread of good Sense and a very high Strain of Piety that run through them and they were thought the best Institutions for a Monk to form his Mind by reading them attentively So they still carried down among those who read them deep Impressions of the Doctrine of the Greek Church This broke out in the Ninth Century in which Godescalcus a Monk was severely used by Hincmar and by the Church of Rheims for asserting some of St. Austin's Doctrines against which Scotus Erigena wrote as Bertram or Ratramne wrote for them Remigius Bishop of Lyons with his Church did zealously assert St. Austin's Doctrine not without great sharpness against Scotus After this the matter slept till the School-Divinity came to be in great Credit And Thomas Aquinas being counted the chief Glory of the Dominican Order he not only asserted all St. Austin's Doctrine but added this to it That whereas formerly it was in general held That the Providence of God did extend it self to all things whatsoever he thought this was done by God's concurring immediately to the Production of every Thought Action Motion or Mode so that God was the First and Immediate Cause of every thing that was done And in order to the explaining the joint Production of every thing by God as the First and by the Creature as the Second Cause he thought at least as his Followers have understood him That by a Physical Influence the Will was predetermined by God to all things whether good or bad so that the Will could not be said to be free in that particular Instance in sensu composito though it was in general still free in all its Actions in sensu diviso A distinction so sacred and so much used among them that I chuse to give it in their on Terms rather than translate them To avoid the consequence of making God the Author of Sin a distinction was made between the Positive Act of Sin which was said not to be Evil and the want of its Conformity to the Law of God which being a Negation was no positive Being so that it was not produced And thus though the Action was produced jointly by God as the first Cause and by the Creature as the Second yet God was not guilty of the Sin but only the Creature This Doctrine passed down among the Dominicans and continues to do so to this day Scotus who was a Franciscan denied this Predetermination and asserted the Freedom of the Will Durandus denied this Immediate Concourse in which he has not had many Followers except Adola and some few more When Luther began to form his Opinions into a Body he clearly saw that nothing did so plainly destroy the Doctrine of Merit and Justification by Works as St. Austin's Opinions He found also in his Works very express Authorities against most of the Corruptions of the Roman Church And being of an Order that carried his Name and by consequence was accustomed to read and reverence his Works it was no wonder if he without a strict examining of the matter espoused all his Opinions Most of those of the Church of Rome who wrote against him being of the other Persuasions any one reading the Books of that Age would have thought that St. Austin's Doctrine was abandoned by the Church of Rome So that when Michael Baius and some others at Louvain began to revive it that became a matter of Scandal and they were condemned at Rome Yet at the Council of Trent the Dominicans had so much credit that great care was taken in the penning their Decrees to avoid all
condemn them of Heresy and to proceed against them with Church-Censures but that they had a Power to depose them to absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and to transfer their Dominions to such Persons as should undertake to execute their Sentences Tâ—is they have often put in execution and have constantly kept up their 〈…〉 it to this day It will not serve them to get clear here to say That these were the violent Practices of some Popes What they did in many particular Instances may be so turned off and left as a Blemish on the Memories of some of them But the Point at present in question is Whether they have not laid Claim to this as a Right belonging to their See as a part of St. Peter's Authority descended to them Whether they have not founded it on his being Christ's Vicar who was the King of kings and Lord of lords Dict Papâ—e l. 1. Ep. Greg. 7. Post Ep. 55. Extravag de Major Obâ—d c 1. to whom all power in heaven and in earth was given Whether they have not founded it on Ieremy's being set over nations and kingdoms to root out pluck down and to destroy and on other places of Scripture not forgetting that the first Words of the Bible are In the beginning and not In the beginnings from which they inferred That there is but one Principle from whence all Power is derived And that God made two great lights the Sun to rule by day which they applied to themselves This I say is the Question Whether they did not assume this Authority as a Power given them by God As for the applying it to particular Instances to those Kings and Emperors whom they deposed that is indeed a personal thing Whether they were guilty of Heresy or of being favourers of it or not And whether the Popes proceeded against them with too much Violence or not The Point now in Question is Whether they declared this to be a Doctrine that there was an Authority lodged with their See for doing such things and whether they alledged Scripture and Tradition for it Conc. Lat. 3. cap. 27. Conc. Lat. 4. Can. 3. Con. Lug. Now this will appear evident to those who will read their Bulls In the Preambles of which those Quotations will be found as some of them are in the Body of the Canon Law And it is decreed in it that the belief of this is absolutely necessary to Salvation This was pursued in a Course of many Ages General Councils as they are esteemed among them have concurred with the Popes both in General Decrees assâ—rting this power to be in them and in special Sentences against Princes This became the universally-received Doctrine of those Ages No Vniversity nor Nation declaring against it not so much as one Divine Ciâ—â—â—lian Canonist or Casuist writ against it as Card. Perron truly said Câ—rd Perron Harangueau tiers estat It was so certainly believed that those Writers whom the deposed Princes got to undertake their defence do not in any of their Books pretend to call the Doctrine in General in question Two things were disputed One was Whether Popes had a direct power in Temporals over Princes so that they were as much subject to them as Feudatory Princes were to their Superior Lords This to which Boniface the 8th laid claim was indeed contradicted The other Point was Whether those particulars for which Princes had been deposed such as the giving the Investitures to Bishopricks were Heresies or not This was much contested But the power in the case of manifest Heresy or of favouring it to Depose Princes and Transfer their Crowns to others was never called in Question This was certainly a definition made in the Chair ex Cathedra For it was addrest to all their Community both Laity and Clergy Plenary Pardons were bestowed with it on those who executed it The Clergy did generally preach the Croisades upon it Princes that were not concerned in him that was deposed gave way to the publication of those Bulls and gave leave to their Subjects to take the Cross in order to the Executing of them And the People did in vast Multitudes gather about the Standarts that were set up for leading on Armies to Execute them while many Learned Men writ in defence of this Power and not one Man durst write against it This Argument lies not only against the Infallibility of Popes but against that of General Councils likewise And also against the Authority of Oral Tradition For here in a Succession of many Ages the Tradition was wholly changed from the Doctrine of former times which had been That the Clergy was subject to Princes and had no Authority over them or their Crowns Nor can it be said That that was a Point of Discipline for it was founded on an Article of Doctrine Whether there was such a power in the Popes or not The Prudence of Executing or not Executing it is a Point of Discipline and of the Government of the Church But it is a Point of Doctrine Whether Christ has given such an Authorityto St. Peter and his followers And those Points of Speculation upon which a great deal turns as to practice are certainly so important that in them if in any thing we ought to expect an Infallibility For in this case a Man is distracted between two contrary Propositions The one is That he must obey the Civil Powers as set over him by an Ordinance of God so that if he resist them he shall receive in himself Damnation The other is That the Pope being Christ's Vicar is to be obeyed when he Absolves him from his former Oath and Allegiance and that the new Prince set up by him is to be obeyed under the pain of Damnation likewise Here a Man is brought into a great strait and therefore he must be guided by Infallibility if any thing So the whole Argument comes to this Head that we must either believe that the Deposing Power is lodged by Christ in the See of Rome or we must conclude with the Article that they have Erred and by Consequence That they are not Infallible For the Erring in any one Point and at any one Time does quite destroy the Claim of Infallibility Before this Matter can be concluded we must consider what is brought to prove it What was laid down at first must be here remembred That the Proofs brought for a thing of this Nature must be very express and clear A Privilege of such a sort against which the appearances and prejudices are so strong must be very fully made out before we can be bound to believe it Nor can it be reasonable to urge the Authority of any Passages from Scripture till the Grounds are shewn for which the Scriptures themselves ought to be believed Those who think that it is in general well proved That there must be an Infallibility in the Church conclude from thence that it must be in the Pope For if
for not following them in this as we have for not giving Infants the Sacrament and therefore we think it no Imputation on our Church that we do not in this follow a groundless and a much abused Precedent though set us in Ages which we highly reverence The greatest Corruption of this whole matter comes in the last place to be considered which is the Methods proposed for redeeming Souls out of Purgatory If this Doctrine had rested in a Speculation we must still have considered it as derogatory to the Death of Christ and the Truth of the Gospel but it raises our Zeal a little more when we consider the use that was made of it and that Fears and Terrors being by this means infused into Mens minds new Methods were proposed to free them from these The chief of which was the saying of Masses for departed Souls It was pretended that this being the highest Act of the Communion of Christians and the most sublime Piece of Worship therefore God was so well pleased with the frequent Repetition of it with the Prayers that accompanied it and with those that made Provisions for Men who should be constantly imployed in it that this was a most acceptable Sacrifice to God Upon this followed all those vast Endowments for saying Masses for departed Souls Though in the Institution of that Sacrament and in all that is spoken of it in the Scripture there is not an hint given of this Sacraments are positive Precepts which are to be measured only by the Institution in which there is not room left for us to carry them further We are to take eat and drink and thereby shew forth the Lord's death till his second coming All which has no relation to the applying this to others who are gone off this Stage therefore if we can have any just Notions either of Superstition or of Will-worship they are applicable here Men will fancy that there is a virtue in an Action which we are sure it has not of it self and we cannot find that God has put in it and yet they without any Authority from God do set up a new piece of Worship and imagine that God will be pleased with them in every thing they do or ask only because they are perverting this piece of Worship clearly contrary to the Institution to be a Solitary Mass. In the Primitive Church where all the Service of the whole Assembly ended in a Communion there was a Roll read in which the Names of the more Eminent Saints of the Catholick Church and of the Holy Bishops Martyrs or Confessors of every particular Church were registred This was an honourable remembrance that was kept up of such as had died in the Lord. When the soundness of any Persons Faith was brought in suspicion his Name was not read till that Point was cleared and then either his Name continued to be read or it was quite dasht out This was thought an Honour due to the Memory of those who had died in the Faith And in St. Cyprian's time in the Infancy of this Practice Cypr. Epist. 1. Oâ—on ad â—leb Furer we see he counted the leaving a Man's Name out as a thing that only left a Blot upon him but not as a thing of any Consequence to his Soul for when a Priest had died who had by his Last Will named another Priest the Tutor or Guardian of his Children this seemed to him a thing of such ill Example to put those Secular Cares upon the Minds of the Clergy that he appointed that his Name should be no more read in the daily Sacrifice which plainly shews unless we will tax St. Cyprian with a very unreasonable Cruelty that he considered that only as a small Censure laid on his Memory but not as a Prejudice to his Soul This gives us a very plain View of the Sense that he had of this Matter After this Roll was read then the general Prayer followed as was formerly acknowledged for all their Souls and so they went on in the Communion-Service This has no relation to a Mass said by a single Priest to deliver a Soul out of Purgatory Here without going far in Tragical expressions we cannot hold saying what our Saviour said upon another occasion My house is a house of prayer but ye have made it a den of thieves Mark 11.17 A Trade was set up on this Foundation The World was made believe that by the Virtue of so many Masses which were to be purchased by great Endowments Souls were redeemed out of Purgatory and Scenes of Visions and Apparitions sometimes of the tormented and sometimes of the delivered Souls were published in all Places which had so wonderful an effect that in two or three Centuries Endowments increased to so vast a degree that if the Scandals of the Clergy on the one hand and the Statutes of Mortmain on the other had not restrained the Profuseness that the World was wrought up to upon this account it is not easy to imagine how far this might have gone perhaps to an entire subjecting of the Temporalty to the Spiritualty The Practices by which this was managed and the Effects that followed on it we can call by no other Name than downright Impostures worse than the making or venting false Coyn when the World was drawn in by such Aâ—â—s to plain Bargains to redeem their own Souls and the Souls of their Ancestors and Posterity so many Masses were to be said and Forfeitures were to follow upon their not being said Thus the Masses were really the Price of the Lands An Endowment to a Religious Use though mixed with Error or Superstition in the Rules of it ought to be held Sacred according to the Decision given concerning the Censures of those that were in the Rebellion of Corah Numb 16.38 So that we do not excuse the Violation of such from Sacriledge yet we cannot think so of Endowments where the only Consideration was a false Opinion first of Purgatory and then of Redemption out of it by Masses this being expressed in the very Deeds themselves By the same Reasons by which private Persons are obliged to restore what they have drawn from others by base Practices by false Deeds or counterfeit Coyn Bodies are also bound to restore what they have got into their Hands by such fraudulent Practices so that the States and Princes of Christendom were at full liberty upon the discovery of these Impostures to void all the Endowments that had followed upon them and either to apply them to better Uses or to restore them to the Families from which they had been drawn if that had been practicable or to convert them to any other use This was a crying Abuse which those who have observed the progress that this matter made from the Eighth Century to the Twelfth cannot reflect on without both Amazement and Indignation We are sensible enough that there are many political Reasons and Arguments for keeping up the Doctrine of Purgatory
But we have not so learned Christ. We ought not to lie even for God much less for our selves or for any other pretended ends of keeping the World in awe and order therefore all the Advantages that are said to arise out of this and all the Mischief that may be thought to follow on the rejecting of it ought not to make us presume to carry on the Ends of Religion by unlawful Methods This were to call in the Assistance of the Devil to do the Work of God If the just Apprehensions of the Wrath of God and the Guilt of Sin together with the Fear of Everlasting Burnings will not Reform the World nor Râ—strain Sinners we must leave this Matter to the wise and unsearchable Judgments of God The next Particular in this Article is the condemning the Romish Doctrine concerning Pardons That is founded on the Distinction between the Temporal and Eternal Punishment of Sin and the Pardon is of the Temporal Punishment which is believed to be done by a Power lodged singly in the Pope derived from those Words Feed my Sheep and To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven This may be by him derived as they Teach not only to Bishops and Priests but to the Inferior Orders to be dispensed by them and it excuses from Penance unless he who purchases it thinks fit to use his Penance in a medicinal way as a Preservative against Sin So the Virtue of Indulgences is the applying the Treasure of the Church upon such Terms as Popes shall think fit to prescribe in order to the redeeming Souls from Purgatory and from all other Temporal Punishments and that for such a number of Years as shall be specified in the Bulls some of which have gone to Thousands of Years one I have seen to Ten hundred thousand And as these Indulgences are sometimes granted by special Tickets like Tallies struck on that Treasure so sometimes they are affixed to particular Churches and Altars to particular Times or Days chiefly to the Year of Jubilee they are also affixed to such things as may be carryed about to Agnus Dei's to Medals to Rosaries and Scapularies they are also affixed to some Prayers the Devout saying of them being a mean to procure great Indulgences The granting these is left to the Pope's Discretion who ought to distribute them as he thinks may tend most to the Honour of God and the Good of the Church and he ought not to be too profuse much less to be too scanty in dispensing them This has been the received Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome since the Twelfth Century and the Council of Trent in a hurry in its last Session did in very general Words approve of the Practice of the Church in this Matter and Decreed that Indulgences should be continued only they restrained some Abuses in particular that of selling them yet even those Restraints were wholly referred to the Popes themselves So that this crying Abuse the Scandal of which had occasioned the first beginnings and progress of the Reformation was upon the matter established and the correcting the Excesses in it was trusted to those who had been the Authors of them and the chief Gainers by them This Point of their Doctrine is more fully opened than might perhaps seem necessary if it were not that a great part of the Confutation of some Doctrines is the exposing of them For though in Ages and Places of Ignorance these things have been and still are Practised with great assurance and to very extravagant excesâ—es yet in Countries and Ages of more Light when they come to be questioned they are disowned with an assurance equal to that with which they are Practised elsewhere Among us some will perhaps say that these are only exemptions from Penance which cannot be denied to be within the Power of the Church and they argue that though it is very fit to make severe Laws yet the execution of these must be softened in practice This is all that they pretend to justify and they give up any further Indulgences as an abuse of corrupt Times Whereas at the same time a very different Doctrine is Taught among them where there is no danger but much profit in owning it All this is only a pretence for the Episcopal Power in the inflicting abating or commuting of Penance is stated among them as a thing wholly different from the power of Indulgences They are derived from different Originals and designed for Ends totally different from one another The one is for the outward Discipline of the Church and the other is for the inward quiet of Consciences and in order to their future State The one is in every Bishop and the other is asserted to be peculiar to the Pope Nor will they escape by laying this Matter upon the Ignorance and Abuses of former Times It was published in Bulls and received by the whole Church So that if either the Pope or the diffusive Body of the Church are Infallible there must be such a Power in the Pope and the Decree of the Council of Trent confirming and approving the Practice of the Church in that Point must bind them all For if this Doctrine is False then their Infallibility must go with it For in every Hypothesis in which Infallibility is said to be lodged whether in the Pope or in Councils this Doctrine has that Seal to it As for the Doctrine it self all that has been already said against the distinction of Temporal and Eternal Punishment and against Purgatory overthrows it since the one is the Foundation on which it is built and the other is that which it pretends to secure Men from And therefore this falls with those All that was said upon the Head of the Sufficiency of the Scriptures comes also in here For if the Scriptures ought to be our Rule in any thing it must be chiefly in those Matters which relate to the Pardon of Sin to the quiet of our Consciences and to a future State Therefore a Doctrine and Practice that have not so much as Colours from Scripture in a matter of such Consequence ought to be rejected by us upon this single Account If from the Scripture we go to the Practice and Tradition of the Church we are sure that this was not thought on for above Ten Centuries all the Indulgences that were then known being only the abatements of the severity of the Penitentiary Canons But in the Ages in which aspiring and insolent Popes imposed on Ignorant and Superstitious multitudes a jumble was made of Indulgences formerly granted of Purgatory and of the Papal Authority that was then very implicitly submitted to and so out of all that mixture this arose Which was as ill managed as it was ill grounded The natural tendency of it is not only to relax all publick Discipline but also all secret Penance when shorter Methods to Peace and Pardon may be more easily purchased The vast Application to the
could they offer at it in a plain contradiction to such Principles as are consistent with the Christian Religion if the Doctrine of the Roman Church is true Here then we have not only the Scripture but Tradition fully of our side Some pretended Christians it is true did very early Worship Images but those were the Gnosticks held in detestation by all the Orthodox Irenaeus Epiphanius and St. Austin tell us Iren. l. 1. c. 24. Epiph. Haeres 27. August de Haeres cap. 7. that they Worshipped the Images of Christ together with Pythagoras Plato and Aristotle Nor are they only blamed for Worshipping the Images of Christ together with these of the Philosophers but they are particularly blamed for having several sorts of Images and Worshipping these as the Heathens did and that among these there was an Image of Christ which they pretended to have had from Pilate Besides these Corrupters of Christianity there were no others among the Christians of the first Ages that Worshipped Images This was so well known to the Heathens that they bring this among other things as a reproach against the Christians that they had no Images Which the first Apologists are so far from denying that they answered them That it was impossible for him who knew God to Worship Images But as human Nature is inclined to visible Objects of Worship so it seems some began to Paint the Walls of their Churches with Pictures or at least moved for it In the beginning of the Fourth Century this was condemned by the Council of Eliberis Can. 36. It pleases us to have no Pictures in Churches lest that which is Worshipped should be Painted upon the Walls Towards the end of that Century we have an account given us by Epiphanius Epiph. ep ad Joan. Hieros of his Indignation occasioned by a Picture that he saw upon a Veil at Anablatha He did not much consider whose Picture it was whether a Picture of Christ or of some Saint he positively affirms it was against the Authority of the Scriptures and the Christian Religion and therefore he tore it but supplied that Church with another Veil It seems private Persons had Statues of Christ and the Apostles Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 18. Aug. in Psal. 113. de Moribus Eccl. Cath. c. 34. which Eusebius censures where he reports it as a remnant of Heathenism It is plain enough from some passages in St. Austin that he knew of no Images in Churches in the beginning of the Fifth Century It is true they began to be brought before that time into some of the Churches of Pontus and Cappadocia which was done very probably to draw the Heathens by this piece of conformity to them to like the Christian Worship the better For that humour began to work and appeared in many Instances of other kinds as well as in this It was not possible that People could see Pictures in their Churches long without paying some marks of respect to them which grew in a little time to the downright worship of them A famous instance we have of this in the Sixth Century Serenus Bishop of Marseilles finding that he could not restrain his People from the Worship of Images broke them in pieces upon which Pope Gregory writ to him blaming him indeed for breaking the Images Greg. Epist. l. 9. Ep. 9. but commending him for not allowing them to be worshipped This he prosecutes in a variety of very plain Expressions It is one thing to worship an Image and another thing to learn by it what is to be worshipped He says they were set up not to be worshipped but to instruct the Ignorant and cites our Saviour's Words Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve to prove that it was not lawful to worship the work of mens hands We see by a fragment cited in the Second Nicene Council that both Iews and Gentiles took advantages from the Worship of Images to reproach the Christians soon after that time The Iews were scandalized at their Worshipping Images as being expresly against the Command of God The Gentiles had also by it great advantages of turning back upon the Christians all that had been written against their Images in the former Ages At last in the beginning of the Eighth Century the famous Controversy about the having or breaking of Images grew hot The Churches of Italy were so set on the worshipping of them This is owned by all the Historians of that Age Anastasius Zonaras Câ—drenus Glycâ—s Theophanes Sigebert Otho Pris. Urspergensis Sigonius Rubens and Ciaâ—â—nius that Pope Gregory the Second gives this for the reason of their Rebelling against the Emperor because of his opposition to Images And here in little more than an Hundred Years the See of Rome changed its Doctrine Pope Gregory the Second being as positive for the worshipping them as the first of that Name had been against it Violent Contentions arose upon this Head The breakers of Images were charged with Iudaism Samaritanism and Manicheism and the worshippers of them were charged with Gentilism and Idolatry One General Council at Constantinople consisting of about Three hundred and thirty eight Bishops condemned the Worshipping them as Idolatrous but another at Nice of Three hundred and fifty Bishops though others say they were only Three hundred asserted the Worship of them Yet as soon as this was known in the West how active soever the See of Rome was for establishing their Worship a Council of about Three hundred Bishops met at Francfort under Charles the Great which condemned the Nicene Council together with the Worship of Images The Gallican Church insisted long upon this matter Books were published in the Name of Charles the Great against them A Council held at Paris under his Son did also condemn Image-worship as contrary to the Honour that is due to God only and to the Commands that he has given us in Scripture The Nicene Council was rejected here in England as our Historians tell us because it asserted the Adoration of Images which the Church of God abhors Agobard Bishop of Lions and Claud of Turin writ against it the former writ with great vehemence The Learned Men of that Communion do now acknowledge that what he writ was according to the sense of the Gallican Church in that Age And even Ionas of Orleans who studied to moderate the matter and to reconcile the Gallican Bishops to the See of Rome yet does himself declare against the Worship of Images We are not concerned to examine how it came that all this vigorous opposition to Image-worship went off so soon It is enough to us that it was once made so resolutely let those who think it so incredible a thing that Churches should depart from the received Traditions answer this as they can As for the Methods then used and the Arguments that were then brought to infuse this Doctrine into the World Acta Con. Nic. 2. Action 4 5 6
our Saviour's speaking of giving his Flesh to them to eat it he adds They foolishly and carnally thought Lib. 20. con Faust. c. 21. in Psal. 98. v. 5. that he was to cut off some parcels of his Body to be given to them but he shews that there was a Sacrament hid there and he thus Paraphrases that Passage The words that I have spoken to you they are spirit and life Vnderstand spiritually that which I have said for it is not this Body which you see that you are to eat or to drink this Blood which they shall shed who crucifie me But I have recommended a Sacrament to you which being spiritually understood shall quicken you And tho' it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly yet it must be understood invisibly Primasius compares the Sacrament to a Pledge Comm. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. which a dying Man leaves to any one whom he loved But that which is more Important than the Quotation of any of the words of the Fathers is that the Author of the Books of the Sacraments which pass under the Name of St. Ambrose Lib. 4. dâ— Sacram. c. 5. tho' it is generally agreed that those Books were writ some Ages after his Death gives us the Prayer of Consecration as it was used in his time He calls it the Heavenly Words and sets it down The Offices of the Church are a clearer Evidence of the Doctrine of that Church than all the Discourses that can be made by any Doctor in it the one is the Language of the whole Body whereas the other are only the private reasonings of particular Men And of all the Parts of the Office the Prayer of Consecration is that which does most certainly set out to us the sense of that Church that used it But that which makes this Remark the more Important is that the Prayer as set down by this pretended St. Ambrose is very near the same with that which is now in the Canon of the Mass only there is one very Important variation which will best appear by setting both down That of St. Ambrose's is Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura Corporis Sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi qui pridie quam pateretur c. That in the Canon of the Mass is Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quae sumus benedictam ascriptam ratam rationabilem acceptabilemque facere digneris ut nobis Corpus Sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi We do plainly see so great a resemblance of the later to the former of these two Prayers that we may well conclude that the one was begun in the other but at the same time we observe an Essential difference In the former this Sacrifice is called the Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ. Whereas in the later it is Prayed that it may become to us the Body and Blood of Christ. As long as the former was the Prayer of Consecration it is not pofsible for us to imagine that the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence could be received for that which was believed to be the true Body and Blood of Christ could not be called especially in such a part of the Office the Figure of his Body and Blood and therefore the change that was made in this Prayer was an evident proof of a change in the Doctrine and if we could tell in what Age that was done we might then upon greater certainty fix the time in which this change was made or at least in which the inconsistency of that Prayer with this Doctrine was observed I have now set down a great variety of Proofs reduced under different Heads from which it appears evidently that the Fathers did not believe this Doctrine but that they did affirm the contrary very expresly This Sacrament continued to be so long considered as the Figure or Image of Christ's Body that the Seventh General Council which met at Constantinople in the Year 754 and consisted of above Three hundred and thirty Bishops when it condemned the Worship of Images affirmed that this was the only Image that we might lawfully have of Christ and that he had appointed us to offer this Image of his Body to wit the Substance of the Bread That was indeed contradicted with much confidence by the Second Council of Nice in which in opposition to what appears to this day in all the Greek Liturgies and the Greek Fathers they do positively deny that the Sacrament was ever called the Image of Christ and they affirm it to be the true Body of Christ. In conclusion I shall next shew how this Doctrine crept into the Church for this seems plausible that a Doctrine of this nature could never have got into the Church in any Age if those of the Age that admitted it had not known that it had been the Doctrine of the former Age and so upwards to the Age of the Apostles It is not to be denied but that very early both Iustin Martyr and Irenaeus thought that there was such a Sanctification of the Elements that there was a Divine Vertue in them And in those very Passages which we have urg'd from the Arguings of the Fathers against the Eutychians tho' they do plainly prove that they believed that the Substance of Bread and Wine did still remain yet they do suppose an Union of the Elements to the Body of Christ like that of the Human Nature's being united to the Divine here a Foundation was laid for all the Superstructure that was afterwards raised upon it For tho' the Liturgies and Publick Offices continued long in the first simplicity yet the Fathers who did very much study Eloquence chiefly the Greek Fathers carried this matter very far in their Sermons and Homilies They did only apprehend the Profanation of the Sacrament from the unworthiness of those who came to it and being much set on the begetting a due reverence for so holy an action and a seriousness in the performance of it they urg'd all the Topicks that sublime Figures or warm Expressions could help them with and with this exalted Eloquence of theirs we must likewise observe the state that the World fell in in the Fifth Century Vast Swarms out of the North over-run the Roman Empire and by a long continued Succession of new Invaders all was sackt and ruined In the West the Goths were followed by the Vandals the Alans the Gepides the Franks the Sweves the Huns and the Lombards some of these Nations but in conclusion the Saracens and Turks in the East made Havock of all that was polite or learned by which we lost the chief Writings of the first and best Times but instead of these many spurious ones were afterwards produced and they passed easily in dark and ignorant Ages All fell under much oppression and misery and Europe was so over-run with Barbarity and Ignorance that it cannot be easily
Body Here then was the Tradition and Practice of the Church falsified which is no small Prejudice against those that support the Doctrine as well as against the Credit of that Council About thirty Years after that Council Paschase Radbert Abbot of Corby in France did very plainly assert the corporal Presence in the Eucharist He is acknowledged both by Bellarmin and Sirmondus to be the first Writer that did on purpose advance and explain that Doctrine He himself values his Pains in that Matter and as he laments the slowness of some in believing it so he pretends that he had moved many to assent to it But he confesses that some blamed him for ascribing a Sense to the Words of Christ that was not consonant to Truth There was but one Book writ in that Age to second him the Name of the Author was lost till Mabillon discovered that it was writ by one Herigerus Abbot of Cob. But all the Eminent Men and the great Writers of that time wrote plainly against this Doctrine and affiâ—med that the Bread and Wine remained in the Sacrament and did nourish our Bodies as other Meats do Those were Rabanus Maurus Archbishop of Mentz Amalarius Archbishop of Triers Heribald Bishop of Auxerre Bertram or Ratramne Iohn Scot Erigena Walafridus Strabus Florus and Christian Druthmar Three of these set themselves on purpose to refute Paschase Rabanus Maurus in an Epistle to Abbot Egilon wrote against Paschase for saying that it was that Body that was born of the Virgin that was crucified and raised up again which was daily offered up And though that Book is lost yet as he himself refers his Reader to it in his Penitential so we have an Account given of it by the Anonymous defender of Paschase Ratramne was commanded by Charles the Bald then Emperour to write upon that Subject which he in the beginning of his Book promises to do not trusting to his own Sense but following the Steps of the Holy Fathers He tells us that there were different Opinions about it Some believing that the Body of Christ was there without a Figure Others saying that it was there in a Figure or Mystery Upon which he apprehended that a great Schism must follow His Book is very short and very plain He asserts our Doctrine as expresly as we our selves can do He delivers it in the same Words and proves it by many of the same Arguments and Authorities that we bring Raban and Ratramne were without dispute reckoned among the first Men of that Age. Iohn Scot was also commanded by the same Emperour to write on the same Subject He was one of the most Learned and the most Ingenious Men of the age and was in great Esteem both with the Emperour and with our King Alfred He was reckoned both a Saint and a Martyr He did formally refute Paschase's Doctrine and assert ours His Book is indeed lost but a full Account of it is given us by other Writers of that Time And it is a great Evidence that his Opinion in this Matter was not then thought to be contrary to the general Sense of the Church in that Age For he having writ against St. Augustin's Doctrine concerning Predestination there was a very severe Censure of him and of his Writings published under the Name of the Church of Lions In which they do not once reflect on him for his Opinions touching the Eucharist It appears from this that their Doctrine concerning the Sacrament was then generally received Since both Ratramne and he though they differ'd extreamly in that Point of Predestination yet both agreed in this It is probable that the Saxon Homily that was read in England on Easter-day was taken from Scot's Book which does fully reject the corporal Presence This is enough to shew that Paschase's Opinion was an Innovation broached in the Ninth Century and was opposed by all the Great Men of that Age. The Tenth Century was the blackest and most ignorant of all the Ages of the Church There is not one Writer in that Age that gives us any clear Account of the Doctrine of the Church Such remote Hints as occur do still savour of Ratramne's Doctrine All Men were then asleep and so it was a fit time for the Tares that Paschase had sown to grow up in it The Popes of that Age were such a Succession of Monsters that Baronius cannot forbear to make the saddest Exclamations possible against their Debaucheries their Cruelties and their other Vices About the middle of the Eleventh Century after this Dispute had slept almost two hundred Years it was again revived Bruno Bishop of Angiers and Berengarius his Archdeacon maintained the Doctrine of Ratramne Little mention is made of the Bishop but the Archdeacon is spoken of as a Man of great Piety So that he past for a Saint and was a Man of such Learning that when he was brought before Pope Nicolaus no Man could resist him He writ against Paschase and had many followers The Historians of that Age tell us that his Doctrine had overspread all France The Books writ against him by Lanfranc and others are filled with an impudent corrupting of all Antiquity Many Councils were held upon this Matter and these together with the Terrours of Burning which was then beginning to be the common Punishment of Heresy made him renounce his Opinion But he returned to it again yet he afterwards renounced it Though Lanfranc reproaches him that it was not the Love of Truth but the Fear of Death that brought him to it And his final Retracting of that renouncing of his Opinion is lately found in France as I have been credibly informed Thus this Opinion that in the Ninth Century was generally received and was condemned by neither Pope nor Council was become so odious in the Eleventh Century that none durst own it And he who had the Courage to own it yet was not resolute enough to stand to it For about this Time the Doctrine of extirpating Hereticks and of deposing such Princes as were Defective in that Matter was universally put in Practice Great Bodies of Men began to separate from the Roman Communion in the Southern Parts of France and one of the chief Points of their Doctrine was their believing that Christ was not corporally Present in the Eucharist and that he was there only in a Figure or Mystery But now that the contrary Doctrine was established and that those who denied it were adjudged to be burnt it is no wonder if it quickly gained Ground when on the one hand the Priests saw their Interest in promoting it and all People felt the Danger of denying it The Anathema's of the Church and the Terrours of Burning were infallible Things to silence Contradiction at least if not to gain Assent Soon after this Doctrine was received the Schoolmen began to refine upon it Lib. 4. Dist. 11. as they did upon every thing else The Master of the Sentences would not determine how Christ was Present
Deity But to this Two things are to be opposed 1 st That those who first discovered these Countries and have given that account of them did not know them enough nor understand their Language so perfectly as was necessary to enable them to comprehend all their Opinions And this is the more probable because others that have writ after them assure us that they are not without all sense of Religion which the first discoveries had too hastily affirmed Some prints of Religion begin to be observed among those of Soldania though it is certainly one of the most degenerated of all Nations But a 2d Answer to this is That those Nations of whom these Reports are given out are so extremely sunk from all that is wise or regular great and good in human Nature so rude and untractable and so incapable of Arts and Discipline that if the Reports concerning them are to be believed and if that weakens the Argument from the common consent of Mankind of the one hand it strengthens it on another while it appears that Human Nature when it wants this Impression it wants with it all that is great or orderly in it and shews a brutality almost as low and base as is that of Beasts Some men are born without some of their Senses and others without the use of Reason and Memory And yet those exceptions do not prove that the imperfections of such persons are not irregularities against the common course of Things The monstrousness as well as the miseries of persons so unhappily born tend to recommend more effectually the perfection of human Nature So if these Nations which are supposed to be without the belief of a God are such a low and degenerated piece of human Nature that some have doubted whether they are a perfect Race of Men or not this does not derogate from but rather confirms the force of this Argument from the general consent of all Nations A Second Exception to this Argument is That men have not agreed in the same Notions concerning the Deity Some believing Two Gods a Good and Bad that are in a perpetual contest together Others holding a vast number of Gods either all equal or subaltern to one another And some believing God to be a corporeal Being and that the Sun Moon and Stars and a great many other Beings are Gods Since then though all may acknowledge a Deity in general they are yet subdivided into so many different conceits about it no Argument can be drawn from this supposed Consent which is not so great in reality as it seems to be But in Answer to this we must observe That the constant sense of Mankind agreeing in this That there is a Superior Being that governs the World shews that this fixed Persuasion has a deep Root Though the weakness of several Nations being practised upon by designing men they have in many things corrupted this Notion of God That might have arisen from the Tradition of some true Doctrines vitiated in the conveyance Spirits made by God to govern the World by the Order and under the Direction of the Supreme Mind might easily come to be lookt on as subordinate Deities Some evil and lapsed Spirits might in a course of some Ages pass for evil Gods The Apparitions of the Deity under some Figures might make these Figures to be adored And God being considered as the Supreme Light this might lead men to Worship the Sun as his chief Vehicle And so by degrees he might pass for the Supreme God Thus it is easy to trace up these mistakes to what may justly be supposed to be their first Source and Rise But still the Foundation of them all was a firm belief of a Superior Nature that govern'd the World Mankind agreeing in that an occasion was given thereby to bad and designing men to graft upon it such other Tenets as might feed Superstition and Idolatry and furnish the Managers of those Impostures with advantages to raise their own Authority But how various soever the several Ages and Nations of the World may have been as to their more special Opinions and Rites yet the General Idea of a God remain'd still unalter'd even amidst all the changes that have happened in the particular Forms and Doctrines of Religion Another Argument for the Being of God is taken from the Visible World in which there is a vast variety of Beings curiously framed and that seem designed for great and noble ends In these we see clear Characters of God's Eternal Power and Wisdom And that is thus to be made out It is certain that nothing could give Being to it self so the things which we see either had their Being from all Eternity or were made in time And either they were from all Eternity in the same State and under the same Revolutions of the Heavens as they are at present or they fell into the Order and Method in which they do now rowl by some happy chance out of which all the Beauty and Usefulness of the Creation did arise But if all these suppositions are manifestly false then it will remain That if things neither were from all Eternity as they now are nor fell into their present State by chance then there is a Superior Essence that gave them Being and that moulded them as we see they now are The First Branch of this That they were not as now they are from all Eternity is to be proved by two sorts of Arguments the one Intrinsical by demonstrating this to be impossible the other Moral by shewing that it is not at all credible As to the first it is to be considered that a successive duration made up of Parts which is called Time and is measured by a successive Rotation of the Heavens cannot possibly be Eternal For if there were Eternal Revolutions of Saturn in his course of Thirty Years and Eternal Revolutions of Days as well as Years of Minutes as well as Hours then the one must be as infinite as the other so that the one must be equal to the other both being infinite and yet the latter are some Millions of times more than the other which is impossible Further Of ev'ry past duration as this is true That once it was present so this is true That once it was to come This being a necessary affection of every thing that exists in time If then all past durations were all once future or to be then we cannot conceive such a Succession of Durations Eternal since once every one of them was to come Nor can all this or any part of it be turned against us who believe that some Beings are immortal and shall never cease to be for all those future durations have never actually been but are still produced of new and so continued in being This Argument may seem to be too subtile and it will require some attention of mind to observe and discover the force of it but after we have turned it over and over again it will
have put our Minds likewise under such a Subordination to some material Motions that out of them peculiar Thoughts should arise in us And though this Union is that which we cannot distinctly conceive yet there is no difficulty in it equal to that of our imagining that Matter can think or move it self We perceive that we our selves and the rest of Mankind have thinking Principles within us so from thence it is easy enough to us to apprehend That there may be other thinking Beings which either have no Bodies at all but act purely as Intellectual Substances or if they have Bodies that they are so subtilised as to be capable of a vast quickness of Motion such in proportion as we perceive to be in our Animal Spirits which in the Minute that our minds command them are raising Motions in the remotest parts of our Bodies Such Bodies may also be so thin as to be invisible to us and as among Men some are Good and some Bad and of the Bad some seem to be determinedly and as to all appearance incurably Bad so there may have been a Time and State of Liberty in which those Spirits were left to their choice whether they would continue in their Innocency or fall from it and such as continued might be for ever fixed in that State or Exalted to higher Degrees in it And such as fell from it might fall irrecoverably into a state of utter Apostacy from God and of Rebellion against him There is nothing in this Theory that is incredible Therefore if the Scriptures have told us any thing concerning it we have no reason to be prejudiced against them upon that account Besides that there are innumerable Histories in many several Countries and Ages of the World of extraordinary Apparitions and other unaccountable Performances that could only have been done by Invisible Powers Many of those are so well attested that it argues a strange pitch of Obstinacy to refuse to believe a Matter of Fact when it is well vouched and when there is nothing in reason to oppose it but an unwillingness to believe Invisible Beings It is true this is an Argument in which a fabulous Humour will go far and in which some are so credulous as to swallow down every thing Therefore all wise men ought to suspend their belief and not to go too fast but when things are so undeniably attested that there is no reason to question the exactness or the credit of the Witnesses it argues a Mind unreasonably prepossessed to reject all such Evidence All those Invisible Beings were created by God and are not to be considered as Emanations or Rays of his Essence which was a gross Conceit of such Philosophers as fancied that the Deity had Parts They are Beings Created by him and are capable of passing through various Scenes in Bodies more or less refined In this Life the State of our Minds receives vast Alterations from the State of our Bodies which ripen gradually And after they are come to their full growth they cannot hold in that condition long but sink down much faster than they grew up some Humours or Diseases discomposing the Brain which is the Seat of the Mind so entirely that it cannot serve it at least so far as to Reflex Acts. So in the next State it is possible that we may at first be in a less perfect condition by reason of this that we may have a less perfect Body to which we may be united between our Death and the General Resurrection and there may be a time in which we may receive a vast Addition and Exaltation in that State by the raising up of our former Bodies and the reuniting us to them which may give us a greater compass and a higher Elevation These things are only proposed as Suppositions that have no Absurdity in them So that if they should happen to be the Parts of a Revealed Religion there is no reason to doubt of it or to reject it on such an Account The Last Branch of this Article is The Assertion of that great Doctrine of the Christian Religion concerning the Trinity or Three Persons in one Divine Essence It is a vain attempt to go about to prove this by Reason For it must be confessed That we should have had no cause to have thought of any such thing if the Scriptures had not Revealed it to us There are indeed Prints of a very Ancient Tradition in the World of Three in the Deity called the Word or the Wisdom and the Spirit or the Love besides the Fountain of both these God This was believed by those from whom the most Ancient Philosophers had their Doctrines The Author of the Book of Wisdom Philo and the Chaldee Paraphrasts have many things that shew that they had received those Traditions from the former Ages but it is not so easy to determine what gave the first rise of them It has been much argued whether this was Revealed in the Old Testament or not some from the Plural Termination of Elohim which is joined to Singular Verbs and from that of the Lord Raining Fire from the Lord upon Sodom Iehovah from Iehovah from the Description of the Wisdom of God in the 8 th of the Proverbs as a person with God from all Eternity and from the mention that is often made of the Spirit as well as the Word of God that came to the Prophets they have I say from all these places and some others concluded that this is contained in the Old Testament Others have doubted of this and have said that the Name Elohim though of a Plural Termination being often joined to a Singular Verb makes it reasonable to think it was a Singular which by somewhat peculiar to that Language might be of a Plural Termination Nor have they thought That since Angels carry the Name of God when they went on special Deputations from him the Angels being called Iehovah could be very confidently urged That Sublime Description of the Wisdom of God in the Proverbs seems not to them to be a full proof in this Matter For the Wisdom there mentioned seems to be the Wisdom of Creation and Providence which is not personal but belongs to the Essence Nor do they think that those places in the Old Testament in which mention is made of the Word or of the Spirit ofGod can settle this Point for these may only signify God's Revealing himself to his Prophets Therefore whatever secret Tradition the Iews might have had among them concerning this from whom perhaps the Greeks might have also had it yet many do not pretend to prove this from passages in the Old Testament alone Though the Expositions given to some of them in the New Testament prove to us who acknowledge it what was the true meaning of those Passages yet take the Old Testament in it self without the New and it must be confessed That it will not be easy to prove this Article from it But there are very
The Stile and Matter of the Revelation as well as the designation of Divine given to the Author of it gave occasion to many Questions about it Clemens of Rome cites it as a Prophetical Book Clem. in Ep. ad Coâ— Justin cont Tryphon Irenaeus l 5. c. 30. Eus. Hist. l. 4. c. 24 26. l. 5. c. 18. l. 7. c. 27. Iustin Martyr says it was writ by Iohn one of Christ's Twelve Apostles Irenaeus calls it the Revelation of St. Iohn the Disciple of our Lord writ almost in our own Age in the End of Domitian's Reign Melito writ upon it Theophilus of Antioch Hyppolitus Clemens and Dennis of Alexandria Tertullian Cyprian and Origen do cite it And thus the Canon of the New Testamentseems to be fullymade outbythe concurrent Testimony of the several Churches immediately after the Apostolicaltime Here it is to be observed that a great difference is to be made between all this and the Oral Tradition of a Doctrine in which there is nothing fixed or permanent so that the whole is only Report carried about and handed down Whereas here is a Book that was only to be copied out and read publickly and by all Persons between which the difference is so vast that it is as little possible to imagine how the one should continue pure as how the other should come to be corrupted There was never a Book of which we have that reason to be assured that it is genuine that we have here There hapned to be constant Disputes among Christians from the Second Century downward concerning some of the most important Parts of this Doctrine and by both sides these Books were appealed to And though there might be some Variations in Readings and Translations yet no question was made concerning the Canon or the Authenticalness of the Books themselves unless it were by the Manichees who came indeed to be called Christians by a very enlarged way of speaking since it is justly strange how men who said that the Author of the Universe and of the Mosaical Dispensation was an Evil God and who held that there were Two Supreme Gods a Good and an Evil one how such men I say could be called Christians The Authority of those Books is not derived from any Judgment that the Church made concerning them but from this That it was known that they were writ either by men who were themselves the Apostles of Christ or by those who were their Assistants and Companions at whose Order or under whose Direction and Approbation it was known that they were written and published These Books were received and known for such in the very Apostolical Age it self so that many of the Apostolical men such as Ignatius and Polycarp lived long enough to see the Canon generally received and settled The suffering and depressed state of the First Christians was also such that as there is no reason to suspect them of Imposture so it is not at all credible that an Imposture of this kind could have passed upon all the Christian Churches A man in a Corner might have forged the Sibylline Oracles or some other Pieces which were not to be generally used and they might have apâ—â—ared soon after and Crâ—dit might have been given too easily to a Book or Writing of that kind But it cannot be imagined that in an Age in which the belief of this Doctrine brought men under great Troubles and in which Miracles and other extraordinary Gifts were long continued in the Church that I say either False Books could have been so early obtruded on the Church as True or that True Books could have been so vitiated as to lose their Original Purity while they were so universally read and used and that so soon or that the Writers of that very Age and of the next should have been so generally and so grosly imposed upon as to have cited Spurious Writings for True These are things that could not be believed in the Histories or Records of any Nation Though the Value that the Christians set upon these Books and the constant use they made of them reading a parcel of them every Lord's Day make this much less supposable in the Christian Religion than it could be in any other sort of History or Record whatsoever The early spreading of the Christian Religion to so many remote Countries and Provinces the many Copies of these Books that lay in Countries so remote the many Translations of them that were quickly made do all concur to make the Impossibility of any such Imposture the more sensible Thus the Canon of the New Testament is fixed upon clear and sure Grounds From thence without any further Proof we may be convinced of the Canon of the Old Testament Christ does frequently cite Moses and the Prophets he appeals to them and though he charged the Iews of that time chiefly their Teachers and Rulers with many Disorders and Faults yet he never once so much as insinuated that they had corrupted their Law or other Sacred Books which if true had been the greatest of all those Abuses that they had put upon the People Our Saviour cited their Books according to the Translation that was then in Credit and common Use amongst them When one asked him which was the great Commandment he answered How readest thou And he proved the chief things relating to himself his Death and Resurrection from the Prophecies that had gone before which ought to have been fulfilled in him He also cites the Old Testament Luke 24.44 by a Threefold Division of the Law of Moses the Prophets and the Psalms according to the Three Orders of Books into which the Iews had divided it The Psalms which was the first among the Holy Writings being set for that whole Volume St. Paul says That to the Iews were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3.2 He reckons that among the chief of their Privileges but he never blames them for being unfaithful in this Trust and it is certain that the Iews have not corrupted the chief of those Passages that are urged against them to prove Jesus to have been the Christ. So that the Old Testament at least the Translation of the LXX Interpreters which was in common use and in high esteem among the Iews in our Saviour's time was as to the main faithful and uncorrupted This might be further urged from what St. Paul says concerning those Scriptures which Timothy had learned of a Child these could be no other than the Books of the Old Testament Thus if the Writings of the New Testament are acknowledged to be of Divine Authority the full Testimony that they give to the Books of the Old Testament does sufficiently prove their â—uthority and Genuineness likewise But to carry this matter yet further Moses wrought such Miracles both in Egypt in passing through the Red-Sea and in the Wilderness that if these are acknowledg'd to be true there can be no question made of his being sent of God and authorized by
they are Yet a long softening is added to the Decree importing That none ought to glory in himself but in the Lord whose goodness is such that he makes his own gifts to us to be merits in us And it adds That because in many things we offend all every one ought to consider the justice and severity as well as the mercy and goodness of God and not to judge himself even tho he should know nothing by himself So then that in which all are agreed about this Matter is 1. That our Works cannot be good or acceptable to God but as we are assisted by his Grace and Spirit to do them So that the real Goodness that is in them flows from those Assistances which enable us to do them 2. That God does certainly reward Good Works He has promised it and he is faithful and cannot lie nor is he unrighteous to forget our labour of love So the Favour of God and eternal Happiness is the reward of Good Works Mention is also made of a full reward of the reward of a righteous Man and of a Prophet's reward Matth. 10.41 42. 2 Cor. 4.17 3. That this Reward is promised in the Gospel and could not be claimed without that by any antecedent Merit founded upon equality Since our light affliction which is but for a moment worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of Glory The Points in which we differ are 1. Whether the Good Works of holy Men are so perfect that there is no defect in them or whether there is still some such defect mixed with them that there is occasion for Mercy to pardon somewhat even in Good Men Those of the Church of Rome think that a Work cannot be called good if it is not entirely good and that nothing can please God in which there is a mixture of Sin Whereas we according to the Article believe that Human Nature is so weak and so degenerated that as far as our Natural Powers concur in any Action there is still some Allay in it and that a Good work is considered by God according to the main both of the Action and of the Intention of him that does it and as a Father pities his Children so God passes over the defects of those who serve him sincerely though not perfectly Gen. 6.5 Jam. 3.2 Phil. 3.13 The imaginations of the heart of man are only evil continually In many things we offend all says St. Iames And St. Paul reckons that he had not yet apprehended but was forgetting the things behind and reaching to these before and still pressing forward We see in fact that the best Men in all Ages have been complaining and humbling themselves even for the sins of their Holy Things for their Vanity and Desire of Glory for the distraction of their Thoughts in Devotion and for the Affection which they bore to Earthly things It were a Doctrine of great Cruelty which might drive Men to despair if they thought that no Action could please God in which they were conscious to themselves of some Imperfection or Sin The Midwives of Egypt feared God yet they excused themselves by a Lye But God accepted of what was good and passed over what was amiss in them and built them houses Exod. 1.21 St. Austin urges this frequently That our Saviour in teaching us to pray has made this a standing Petition Forgive us our Trespasses as well as that Give us this day our daily Bread for we sin daily and do always need a Pardon Upon these Reasons we conclude that somewhat of the Man enters into all that Men do We are made up of Infirmities and we need the Intercession of Christ to make our best Actions to be accepted of by God For if he should straitly mark iniquity who can stand before him Psal. 130.3 4. 2 Chron. 30.18 19. but mercy is with him and forgiveness So that with Hezekiah we ought to pray That though we are not purified according to the purification of the sanctuary yet the good Lord would pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God The Second Question arises out of this concerning the Merit of Good Works for upon the supposition of their being compleatly good that Merit is founded which will be acknowledged to be none at all if it is believed that there are such Defects in them that they need a Pardon since where there is Guilt there can be no pretension to Merit The word Merit has also a sound that is so daring so little suitable to the humility of a Creature to be used towards a Being of Infinite Majesty and with relation to endless Rewards that though we do not deny but that a sense is given to it by many of the Church of Rome to which no just exception can be made yet there seems to be somewhat too bold in it especially when Condignity is added to it And since this may naturally give us an Idea of a buying and selling with God and that there has been a great deal of this put in practice it is certain that on many respects this Word ought not to be made use of There is somewhat in the Nature of Man apt to swell and to raise it self out of measure and to that no Indulgence ought to be given in words that may flatter it for we ought to subdue this Temper by all means possible both in our selves and others On the other hand though we confess that there is a Disorder and Weakness that hangs heavy upon us and that sticks close to us yet this ought not to make us indulge our selves in our sins as if they were the effects of an Infirmity that is inseparable from us To consent to any Sin if it were ever so small in it self is a very great sin We ought to go on still cleansing our selves more and more 2 Cor. 7.1 from all filthiness both of the flesh and of the spirit and perfecting holiness in the fear of God Our readiness to sin should awaken both our diligence to watch against it and our humility under it For though we grow not up to a pitch of being above all sin and of absolute Perfection yet there are many degrees both of Purity and Perfection to which we may arrive and to which we must constantly aspire So that we must keep a just Temper in this Matter neither to ascribe so much to our own Works as to be lifted up by reason of them or to forget our daily need of a Saviour both for Pardon and Intercession nor on the other hand so far to neglect them as to take no care about them The due Temper is to make our calling and election sure Phil. 2.12 Col. 3.17 and to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling but to do all in the name of the Lord Iesus ever trusting to him and giving thanks to God by him ARTICLE XIII Of Works before Justification Works done before the
We must be then well assured in whom this great Privillege is vested before we can be bound to acknowledge it or to submit to it So here a great many things must be known before we can either argue from or apply those Passages of Scripture in which it is pretended that Infallibility is promised to the Church And if private Judgment is to be trusted in the Inquiries that arise about all these particulars they being the most important and most difficult matters that we can search into then it will be thought reasonable to trust it yet much further It is evident by their proceeding this way that both the Authority and the Sense of the Scriptures must be known antecedently to our acknowledging the Authority or the Infallibility of any Church For it is an Eternal Principle and Rule of Reason never to prove one thing by another till that other is first well proved Nor can any thing be proved afterwards by that which was proved by it This is as impossible as if a Father should beget a Son and should be afterwards begotten by that Son Therefore the Scriptures cannot prove the Infallibility of the Church and be afterwards proved by the Testimony of the Church So the one or the other of these must be first settled and proved before any use can be made of it to prove the other by it The last way they take to find out this Church by is from some Notes that they pretend are peculiar to her such as the Name Catholick Antiquity Extent Bellar. Contr. Tom 2. l. 4. Duration Succession of Bishops Vnion among themselves and with their Head Conformity of Doctrine with former times Miracles Prophecy Sanctity of Doctrine Holiness of Life Temporal Felicity Curses upon their Enemies and a constant Progress or Efficacy of Doctrine together with the Confession of their Adversaries And they fancy that wheresoever we find these we must believe that Body of Men to be Infallible But upon all this endless Questions will arise so far will it be from ending Controversies and settling us upon Infallibility If all these must be believed to be the Marks of the Infallible Church upon the account of which we ought to believe it and submit to it then two Enquires upon every one of these Notes must be discussed before we can be obliged to acquiesce in the Infallibility First Whether that is a true Mark of Infallibility or not And next Whether it belongs to the Church which they call Infallible or not And then another very intricate Question will arise upon the whole Whether they must all be found together or How many or which of them together will give us the entire Characters of the Infallible Church In discussing the Questions Whether every one of these is a true Mark or not no use must be made of the Scriptures for if the Scriptures have their Authority from the Testimony or rather the Decisions of the Infallible Church no use can be made of them till that is first fixed Some of these Notes are such as did not at all agree to the Church in the best and purest Times for then she had but a little Extent a short-liv'd Duration and no Temporal Felicity and she was generally reproached by her Adversaries But out of which of these Topicks can one hope to fetch out an Assurance of the Infallibility of such a Body Can no Body of Men continue long in the constant Series and with much Prosperity but must they be concluded to be Infallible Can it be thought that the assuming a Name can be a Mark Why is not the Name Christian as solemn as Catholick Might not the Philosophers have concluded from hence against the First Christians That they were by the confession of all Men the true Lovers of Wisdom since they were called Philosophers much more unanimously than the Church of Rome is called Catholick If a Conformity of Doctrine with former times and a Sanctity of Doctrine are Notes of the Church these will lead men into Enquiries of such a nature that if they are once allowed to go so far with their private Judgment they may well be suffered to go much further Some Standard must be fixed on by which the Sanctity of Doctrine may be examined they must also be allowed to examine what was the Doctrine of former times and here it will be natural to begin at the first times the Age of the Apostles It must therefore be first known what was the Doctrine of that Age before we can examine the Conformity of the present Age with it A Succession of Bishops is confessed to be still kept up among corrupted Churches An Union of the Church with its Head cannot be supposed to be a Note unless it is first made out by some other Topicks That this Church must have a Head and that he is Infallible For unless it is proved by some other Argument That she ought to have a Head she cannot be bound to adhere to him or to own him and unless it is also proved that he is Infallible she cannot be bound absolutely and without restrictions to adhere to him Holiness of Life cannot be a Mark unless it is pretended that those in whom the Infallibility is are all holy A few holy men here and there are indeed an Honour to any Body but it will seem a strange Inference That because some few in a Society are eminently holy that therefore others of that Body who are not so but are perhaps as eminently vicious should be Infallible Somewhat has been already said concerning Miracles The pretence to Prophecy falls within the same Consideration The one being as wonderful a Communication of Omniscience as the other is of Omnipotence For the Confession of Adversaries or some Curâ—es on them these cannot signifie much unless they were Universal Fair Enemies will acknowledg what is good among their Adversaries But as that Church is the least apt of any Society we know to speak good of those who differ from her so she has not very much to boast as to others saying much good of her And if Signal Providences have now and then happened these are such things and they are carried on with such a depth that we must acquiesce in the Observation of the wisest Men of all Ages That the race is not to the swift nor the battel to the strong Eccl. 9.11 But that time and chance happeneth to all things And thus it appears That these pretended Notes instead of giving us a clear Thread to lead us up to Infallibility and to end all Controversies they do start a great variety of Questions that engage us into a Labyrinth out of which it cannot be easy for any to extricate themselves But if we could see an end of this then a new set of Questions will come on When we go to examine all Churches by them Whether the Church of Rome has them all And if she alone has them so that no
that imports the Designation of the Person so prayed over In the Greek Church there is indeed a different Form for though there are Prayers in their Office of Ordination Haberti pontif Graecum Morinus de Ordinat Sacâ—is yet the words that do accompany the Imposition of Hands are only Declaratory The Grace of God that perfects the feeble and heals the weak promotes this Man to be a Deacon a Priest or a Bishop let us therefore pray for him By which they pretend only to judge of a divine Vocation All the ancient Rituals and all those that treat of them for the first Seven Centuries speak of nothing as Essential to Orders but Prayer and Imposition of Hands It is true many Rites came to be added and many Prayers were used that went far beyond the first Simplicity But in the Tenth or Eleventh Century a new Form was brought in of delivering the Vessels in ordaining Priests and Words were joined with that giving them Power to offer Sacrifices to God and to celebrate Masses and then the Orders were believed to be given by this Rite The delivering of the Vessels look'd like a Matter and these Words were thought the Form of the Sacrament and the Prayer that was formerly used with the Imposition of Hands was indeed still used but only as a Part of the Office no Hands were laid on when it was used And tho' the Form of laying on of Hands was still continued the Bishop with other Priests laying their Hands on those they Ordained yet it is now a dumb Ceremony not a word of a Prayer being said while they lay on their Hands So that tho' both Prayer and Imposition of Hands are used in the Office yet they are not joined together In the conclusion of the Ofsice a new Benediction was added ever since the Twelfth Century The Bishop alone lays on his Hands saying Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins ye remit they are remitted and whose sins ye retain they are retained The number Seven was thought to sute the Sacraments best so Orders were made one of them and of these only Priesthood where the Vessels were declared to be the Matter and the Form was the delivering them with the words Take thou Authority to offer up Sacrifices to God and to Celebrate Masses both for the Living and the Dead In the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost The Schoolmen have taken a new way of explaining this whole matter borrowed from the Eucharist that is made up of Two parts the Consecration of the Bread and of the Wine both so necessary that without the one the other becomes void So they teach that a Priest has Two Powers of Consecrating and of Absolving and that he is Ordained to the one by the delivery of the Vessels and to the other by the Bishop's laying on of Hands with the words Receive the Holy Ghost and they make the Bishop and the Priest's laying on Hands jointly to be only their declaring as by a Suffrage that such a Person ought to be Ordained So totally have they departed from the Primitive Forms If this is a Sacrament and if the Sacrament consists in this Matter and Form by them assigned then since all the Rituals of the Latin Church for the sirst Ten Centuries had no such Form of Ordaining Priests this cannot be the Matter and Form of a Sacrament otherwise the Church had in a course of so many Ages no true Orders nor any Sacrament in them Nor will it serve in answer to this to say that Christ Instituted no special Matter nor Form here but has left the specifying those among the other Powers that he has given to his Church For a Sacrament being an Institution of applying a Matter designed by God by a particular Form likewise appointed to say that Christ appointed here neither Matter nor Form is plainly to confess that this is no Sacrament In the first Nine or Ten Ages there was no Matter at all used nothing but an Imposition of Hands with Prayer So that by this Doctrine the Church of God was all that while without true Orders since there was nothing used that can be called the Matter of a Sacrament Therefore though we continue this Institution of Christ as he â—nd his Apostles settled it in the Church yet we deny it to be a Sacrament we also deny all the inferior Orders to be Sacred below that of Deacon The other Orders we do not deny might be well and on good reasons appointed by the Church as steps through which Clerks might be made to pass in order to a stricter examination and trial of them like Degrees in Universities But the making them at least the Subdiaconate Sacred as it is reckoned by Pope Eugenius is we think beyond the Power of the Church for here a Degree of Orders is made a Sacrament and yet that Degree is not named in the Scripture nor in the first Ages It is true it came to be soon used with the other Inferior Orders but it cannot be pretended to be a Sacrament since no Divine Institution can be brought for it And we cannot but observe that in the definition that Eugenius has given of the Sacraments which is an Authentical piece in the Roman Church where he reckons Priests Deacons and Subdeacons as belonging to the Sacrament of Orders he does not Name Bishops though their being of Divine Institution is not questioned in that Church Perhaps the Spirit with which they acted at that time in Basil offended him so much that he was more set on depressing than on raising them In the Council of Trent in which so much Zeal appeared for recovering the Dignity of the Episcopal Order at that time so much eclipsed by the Papal Usurpations when the Sacrament of Orders was Treated of they reckoned Seven Degrees of them the highest of which is that of Priest So that though they Decreed that a Bishop was by the Divine Institution above a Priest yet they did not Decree that the Office was an Order or a Sacrament And the Schoolmen do generally explain Episcopate as being a higher Degree or Extension of Priesthood rather than a new Order or a Sacrament the main thing in their Thoughts being that which if true is the greatest of all Miracles the wonderful Conversion made in Transubstantion they seem to think that no Order can be above that which qualifies a Man for so great a Performance I say nothing in this place concerning the power of Offering Sacrifices pretended to be given in Orders for that belongs to another Article The Fourth Sacrament here rejected is Marriage which is reckoned the last by the Roman Account In the Point of Argument there is less to say here than in any of the other but there seems to be a very express warrant for calling it a Sacrament from the Translation of a passage in St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians Ephes. 5.32 in which he makes an allusion while he
doubt of the Testimony of our Senses Another presumptive Proof that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that the Heathens and the Iews who charged them and their Doctrine with every thing that they could invent to make both it and them odious and ridiculous could never have passed over this in which both Sense and Reason seemed to be so evidently on their side They reproach the Christians for believing a God that was Born a God of Flesh that was crucified and buried They laughed at their belief of a Judgment to come of endless Flames of a heavenly Paradise and of the Resurrection of the Body Those who writ the first Apologies for the Christian Religion Iustin Martyr Tertullian Origen Arnobius and Minutius Felix have given us a large Account of the Blasphemies both of Iews and Gentiles against the Doctrines of Christianity Cyril of Alexandria has given us Iulian's Objections in his own Words who having been not only initiated into the Christian Religion but having read the Scriptures in the Churches and being a Philosophical and Inquisitive Man must have been well instructed concerning the Doctrine and the Sacraments of this Religion And his Relation to the Emperor Constantine must have made the Christians concerned to take more than ordinary Pains on him When he made Apostacy from the Faith he reproached the Christians with the Doctrine of Baptism and laughed at them for thinking that there was an Ablution and Sanctification in it conceiving it a thing Impossible that Water should wash or cleanse a Soul Yet neither he nor Porphiry nor Celsus before them did charge this Religion with the Absurdities of Transubstantiation It is reasonable to believe that if the Christians of that time had any such Doctrine among them it must have been known Every Christian must have known in what Sense those Words This is is my body and This is my blood were understood among them All the Apostates from Christianity must have known it and must have published it to excuse or hide the shame of their Apostacy Since Apostates are apt to spread Lies of them whom they forsake but not to conceal such Truths as are to their Prejudice Iulian must have known it and if he had known it his Judgment was too True and his Malice to the Christian Religion too Quick to overlook or neglect the Advantages which this part of their Doctrine gave him Nor can this be carried off by saying that the eating of human Flesh and the Thyestean Suppers which were objected to the Christians relate to this When the Fathers answer that they tell the Heathens that it was a downright Calumny and Lie And do not offer any Explanations or Distinctions taken from their Doctrine of the Sacrament to clear them from the mistake and malice of this Calumny The Truth is the execrable Practices of the Gnosticks who were called Christians gave the Rise to those as well as to many other Calumnies But they were not at all founded on the Doctrine of the Eucharist which is never once mentioned as the Occasion of this Accusation Another Presumption from which we conclude that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that we find Heresies and Disputes arising concerning all the other Points of Religion There were very few of the Doctrines of the Christian Religion and not any of the Mysteries of the Faith that did not fall under great Objections But there was not any one Heresy raised upon this Head Men were never so meek and tame as easily to believe things when there appeared strong Evidence or at least great Presumptions against them In these last Eight or Nine Centuries since this Doctrine was received there has been a perpetual Opposition made to it even in dark and unlearned Ages In which implicite Faith and blind Obedience have carried a great sway And though the Secular Arm has been employed with great and unrelenting Severities to extirpate all that have opposed it Yet all the while many have stood out against it and have suffered much and long for their rejecting it Now it is not to be imagined that such an opposition should have been made to this Doctrine during the nine hundred Years last past and that for the former eight hundred Years there should have been no Disputes at all concerning it And that while all other things were so much questioned that several Fathers writ and Councils were called to settle the Belief of them yet that for about eight hundred Years this was the single Point that went down so easily that no Treatise was all that while writ to prove it nor Council held to establish it Certainly the Reason of this will appear to be much rather that since there have been Contests upon this Point these last Nine Ages and that there were none the first Eight this Doctrine was not known during those First Ages and that the great Silence about it for so long a time is a very strong Presumption that in all that time this Doctrine was not thought of The last of those Considerations that I shall offer which are of the nature of presumptive Proofs is that there are a great many Rites and other practices that have arisen out of this Doctrine as its natural Consequences which were not thought of for a great many Ages but that have gone on by a perpetual progress and have increased very fruitfully ever since this Doctrine was received Such are the Elevation Adoration and Processions together with the Doctrine of Concomitance and a vast number of Rites and Rubricks the first occasions and beginnings of which are well known These did all arise from this Doctrine it being natural especially in the Ages of Ignorance and Superstition for Men upon the supposition of Christ's being Corporally present to run out into all possible Inventions of Pomp and Magnificence about this Sacrament and it is very reasonable to think that since these things are of so late and so certain a date that the Doctrine upon which they are founded is not much ancienter The great Simplicity of the Primitive Forms not only as they are reported by Iustin Martyr and Tertullian in the Ages of the Poverty and Persecutions of the Church but as they are represented to us in the Fourth and Fifth Century by Cyril of Ierusalem the Constitutions and the pretended Areopagite have nothing of that Air that appears in the latter Ages The Sacrament was then given in both kinds it was put in the hands of the Faithful they reserved some portions of it It was given to Children for many Ages The Laity and even Boys were imployed to carry it to dying Penitents what remained of it was burnt in some places and consumed by the Clergy and by Children in other places the making Cataplasms of it the mixing the Wine with Ink to sign the Condemnation of Hereticks are very clear Presumptions that this Doctrine was not then known But above all their not adoring the Sacrament which
says Receive the Holy Ghost And in this sense and with this respect the use of these Words may be well justified ARTICLE XXXVII Of Civil Magistrates The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Iurisdiction Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some slanderous Folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself that is That they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil-doers The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian Men with Death for heinous and grievous Offences It is lawful for Christian Men at the Commandment of the Magistrate to wear Weapons and serve in the Wars THIS Article was much shorter as it was published in King Edward's time and did run thus The King of England is Supreme Head in Earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland Then followed the Paragraph against the Pope's Jurisdiction worded as it is now To which these Words were subjoined The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God wherefore we must obey him not only for fear of Punishment but also for Conscience sake In Queen Elizabeth's time it was thought fitting to take away those Prejudices that the Papists were generally infusing into the minds of the People against the term Head which seemed to be the more incongruous because a Woman did then reign therefore that was left out and instead of it the words chief Power and chief Government were made use of which do signify the same thing The Queen did also by her Injunctions offer an Explanation of this matter for whereas it was given out by those who had complied with every thing that had been done both in her Father and in her Brother's time but that resolved now to set themselves in opposition to her That she was assuming a much greater Authority than they had pretended to She upon that ordered that Explanation which is referred to in the Article and is in these words For certainly Her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Authority other than that was challenged and lately used by the said Noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth which is and was of antient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over ail manner of Persons born within these her Realms Dominions and Countries of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Foreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them And if any Person that hath conceived any other sense of the said Oath shall accept the same Oath with this Interpretation Sense or Meaning Her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient Subjâ—cts and shall acquit them of all manner of Penalties contained in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily and obstinately refuse to take the same Oath Thus this matter is opened as it is both in the Article and in the Injunctions In order to the treating regularly of this Article it is First To be proved That the Pope hath no Jurisdiction in these Kingdoms 2 dly That our Kings or Queens have it And 3 dly The Nature and Measures of this Power and Government are to be stated As for the Pope's Authority though it is now connected with the Infallibility yet it was pretended to and was advanced for many Ages before Infallibility was so much as thought on Nor was the Doctrine of their Infallibility ever so universally received and submitted to in these Western Parts as was that of their Universal Jurisdiction They were in possession of it Appeals were made to them They sent Legates and Bulls every where They granted Exemptions from the ordinary Jurisdiction and took Bishops bound to them by Oaths that were penned in the Form of Oaths of Fealty or Homage This was the first Point that our Reformers did begin with both here and every where else that so they might remove that which was an insuperable Obstruction till it was first taken out of the way to every step that could be made toward a Reformation They laid down therefore this for their Foundation That all Bishops were by their Office and Character equal and that every one of them had the same Authority that any other had over that Flock which was committed to his Care And therefore they said that the Bishops of Rome had no Authority according to the Constitution in which the Churches were settled by the Apostles but over the City of Rome And that any further Jurisdiction that any Antient Popes might have had did arise from the Dignity of the City and the Customs and Laws of the Empire As for their deriving that Authority from St. Peter it is very plain that the Apostles were all made equal to him and that they never understood our Saviour's Words to him as importing any Authority that was given to him over the rest since they continued to the last while our Saviour was among them disputing which of them should be the greatest The Proposition that the Mother of Iames and Iohn made Mat. 20.21 ver 24. ver 26. in which it was evident that they likewise concurred with her shews that they did not apprehend that Christ had made any Declaration in favour of St. Peter as by our Saviour's Answer it appears that he had not done otherwise he would have referred them to what he had already said upon that occasion By the whole History of the Acts of the Apostles it appears that the Apostles acted and consulted in common without considering St. Peter as having any Superiority over them He was called to give an account of his Baptizing Cornelius and he delivered his Opinion in the Council of Ierusalem without any strain of Authority over the rest Acts 11.2 3. Acts 15.7 ver 14 19. Gal. 2 7 8. ver 11. St. Paul does expresly deny that the other Apostles had any Superiority or Jurisdiction over him and he says in plain words that he was the Apostle of the Vncircumcision as St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and in that does rather claim an advantage over him since his was certainly the much wider Province He