of their Church This latter I undertake to make out from the undeniable Maximes to which all of that Communion are bound to adhere There are Two Principles which I may well call the Fundamental Principles of the Roman Church since all Opinions that are not inconsistent with them can be tollerated among them But whatever strikes at these must needs be Abominated as Destructive of that they call The Catholick Faith The one is The Authority of the Church The other is The Certainty of Tradition If then the Doctrine of Deposing Kings and by consequence Killing them for if they are justly deposed it 's as just to kill them as to kill any Usurper is such that without denying the Authority of the Church and the Certainty of Tradition it cannot be denied then all men must resolve either to acknowledg it or to renounce their Subjection to a Church that must needs believe it About the Authority of the Church Two things are to be observed that serve for clearing what I design to make out The First is That the Church in any one Age has as much Authority as ever it had or can have in any other Age For if Christs Promises together with the other Arguments they bring for the Authority of the Church be good they are alike strong at all Times and in all Ages And therefore though in writing Books of Controversies they muster up Authorities out of the former Ages because we profess we pay little esteem to the latter Ages Yet among themselves all Ages are alike and the Decrees of them are of equal authority Secondly The Authority of the Church is as little to be disputed in moral matters that fall under practice as in Articles of Faith that only fall under Speculation and in a word The Church must be the Infallible Expounder of the Ten Commandments as well as of the Creed All the Arguments from Christs Promises from the hazard of trusting to our private Reasonings and the Necessity of Submitting to a publick Judg are by so much the more concluding in Practical matters as it is of more Importance That Men think aright in Practical than in Speculative Opinions If then there arises a Question about a Moral matter or the Exposition of any of the Commandments The only certain Decision must be expected from the Church For instance a Question arises about Images Whether it is lawful to use them in the Worship of God upon the seeming Opposition which the worship of them has to the 2d Commandment Since the Church has once Determin'd that it may be lawfully used it is Heresie to deny it on this pretence that we fancy it is contrary to one of the Commandments So if a Controversie arise upon the Fifth Commandment How far a King is to be acknowledged if the Church has determined the Limits of that it is Heresie to carry it further If also another Question arise how much the Sixth Commandment obliges It must be carried so far and no further than the Determination of the Church allows I confess by the Doctrine of that Church even a General Council may err in a point in which any matter of Fact is included Because they may be deceived by a false Information But in a General Rule about Morality and the Extent of any of the Ten Commandments The Decision of the Church must either be certain and for ever Obligatory or the whole Doctrine of the Infallibility of the Church falls to the ground Concerning the Certainty of Tradition the general Opinion of that party is That Tradition is an Infallible Conveyance of Divine Truth and that whatever any Age of the Church delivers to another as derived from Christ and his Apostles must be received with the same Veneration and Obedience that we pay to the Holy Scriptures And for the ways of distinguishing a Tradition of the Church from any Imposture or Novelty There be four of them The first That is the most doubtful is That the greatest and most esteemed Doctors in any Age deliver as a Divine Truth Nor is it necessary that they formally say This is a Tradition but if many of them mention an Opinion and declare their own assent to it this passes as a sufficient proof of the Tradition of any Age of the Church So in all points of Controversie between them and us the greatest part of their Writers some few later and suspected ones only excepted think they have sufficiently justified their Church when they bring Testimonies out of any of the Writings of the Fathers that seem to favour their Opinion and will call it unreasonable for us to reject these because they only deliver their own opinion and do not call it the Tradition of the Church but conclude That many Writers in any age asserting an Opinion it may well be looked on as the Tradition of that Age. But because this is more liable to exception there is another way that is more infallible to judg of Tradition and that is by the conveyance of the See of Rome which they judg the chief Depository of the Faith and for which they fansie they have so many proofs from the high things some of the Fathers have said about the dignity of that See Now if these conclude any thing it must follow That whatever has been delivered in any Age by a Pope as conveyed down from Christ or his Apostles must either be so indeed or the See of Rome is not a faithful Transmitter of Tradition But there is yet a more certain way of judging of Tradition by what the chief Pastors of the Church have delivered when assembled in a general Council This being the Supreme Tribunal in the Church there can lie no appeal from it Nor can the Doctrines delivered or approved by it be questioned For instance If it were under debate How the Tradition about Transubstantiation can be made out in the Thirteenth Century it is needless to seek any other evidence than That one Almerick is condemned for denying it and in Opposition to that it was formally established in a general Council This is as much as can be had and he were very unreasonable that were not satisfied with it So if it be asked How can the Tradition of the Doctrine of Deposing Kings and giving away their Dominions in the same Century be proved The Answer is plain That same very Council decreed it Upon which a great Prince was deposed and his Dominions were given to another These are the Common Standards by which Traditions are Examined But to these a new one has been lately added which is indeed a much shorter and nearer way And that is whatever the Church holds in any one age as a Material point of Religion she must have received it from the former age and that age from the former and so it climbs upwards till the days of the Apostles If this be a certain Track of Tradition by which we may infallibly trace it Then for instance If
the Tradition of the Church was confidently alledged and some Quotations were brought and very oft out of some later Writers The Paper was no sooner read than a loud and often repeated Shout of applause followed without any further search or canvasing about these Authorities And upon that the Decree was made This was the practice both of the second Nicene and of some more ancient Councils whose Journals are hitherto preserved and where the Journals are lost we have reason to believe they followed the same method so that it is very probable there might have been some such Writing read in the Council of Lateran And if they did not found their Decree upon Tradition they were much to blame for they had as venerable a Tradition as either the second Council of Nice or some other Councils had a practice about 150 years standing from the days of Pope Gregory the VII so that it is not to be denied but they had as good authority from Tradition to make this Decree as to make most of the other Decrees on which they insist much in the Books of Controversies that are written by them By the fourth Rule of judging about Tradition the matter is yet much plainer for if the generally received Belief of any Age of the Church is a good Thread to lead us up to the Apostles times then there needs no more be said For it is certain that for near four Ages together this was the universally received Doctrine of the Church of Rome And the opposition that some Princes made to it was condemned as Heresy Rebellion and every thing that was evil And it is remarkable that both Oâ—…kam that wrote much for the Emperors cause against the Pope and Gerson and Almain no great favourers of Papal power are cited by Cardinal Perrow as acknowledging the Ecclesiastical power of deposing if a Prince were guilty of spiritual crimes So that the Controversies in this matter that were managed between the Writers for the Popes and Emperors were not whether the Pope in cases of Heresy might depose a Prince but were concerning two things very remote from this The one was whether the Pope had a direct Temporal power over all Kings by which as being Lord of the Feâ—… he could proceed upon any Cause whatsoever against a King and take his Dominions from him To this indeed Gregory the 7th pretended tho more covertly and Boniface the 8th more avowedly There was great Opposition made to this by many Writers but at the same time they all agreed on it as an undeniable Maxim That the Pope had an indirect Power over Princes by which in the Cases of Heresy he might excommunicate and depose them nor was there so much as any Debate about it A second thing about which there was some Controversy was whether the Particulars that fell under debate came within the Head of Heresy or not So in the Case of Princes giving the Investitures into Bishopricks the Pope brought it in within the Head of Heresy and condemned those Persons as Simoniacks The Writers on the other side denied this pretending it was a Civil Matter and a right of the Crown The like Debates fell in when Princes were sentenced on any other account The Authority of the Sentence in the Case of Heresy was not controverted all the Question was Whether the Point under debate was Heresy or not And concerning these things any who have read the Writings in the great Collection made of them by Goldastus will receive an easy and full Satisfaction By which it appears that the Popes Power of deposing Kings in the Case of Heresy was the received Doctrine of the Church for several Ages and by consequence it must be looked on as derived down from the Apostles If the Doctrine of any one Age of the Church can lead us backward in a certain Track to discover what it was in the Apostles days By the first Position about the Nature of Supreme Power it is apparent that in the Case of Heresy a Prince deposed by the Pope if he stands out against the Sentence may be as lawfully killed as any Tory or Moss-Trooper or Bantito may be for he is a Rebel against his Lord and an Usurper over the People from that day forward And therefore tho Mariana told a Secret too publickly yet it cannot be denied to be a certain Consequent of their Principles It had been indeed more discreetly done to have ordered this only to be infused unto Peoples Consciences by their Confessors in secret And for Mariana tho the Book in gross is condemned as they give out yet the Opinions set down in it are not censured But Suarez writing against K. Iames tells him in plain Terms That a King who is canonically deposed may be killed by any man whatsoever This was not only published with an ordinary License but the whole University of Alcala declared every thing in it to be according to the Doctrine of the Church Valentia tho he disguises it a little yet says That an Heretical Prince may by the Popes Sentence be deprived of his Life Foulis cites ten more Doctors for the same Opinion of killing Kings by private persons I do not build upon the Assertions of these Jesuits as binding Authorities in that Church but make use of them to shew that some of their own eminentest Writers acknowledg the force of this Consequence which is indeed so evident that nothing but good Manners and some small Care not to provoke Princes too much by such bare-faced Positions keeps others from asserting it Few Princes are so tame as Childeric was to go into a Monastery after they are deposed Therefore this Doctrine is but a lame provision for the Churches Security from Heresie if the Lawfulness of killing does not follow that of deposing Kings And it was so generally received that it is told of Gerson that he was at great pains to get it declared that no private Cut-throat might kill a King and that by consequence it was only the Popes Prerogative to order them to be destroyed By the second Position about the Nature of Supreme Power that in extraordinary Cases Forms of Law may be superseded It is also clear that tho we know nothing of any Sentence of Deposition given out against the King yet he is not a whit the safer for he lies under an yearly Curse every Maundy Thursday The Notoriousness of his Heresy will sufficiently justify a particular Sentence without any further Process or Citation according to the Maxims of the Canon Law And there may be for ought we can know as valid a Deposition as Parchment and Lead can make it already expeded And if it be not yet done we are sure it may be done very suddenly and will be done whensoever they see any probability of Success Bellarmine hath very sincerely told us the Reason why Heretical Princes are not deposed because the Church has not strength enough to make such
do hinder him in his Iourney he is ipso facto deprived of all Honour Dignity Office or Benefice whether Ecclesiastical or Secular So here the indirect power over Princes by which they may be both deposed and punished is plainly assumed It is true that same Council did indeed Decree That no Subject should murther his King or Prince upon which some of our English and Irish Writers who condemn these practices think they have great advantages That Decree was procured by Gersons means who observing that by the many Rebellions that had been generally set on by Popes the Persons of Princes were brought under such contempt that private Assassinations came to be practised and in particular that of the Duke of Orleance by the Duke of Burgundy Therefore to prevent the fatal consequer ces which were like to follow on that and to hinder such practices for the future he with great earnestness followed that matter And tho it had almost cost him his life it is like from some of the Duke of Orleance his Faction who were resolved on a Revenge yet at last he procured it But this was only a Condemnation of private Cut-throats And the Article condemned had a pretty Reservation in it for it strikes only against Subjects killing their Prince without waiting for the Sentence of any Iudg whatsoever So if a Sentence be past by the Spiritual Judg then this Condemnation notwithstanding a Prince may be Murthered And the other Decree of that Council passed in the same Session shew they had no mind to part with the Deposing Power Besides the Answer to this Decree is clear It is acknowledged by the Defenders of the contrary opinion That it is not lawful in any case to kill a King but when one that was a King is no more such but becomes a Rebel and an Usurper then it is lawful to kill him Pursuant to the Decree made at Constance a Council met at Siena ten years after in which all the former Decrees made against Hereticks are confirmed and the Favourers or Fautors of Heresie are delared liable to all the pains and censures of Hereticks and by consequence to the chief of them all Deposition After that came the Council of Basil which ratified the forementioned Decree made at Constance about General Councils By which Popes Emperors Kings c. that presumed to hinder any from coming to the Council are subjected to Excommunication Interdicts and other Punishments Spiritual and Temporal Last of all came the Council of Trent and tho met ters were at that pass that the Council durst not tread on Princes as others had formerly done lest they should have been thereby provoked to join with the Protestants yet they would not quite lay aside the pretence of a Deposing power but resolved to couch it so into some Decree that it might continue their claim to a Right which they would not part with tho they knew not at that time what to make of it So in the Decree against Duels they declare That if any Emperors Kings c. did assign a field for a Combat that they did thereby lose their Right to that place and the City Castle or other places about it Now it is certain if by their Decrees a Prince may forfeit any part of his Dominion he may be also dispossessed of all the rest since his Title to his whole Territory being one individual thing what shakes it in any part subjects it entirely to him who has such authority over it Here we have found 7 General Councils as they are esteemed by that Church all either expresly asserting the Deposing Power or ratifying former Decrees that had asserted it And from such a succession of Councils it is reasonable to conclude That this Third Character of a Tradition of the Church agrees to it and if General Councils are fit Conveyors of Traditions we have as full Evidence as can be desired for proving this to be a Church-Tradition This last Character of a Tradition is what the whole Body of the Church has held in any one Age. Upon which they say we may calculate that such opinions must have come down from the Apostles since it seems neither credible nor possible that the Belief of the Church could be changed With this Arnold has of late made great noise And as the new Fashions that come from France do please our young Gallants best so some of the Writers of Controversies among us have taken up the same plea here That the whole Church received the Deposing Doctrine in cases of Heresy may be inferred from what had been said The Church is made up of Popes Bishops Priests Of Soveraign Princes and Subjects of all ranks That the Popes believed it none can doubt So many Definitions of Councils shews us as plainly what the Bishops and other Prelates believed the Writing of the Schoolmen and Canonists shew what the rest of the Clergy believed Those Princes who suffered under the Sentences give at least a tacit consent to it since they never question it but study only to clear themselves of the imputation of Heresie The other Princes who made use of the Donations of the Popes shew as plainly that they believ'd it The great Armies that were brought about their Standards must have also believed it and the people who generally deserted the Deposed Prince notwithstanding the great vertues of some of them and the love that Subjects naturally carry to their Princes shew that they believed it So that if St. Iames his Question Shew me thy Faith by thy Works be applied to this particular the Answer will be easie What shall I mention the frequent depositions of Charles the 1st of Henry the 4th of his Son Henry the 5th of Frederick the 1st Philip Otho the 4th Frederick the 2d and Lewis the 4th in the Empire The frequent Depositions in Sicily and Naples the many attempts upon France that terrible Bull in particular of Iulius the 2d against that good King Lewis the twelfth By which besides the Sentence against the King it appears he designed the total destruction of the Nation promising the Pardon of Sin to every one that killed one French Man the frequent Attempts upon England both in Hen. the 2d and K. Iohn's time not to mention their later Bulls of Deposition against K. Henry the 8th and Q. Elizabeth the many Attempts in Spain particularly the deposing the King of Navarre by P. Iulius and the Sentences against Henry the 4th then King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde All these and a great many more with the strange Effects that followed upon them are so clear Proofs of the Worlds believing this Doctrine for many Ages together that if Men had any Remainders of shame left with them they could not deny it And to this day all their Writers maintain it tho perhaps now the greatest part of the Laity know little of it but whenever the Tradition of the Church is
Err do agree as well to the Iewish as the Christian Church the one being the true Church under that dispensation as well as the other is now If then this Decision made by the true Church in Christs time did not oblige all in that Church to go on in that error but private persons might have examined their Sentence and depart from them upon it then upon the same reasons though we acknowledge the Church of Rome a true Church yet we may examine her Doctrines and separate from her errors This grand prejudice being thus removed there are two things in the next place to be laid before them One is that the Scriptures being acknowledged to come from Divine Inspiration on all hands can only decide the Controversies among us and the places I shall make use of shall be cited according to the Doway Translation to which being made by themselves they cannot except Another is that a man must judg of things as they appear plainly to his reasonable Faculties It is against all reason to say that because it is possible for a man to be mistaken therefore he ought to doubt his Judgment in things that are clear to him This must turn a man Sceptical both to all Religions and all the concerns of human life Therefore every man must follow his Judgment when after a diligent Inquiry any thing appears plain to him And now to come up close to those of that perswasion they are to consider that the chief parts of Religion are First Articles of Faith Secondly Rules of Life Thirdly The worship of God chiefly in the Sacraments And Fourthly The Government of the Church If then in every one of these Heads the Church of England agrees clearly with the Scriptures and the Church of Rome does either manifestly contradict them or differs matterially from them in all these points in which we and they differ then the Resolution of the Question Whether a man ought to joyn himself to our Church or theirs will be easily made For Articles of Faith if either the Apostles Creed or the Creeds of the First 4. General Councils contain a just abstract of the Faith then we who receive every Article in these Creeds do agree more exactly to the Apostolical Doctrine than they who have added many new Articles to their Creed The chief Article of Faith is The Covenant made between God and Man through Iesus Christ by which upon the Account of his Merits and Intercession all who follow the Rules of the Gospel may expect the Blessings of it both here and hereafter Pennance toward God and Faith towards our Lord Iesus Christ being the conditions upon which we hope for Eternal life This we plainly teach without Addition or Change But in how many things have they departed from this Simplicity of the Gospel First In teaching People to address to God for the Merits and by the Intercession of the Saints From whom these things are asked for which the Scriptures direct us only to God and Christ. And in the very words pronounced after absolution The Merits of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints are joined with the passion of Christ as the grounds on which we obtain pardon of Sin Grace and Eternal life Secondly In perswading People That a Simple attrition with the use of the Sacraments without any real conversion of the Soul or change of life is sufficient to Salvation Thirdly In perswading People That there is a Communication of the Merits of Saints to other Persons though the Scriptures mention only the Communication of Christs Merits Fourthly by Teaching that tho our sins are pardoned thorough Christ yet there are terrible and long lasting torments to be endured in another State Fâ—â—tly that saying Masses and going of Pilgrimages can Redeem from these Now in all these the two chief Designs of the Gospel are plainly contradicted Which be First To Change our hearts and lives Secondly To perswade us to a humble Dependance upon Christ and an high acknowledgment of him But these Doctrines of theirs as they shew us a way to be sure of Heaven without a real Conversion so they take off so much from Faith in Christ as they carry us to trust to somewhat else These are Errors of great Importance Since they corrupt the Fountain and overthrow the chief design of the Christian Religion They are also late devices brought in in the dark and ignorant Ages No mention is made of praying to Saints in any Ancient Liturgie There is a great deal against it in the most Ancient Authors And though in the Fourth Century upon the Conversion of many Heathens to the Christian Faith to humour them in their conceit of some Intermedial Agents between the Divinity and us Mortals there was a Reverence for the Saints set up to deive out the worship of those Secondary Deities yet this was no direct Adoration though they then began to use Rhetorical addresses to Saints like prayers Yet even in Gregory the Great his time in the beginning of the Seventh Century we find no Prayers made to them in all his Liturgies And for the Belief of a simple Attrition being sufficient with the Sacrament no body ever dreamed of it before the Schoolmen found out the Distinction between Attrition and Contrition in the later Ages For the Communication of the Merits of Saints the whole Fathers in one voice speak only of the Merits of Christ being Communicate to us The Fryers first invented it to invite People at least to die in their habits by perswading them that all the merits of the Saints of their Order were shared among the whole Order And for Redeeming out of Purgatory the first Four Ages knew nothing of it In the beginning of the Fifth Century St. Austin plainly speaks of it as an Opinion which some had taken up without any ground and that it was no way certain nor could we ever be sure of it And though in Gregory the Great 's time the Belief of it was pretty far advanced yet the Trade of Redeeming out of it by saying Masses for Departed Souls was not even then found out So that all these are both gross Errors and late Inventions The next Branch of Religion is the Rule of human life which one would think could be taken from no other Standard so certainly as the 10. Commandments and the Expositions given of these in Scripture chiefly our Saviours Sermon on the Mount Let Malice it self appear to Declare wherein our Church strikes at any of these or Teaches men to disobey even the least of them If then our Rule of life be exactly the same with that which the Scriptures prescribe we are safe as to this which may be well called The most important piece of Religion For it is to be considered that God making man after his own Image the end of his Creation was that he might be made like God The Attributes of God to be Imitated are Goodness Mercy Justice Wisdom and Truth And it
Absolution but we do not make this an Engin to screw peoples secrets from them For which there is no warrant in Scripture nor was it thought necessary for many Ages after the Apostles Confession of publick Scandals was enjoyned and for private sins it was recommended but this latter was not judged simply necessary for obtaining the pardon of sin And what noise soever they make of the good that Confession and the enjoyning of Pennance may do if well managed we need only appeal to some of their own best Writers now in France whether as they have been practised they have not rather driven all true Piety out of the world If these abuses had been only the faults of some Priests the blame could not have been justly cast on their Church but when the publick Rules given to Confessors printed with Licence are their warrants for so doing then their Church is in fault So that nothing is more common among them than for persons after a confession made of their sins with a slight sorrow and some trifling pennance undergone together with the Priestly Absolution to fancy themselves as clean from all sin as if they had never offended God And this being the Doctrin of their Church it both lessens the sense of sin and takes men off from making such earnest applications to God through Christ as the Gospel commands For Orders they are among us with the same Rites that Christ and the Apostles gave them first And a learned Man of their own Church has lately published the most ancient Forms of Ordinations he could find From which it appears that all the Ceremonies in their Ordinations for the want of which they accuse us were brought in since the eighth Century so that even by their own Principles these things cannot be necessary to Ordination otherwise there were no true Orders in the Church for the first eight Ages For Marriage we honour it as Gods Ordinance and since the Scriptures declare it honourable in all without exception we dare deny it to none who desire it St. Paul delivers the Duty of Clergy-men towards their Wives with Rules for their Wives behaviour which had been very impertinent if Clergy-men might have no Wives We find a married Clergy in the first ten Centuries And we know by what base Arts the Caelibate of the Clergy was brought in and what horrid ill effects it has produced Neither do we allow of any devices to hinder Marriage by degrees of kindred not prohibited in the Law of God or the trade that was long driven in granting Dispensations in those degrees and afterwards annulling these and avoiding the Marriages that followed upon them upon some pretences of Law Thus it appears how they have corrupted the Doctrine of the Sacraments together with the Worship of God The last head of Religion is Government and as to this we can challenge any to see what they can except to us First in reference to the Civil Power we declare all are bound for conscience sake to obey every lawful Command of the Supream Authority and to submit when they cannot obey We pretend to no Exemption of Clarks from the Civil Jurisdiction but give to Caesar the things that are Caesars We do not obey the King only because he is of our Religion much less do we allow of Conspiracies or Rebellions upon our judging him an Heretick so that we deliver no Doctrin that can be of any ill consequence to the Society we live in And for the Ecclesiastical Government we have Bishops Priests and Deacons rightly Ordained and in their due subordination to one another every one administring these Offices due to his Function which has been the Government of the Christian Church since the times of the Apostles So that we have a clear vocation of Pastors among us from whose hands every person may without scruple receive all the Sacraments of the Church But for the Church of Rome how unsafe is the Civil Government among them not to mention the Doctrin of deposing Princes for which I refer you to my former Letter What a security does the Exemption of Clerks from the Civil Courts in cases criminal give to loose and debauched Church-men and what disturbance must this breed to a Common-wealth The denying the Civil Magistrate power to make Laws that concern Religion or oblige Churchmen takes away a great deal of his Rights for scarce any Law can be made but wrangling and ill-natur'd Churchmen may draw it within some head of Religion And that this was frequently done in former Ages all that have read History know The quarrels that were in the beginning of this Century between the Pope and the Republick of Venice were a fresh Evidence of it But for the Ecclesiastical Government they have spoiled it in all the parts of it The Pope has assumed a power of so vast an extent and so arbitrary a nature that all the ancient Canons are thrown out of doors by it We know that originally the Bishops of Rome were looked on by the rest of the Church as their Colleagues and fellow Bishops The Dignity of the City made the See more remarkable and the belief of St. Peters having founded it with his suffering Martrydom there with St. Paul made it much honoured so that when the Empire became Christian then the Dignity of the Imperial City made the Bishop of Rome be acknowledged the first Patriarch From this beginning they arose by many degrees to the height of pretending to a Supremacy both Civil and Spiritual and then they not only received appeals which was all they at first pretended to but set up Legantine Courts every where made the Bishops swear Obedience and Homage to them and the Arch-Bishops receive the Pall from their hands in sign of their dependance on them Exempted Monasteries and other Clarks from Episcopal Jurisdiction broke all the Laws of the Church by their Dispensations So that no shaddow of the primitive Government does now remain And though Gregory the Great wrote with as much indignation against the Title of Universal Bishop as ever any Protestant did yet his Successors have since assumed both the Name and thing And to that height of Insolence has this risen that in the Council of Trent all the Papal Party opposed the Decree that was put in for declaring Bishops to have their Jurisdictions by Divine Right The Court Party not being ashamed to affirm that all Jurisdiction was by Divine Right only in the Pope and in the other Bishops as the Delegates of the Apostolick See and they were in this too hard for the other Party So that now a Bishop who by the Divine appointment ought to feed the Flock can do no more in that then as the Pope gives him leave The greatest part of the Priests have no dependence on their Bishops The Monks Fryars and Iesuits being immediately subordinate to the Pope so that they do what they please knowing they can justifie any thing
wherever they find it And therefore in the first place their minds must be disingaged from these unjust prejudices that they conceive of our Religion and such just prejudices must be offered them against the Romish Religion as may at least beget in them some jealousies concerning it by which they may be brought so far as to think the matter suspicious If then there be such reasons offered them for susspecting foul dealing from their Priests and Church as would make them suspect an Attorney Physician or any other person with whom they were to deal they will be prepared to hear reason which is all that we desire and upon this Head these following Considerations may be laid before them 1. All people that pretend to great Power and Dominion over our consciences are justly to be suspected If any man designed to make himself Master of any of our other Liberties we would examine his Title and suspect all his other motions when we see they tend to subject us to him Therefore a Church that designs to keep all her Votaries under an absolute obedience is justly to be suspected and our Church that pretends to no such power is more likely to deal fairly 2. A Church that designs to keep her Members in ignorance is more to be suspected than a Church that brings every thing to a fair Trial. A Church that denies the use of the Scriptures in a known tongue except to a few and wraps up their Worship in a Language that is not understood is reasonably to be suspected more than a Church that gives the free use of the Scriptures to all persons and worships God in a Language which the people understand 3. A Church whose Opinions tend to engross the Riches of the world to its Officers is more to be suspected than a Church that pretends to nothing but a competent maintenance of the several Officers in it The Redeeming Souls out of Purgatory and the Enriching the Shrines or Reliques of Saints Pardons Jubilees and many more Tenets of the Church of Rome are so calculated for enriching their Societies that every cautious man must needs suspect some design in it which he cannot charge on a Church that has none of these Arts to get money 4. A Church that has carried on its Designs by the most dishonest methods possible the forging of Writings and Deeds of Miracles Visions Prophesies and other things of that Nature is more justly to be suspected than a Church that cannot be charged with any such practices The Forging so many Epistles for the Popes of the first Ages which are now by themselves confest to be Spurious with many other Forgeries were the Engines by which the Papal Power was chiefly advanced The Legends and Extravagant Fables of which they are now ashamed were the chief Motives of Devotion for many Ages And by these Saints and Images were so much magnified and Monasteries so enriched A Noted Liar after a Discovery is no more to be trusted 5. Any that considers the present State of Rome the manner of Electing Popes the Practices of that Court and the Maximes they move by must see that every thing there is secular corrupt and at best directed by rules of Policy But to fansie the Holy Ghost can come upon any Election so managed as their own Books shew that is is the most unreasonable thing that can be devised Therefore a Church that neither pretends so high nor can be charged with such proceedings is more likely to be the true Church 6. A Church that teaches Cruelty against poor Innocent people that differ in opinion and sets on Plots Conspiracies and Rebellion against Princes that are judged Hereticks is more likely to be corrupted than a Church that is so merciful as to condemn all capital proceedings for difference of Opinion and teaches an absolute Submission to the Soveraign Power even when it persecutes and oppresses them 7. A Church that is false to her own Principles is not so likely to Instruct her members aright as a Church that is in all things consistent to her self The great Foundation of their Doctrine is That there must be a speaking Judg to decide all Controversies Now they have no such Judg for it is not of Faith that the Pope is this Judg or is Infallible And for a general Council they have had none these 112. years nor are they like to see another in hast So they have no Speaking Infallible Judg among them And thus they deceive people by a false Pretence whereas we appeal to nothing but what we really have among us which are the Scriptures 8. A Church that appeals to Marks which are not possible to be searcht out is more likely to mislead people than a Church that pretends to nothing but what can be certainly proved The great thing they appeal to is the Constant Succession of the Bishops of Rome and their other Pastors This cannot be known no not by a probable conjecture But there are on the contrary as great grounds for History to deny it in the See of Rome as in any other Ancient See whatsoever but though they have it both the Greek Church and our Church has it likewise These are such plain things and the Truth of them is so notoriously known that I should ask any of that Communion whether upon the like reasons he would not be Jealous of any person or sort of persons whatsoever And if these grounds of jealousie would work in other matters it is much more reasonable that they should take place in matters of Religion In which as an Error is of far greater Importance So Impostors in all Ages have studied to make gain by Religion Therefore it is most just upon these violent presumptions to look about us and take care we be not cheated But before I would descend to particulars there is one General prejudice that works most universally on weaker minds to be removed which is that the true Church cannot Erre If then it be made appear unanswerably that the true Church may Erre and that in a most weighty Point all these Arguments fall to the ground That the Church of the Iews in our Saviours days was the true Church cannot be denied for our Saviour owned it to be such He joyned with them in their worship He sent the Lepers to the Priest He commanded them to hear the Doctors that sate in Moses Chair and himself acknowledged the High Priest This is sufficient to prove that it was the true Church and yet this Church erred in a most Important point whether Jesus Christ was the true Messias in whom the Prophecies were fulfilled or not they Judged falsly The High Priests with all the Sanhedrim declared him a Blasphemer and condemned him guilty of Death Here the true Church expounds the Scriptures falsly and erred in the Foundation of Religion And it is well known that the chief arguments which they of the Romish party bring to prove that a Church cannot
at Rome and they fear no Censure any where else From this so many abuses have crept in and the Canonists have found out so many devices to make them Legal that there is no hope of Reforming these at Rome The whole State of Cardinals is one great Corruption who from being Originally the Parish Priests of Rome and so under all Bishops have raised themselves so high that they do now trample on the whole Order and pretend to an Equality with Princes The giving Benefices to Children the unlimitted Plurality of Benefices in one Person the Comendam's the reserved Pensions with many other such like are gross as well as late Corruptions And no wonder if all men despair of Reforming the Court of Rome when these abuses are become necessary to it by which the greatness of the Cardinals and the other Officers or Ministers there is kept up I need not mention the gross Simony of that Court where all the world knows every thing may be had for money The Popes themselves are often Chosen by these Arts and if their own Rules be true such Elections with every thing that follows on them are void The Infinite Swarmes of the Inferiour Clergy do plainly drive a Simoniacal Trade by the Masses they say for Departed Souls for Money And for Publick Pennance they have Universally let it fall in stead whereof private Pennance is now in use And if their own Writers say true this is made an Engine to serve other ends when by enjoyning slight and easie Pennances they draw the People after them upon which the Jesuites have been loudly accused these Forty Years last past In Sum all the Corruptions or rather defects that are in the Government of our Church are only such as they brought in and have not met yet with such effectual remedies as must cure the Church of these inveterate Distempers their ill Conduct did cast her into If any of that Party will review these Particulars and so far trust their own Reasons as to judge according to the plainest Evidence they cannot resist the conviction that they must needs meet with when they see the simplicity of our Faith the Morality of our Doctrine the Purity of our Worship and our Primitive Government and compare it with their vast Superfetation of Articles of Faith the Immorality of their Rules of living the Superstition if not Idolatry of their Worship and the most extravagant Innovations in Government that are in the Church of Rome And indeed these things are so clear that few could resist the force of so much plain truth if it were not for some prejudices with which they are so fettered that they cannot examine matters with that freedom of mind that is necessary Therefore much care must be taken to clear these in the most familiar and demonstrative manner that is possible They may be reduced to these Five chief Ones First That the true Church cannot Err. Secondly That out of the true Church there is no salvation Thirdly That the case of the Church of Rome is much safer than ours is since the Church of England acknowledges a possibility of salvation in the Church of Rome which they on the other hand deny to the Church of England Fourthly That unless there be a Supreme Judg set up we can be sure of nothing in Religion but must fall into many Factions and Parties And Fiftly That the Reformation was but a Novelty begun in the former Age and carried on in this Nation out of an ill design and managed with much Sacriledge The First of these seemed necessary to be cleared in the beginning of this Discourse and I am deceived if it was not done convincingly And for the Second we agree to it That out of the true Church there is no Sâ—…lvation But then the Question comes What makes one a Member of the true Church The Scriptures call the Church the Body of Christ of which he is the Head So then whoever are joined to Christ according to the Gospel must be within the true Church But the deceit that lies hid under this is That from hence they fancy that the Unity of the Church does consist in an outward Communion with the See of Rome And upon that they calculate that there must be an Unity in the Body of the Church And that cannot be except all be joined to the See of Rome Now we grant there is but one Church but this Unity consists not in an Outward Communion though that is much to be desired but consists in an Unity of Belief about the essentials of Christianity There is nothing more evident than that even according to their own Principles other Churches are not bound upon the hazard of Damnation to hold Communion with the See of Rome for it is not an Article of Faith nor certain according to their own Doctrine That the Pope is Infallible And except that were certain we cannot be obliged to hold Communion under such a Sanction with that See For if it be possible that a Pope may become an Heretick or Schismatick which many of them confess and all agree that the contrary is not of Faith then other Churches are not in that case obliged to hold Communion with that See If therefore the possibility of Error in that See be acknowledged then holding Communion with it cannot be the measure of the Unity of the Church So we bring it to this Issue It is not Heresie to say The Pope may Err Therefore this is no just prejudice against our Church because we have departed from Communion with him when he imposed his Errors on us So all the high things they boast of that See come to nothing except they say This Proposition is of Faith That the Pope is Infallible And for these Meetings that they call General Councils they were at best but the Councils of the Western Patriarchate artificially packt and managed with much Art as appears even from Cardinal Pallavicini's History of the Council of Trent For the Third Prejudice It is the most disingenuous thing that can be Because our Church is charitable and modest in her Censures and theirs is uncharitable and cruel in her Judgments therefore to conclude That Communion with them is safer than with us If confidence and Presumption Noise and Arrogance are the marks to judge a Church by we must yield to them in these but if Truth and Peace Charity and holy Doctrines be the better Standards then we are as sure that our Communion is much safer Let this Rule be applied to the other concerns of human life and it will appear how ridiculous an abuse it is to take measures from so false a Standard If a man were sick the Question comes Whether he shall use an approved Physitian or a Montebanks On the one hand the Montebank says He will certainly cure him and the Doctors will undoubtedly kill him On the other hand the Doctor modestly says he will undertake nothing but will do the best
and the bitter ones of enraged Priests were also set on work to appear in Defence of it Of whose Writings Thuanus gives a full account One mercenary Protestant was also hired to excuse if not to defend it I have never been able to meet with any of these Books only Rosseus that wrote in defence of the Holy League calls it the Iustice of St. Bartholomews day And Andreas Eudemon Iohannes does also commend it The Arguments they used have been formerly glanced at The late Civil Wars the pretended Conspiracy of the Admiral the necessity of using desperate Remedies in extream Cases and the Sovereign Power of Kings were what the Lawyers could pretend But the Divines had a better Plea that by one General Council all Hereticks were to be extirpated And by another Faith was not to be kept to them And it cannot be denied but this is unanswerable according to the Principles of the Roman Church The Protestants were not wanting to their own Cause but answered these Books and sufficiently discovered the impudent Allegations of those shameless Persons who hired themselves out to defend so horrid an Action Maximilian the 2d the Emperor is the Person whose Judgment we have least reason to suspect He was the King of France his Father-in-Law and both by Blood and Alliance was joined to the Crown of Spain yet he in a private Letter writing to Scuendi his chief Minister in Hungary has delivered his sense of this Matter so sincerely and fully And that whole Letter is so excellently well written and shews so much true piety and so rare a temper of mind that I shall not fear the Reader 's censure for inserting it at its full length It is but in one Book that I know and that is very scarce Dear Scuendi I Received your Letter and took in good part your Christian and Friendly Condoleance for my late Sickness The Eternal God in whose hands are all things do with me according to his Will I bless him for every thing that befalls me He only knows best what is healthful and profitable and what is hurtful to me I do patiently and chearfully acquiesce in his Divine Pleasure And indeed Matters go so in this World that a Man can have little pleasure or quiet in them for every where there is nothing to be found but trouble treachery and foul dealing God pity us and deliver his Church from these mischiefs It were no wonder if from such a prospect of Affairs a Man should become stupid or mad of which I could say much to you I begin to recover and am now so strong that I walk about with a Stick God be blessed in all his Works For that strange thing which the French have lately acted most tyrannically against the Admiral and his Friends I am far from approving it and it was a great grief to me to hear that my Son-in-Law had been perswaded to that vile Massacre tho I know that others reign rather than he yet that is not sufficient to excuse him nor to palliate such a wickedness I would to God he had asked my advice I should have given him faithful and fatherly Counsel and he should never have had my consent to this Crime which has cast such a blemish on him that he will never wash it off God forgive them that lie under such guilt I apprehend within a little while they shall perceive what they have gained by this method For indeed as you observe well the Matters of Religion are not to be handled or decided by the Sword and no Man can think otherwise that is either pious or honest or desirous of Publick Peace and Happiness Far otherwise did Christ teach and his Apostles instruct us their Sword was their Tongue their Doctrine the Word of God and a Life worthy of Christ. Their Example should draw us to follow them in so far as they were followers of Christ. Besides that mad sort of People might have seen after so many years Trials and so many Experiments that by their Cruelties Punishments Slaughters and Burnings this Business cannot be effected In a word Their ways do not at all please me nor can I ever be induced to approve them unless I should become mad or distracted which I pray God earnestly to preserve me from And yet I shall not conceal from you that some impudent and lying Knaves have given out That whatever the French have done was by my knowledg and approbation In this I appeal to God who knows how deeply I am injured by it but such Lies and Calumnies are no new things to me I have been often forced to bear them formerly and in all such cases I commit my self to God who knows in his own good time how to clear me and vindicate my innocence As for the Netherlands I can as little approve of the Excesses committed there And I do well remember how often I wrote to the King of Spain Advices far different from those they have followed But what shall I say The Councils of the Spaniards relished better than mine They now begin to see their Error and that they themselves have occasioned all the mischief that hath since followed I had a good end be-before me that these noble and renown'd Provinces might not be so miserably destroyed And tho they would not follow my Counsel so that I may well be excused from medling any more yet I do not give over but am sincerely pressing them all I can to follow another method God grant I may see the wished-for effect of these endeavours and that Men may be at last satisfied with what they have done and may use no more such violent Remedies In a word Let the Spaniards or the French do what they will they shall be made to give an account of their Actions to God the Righteous and Just Judg. And for my part by the help of God I shall carry my self honestly christianly and faithfully with all candour and uprightness and I hope God will so assist me with his Grace and Blessing that I may approve all my Designs and Actions both to him and to all Men. And if I do this I little regard a wicked and malicious World How the rest of the World looked on this Action may be easily gathered from the Inclinations and Interests of the several Parties That all Protestants did every where abhor it and hold the remembrance of it still in detestation needs not be doubted All that were noble or generous in the Roman Church were ashamed of it but many extolled it to the Heavens as a work of Angels and others did cast the blame of it on the Protestants The Court of Spain rejoiced openly at it They delighted in the shedding of Protestant Blood and were also glad to see France again embroil'd and to be freed of the fears they had of a War in Flanders In which if the French King had engaged he had in all appearance conquered in one year that