put his hand upon (a) Mar. 8.24 he did see truly but yet he was not able to distinguish Men from Tree the Word of God had restored my Eyes but they were but weak and subject to a great many dimnesses it was need to have some time to strengthen me in the Truth which I had but a glimpse of and to take away the Ignorance of Divinity under the pretences of which the Devil would cloak the Word of God Therefore the Divine Providence that took care for my Conduct disposed all things to hasten my Conversion it brought to pass several incidents which the Profane would call chance but the Saints stile The hand of the Lord. First I was destinated for the study of Divinity four years before all my Companions let the Flatterers and Profane say what they please those who judge holily of things that come to pass understand very well that the design of the Lord in that was no other but to take away as soon as it could be the fair Pretences wherewith Error would have offuscated Truth Secondly the Lord permitted I should come to an able man learned in Divinity both Scholastical and Positive perfect in Right Canon which is the Decrees of Fathers Councils and Popes in a word a man who was marvellous in Study of Controversies and in every thing which can contribute to make an absolute Divine But He permitted also that there might be in so excellent a man the fair Dealing and the Sincerity of a Child that was the reason that some Years after when he had known the Truth of God and the Errors of Rome because he knew not how to disguise Truth he published it every where he could not forbear to say that Indulgences Purgatory and the Obligations of Believing the Articles of Faith of the Pope and of keeping his Commandements upon â—ain of a mortal Sin were so many â—rafty Tricks of Rome to get Money He could not forbear to tell every Body the Mysteries the Factions the Impostures of the most part of those last Councils which are accounted General and Oecumenical by the Church of Rome he defended generously all the Truths which we profess in the Church of England wherefore he drew upon himself all the Persecutions he suffered for Truth so that afterward he died a Martyr for the Gospel by the severity of the Laws of Rome Oh! had he been in the time that I conversed with him as much lightned as he has been since he had saved me many troubles and perplexities he had doubtless delivered me out of that Suspension of Spirit whereunto I was reduced by the subtilty of his Answers and the height of his Resolutions But in that time the Lod did but begin his Conversion as well as mine and lighten us both by degrees yet with these two differences First the Lord destinated him to suffer all kinds of Persecutions to make him a Witness of his Holy Word a Martyr of the Gospel and he has not yet judged me worthy of Persecutions nor of Martyrdom Secondly he would have him raised up to the number of those great Saints whom the World afflicts and torments Ch. 1. §. 4. (a) Heb. 11.38 Of whom the World is not worthy Therefore the Lord ravished betimes that innocent Soul in the liveliness of his Years and speedily was he taken away (b) Wisd 4.11 as saith Solomon Lest Wickedness should alter his Understanding or deceit beguile his Soul Whereas the Divine Justice has looked upon me as a grievous Offendor who am suffered to live that I might Mourn and Weep longer for my Sons §. 4. The Conclusions of this Chapter How I came to know that the Articles of faith of Rome cannot be proved by Scripture IT was under the Conduct of that learned and holy Man that I began to give my self to the Study of Divinity I read what Authors do write concerning those Questions but specially and more exactly concerning the Questions which are controverted which are for the most part the Doctrines the Church of Rome hath received out of pride and covetousness without any ground in the Scripture I found in those Questions several difficulties I came to propound them to my Master there is said he what Bellarmin Answers there is for this matter the Exposition of Cardinal du Perron there is what Bonaventure what Thomas Aquinas what Scotus what Suarez what Valentia what Boivin what Herincx what others say touching that difficulty But when I asked him Tell me I beseech you freely what do you think He Answered me almost to every one of those Questions To tell you the truth said he the Doctrin of Purgatory of Indulgences of Worshiping Images and Reliques the Doctrin of Transubstantiation c. I do not find all these Doctrins very evident in the Scripture I do not see neither how they can be drawn very directly out of those places of the Bible th Authors of Rome are wont to produce to prove them by I give them you said he only to alledge to those who would have a place of the Bible he brought forth in every matter to have some pretence to say seasonably or unseasonably the Scripture speaks of that Matter and to content the Hereticks But to speak plainly I do sincerely confess it is not the Scripture which obliges or perswades me to believe all those Articles but the true and the only reason why I do hold them is because the Church teaches them so There are said I in self at once a great many difficulties abridged it is a great deal more just and more reasonable to deal after this manner than to consume all our brain to find in the Scripture with great pains of false discoursing what the Holy Ghost had never intention to teach therein Let us acknowledge then freely that all the Articles of the Faith of Rome are not in the Scripture nor grounded upon any thing else but upon the Authority of the Church After that all these difficulties may be very easily resolved All the business will be but to know whether or no I am obliged to believe as an Article of Faith what the Roman Church teaches without any ground from the Scripture This was the pass to which I was reduced to this I thought all the Theologie of Rome was to be reduced I did but loose my labour in consulting other Professors of Divinity in Conferring with those Friends of mine who were some Bachelors some Licentiates some Doctos of Sorbon and Curates of some chief Parishes in Paris They spoke but Gibbrish or some Latin words contrary to the good common Secne and Reason when they would have grounded the Doctrin of the Church of Rome upon the Scriptures and they never spake with reason but when at last they reduced themselves as to a Principle to the infallible definitive and final Judgement of the said Church in such matters CHAP. II. Chap. 2. How I understood the Articles of Faith of the
caused me to defer it again after it had made me understand that this same Romish Faith was grounded neither upon the Authority of the Holy Fathers nor upon the Practice of the Ancient Christians according to the pretensions of the Roman Theologians This Pretence was the Authority of Rome which I supposed Infallible and it was that pretended Infallible Authority which kept me stil in its Communion If the Roman Church be Infallible what matter is it whether the Articles determined by it have any foundation in the Word of God or upon the Authority of the Fathers or Practice of the Primitive Church As long as we suppose it Infallible we must believe all the Articles it teaches and it signifies nothing to say that such or such an Article of Faith was not heretofore believed When the Roman Church shall declare it an Article of Faith to believe That the blessed Virgin Mary was conceived without any original sin and that we must hold as oecumenick the Council of Basil that * Sess 36. teaches us this Doctrine When this Church shall declare That all Christians are truly and really buried in Jesus Christ in Baptism That the Water used in that Sacrament is transubstantiated into Christ's own true Blood wherein our sins are purified and That it is an Heresie to believe that under the appearances of the Water of the Baptism there remains something of the substance of Water That Baptism must be worshipped When the Church shall be pleased to determine all these Articles and to declare that they are implicitly in (a) Rom. 6.3 4. Col. 2.12 Gal. 3.27 Scripture and in the (b) St. August Epist 164. ad Emerit Fathers we shall be obliged to believe them because the Church is Infallible This way of dealing to acknowledge plainly that neither the Fathers of the Church nor the first Christians believed many Articles of Faith which are now believed in the Church of Rome seemed to me a great deal more sincere than to seek in the Fathers what they never said and to make the Primitive Church believe things which it did never so much as think of This way of dealing freely was a little bold but it was just sincere and very easie According to that Method when one asks a Theologian Why do you believe Transubstantiation he presently answers that he believes Transubstantiation as an Article of Faith Because the Council of (c) Sess 13. cap. 4. Trent hath declared that it is an Article of Faith and pronounced Anathema against those who should hold the contrary Is is not better to answer thus than to break ones brain to give unto the Fathers both Greek and Latin several Explications which they would not avow if they were alive and to make the World believe that in those Passages of the Fathers wherein they use these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they have intended to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an Expression not to be found in any of those Fathers as it is observed by a late (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. Eccles tom 1. part post p. 247. Bishop of Norwich cited by Dr. Hammond in his Catechism I see very well said I that after the Examination of the Scripture and of the Fathers wherein it is impossible to find evidently the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church the shortest way is to refer all the business to the Authority of the Church Thus if the Authority of the Roman Church be Infallible to deal fairly simply justly and honestly we must say I believe the Christian People for whom Christ shed all his Blood ought not to partake of the Chalice of his Blood because the Council of (b) Sess 13. Constance and the Council of (c) Sess 21. Trent have so determined I believe that besides the Sacrifice of the Cross there is another Propitiatory Sacrifice viz. the Mass which blots out the Sins both of the Quick and the Dead because the Council of * Sess 22. chap. 1 2. can 1 2 3. Trent made that an Article of Faith And say the same honestly and in good earnest of Purgatory of Indulgences of Invocation of Saints and of other Articles and not headily drive on to find in the Primitive Church Articles of Faith whereof it had never so much as the least knowledge or Notion Thus there remains nothing but to examine if the Authority of the Roman Church be Infallible This was the indivisible Point whereupon I fixed all my Religion thither I reduced all the Controversial Questions wherefore I examined that Question of the Infalliblity of the Roman Church but whether because I was afraid to find the Infallibility of Rome as ill grounded as the Doctrine of Transubstantiation whether because the greediness I had to maintain with credit and reputation the Authority of the Church which I was ingaged at that time to sustain in Publick Disputes had distracted and blinded me whether because Grace was not pleased at that time to make an end of my Conversion but would have me grow ripe and root very profoundly in my mind the Reasons I had meditated to fasten me more and more in the Faith of the Holy Word I devised many Proofs and many Reasons both good and bad I perswaded my self first that I might perswade others more easily and I maintained in my Publick Theses That the Roman Church even that the Pope alone was Infallible when he determins something that belongs to the Faith That Perswasion kept me still in the Church of Rome wherefore I began to be asswaged and to change my Discourse and whereas I had considered the Articles of Faith of that Church as so many Errors because they were not agreeable with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and the Testimony of the Fathers I considered them at that time only as some Novelties which were not criminal since I supposed that Church being Infallible had right to produce every day and to declare new Articles of Faith In that Supposal when some Learned Man asked me my Sentiment in particular upon some Question of Divinity I soon return'd according to my Opinion and I reduced all the Questions to the Infallibility of Rome But when I was obliged to speak in publick and before the People I thought my self ingaged for fear of scandalizing and discontenting weak minds to use the Method which others use every where and to bring though against my own perswasion some Passages of the Scripture and some Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers of the Church to prove in particular every Article of the Roman Faith Such was my dealing at that time when the only Perswasion of the Infallibility of Rome fastened me in its Communion The END of the FIRST PART THE SECOND PART SECONDE PARTIE Que l'Eglise Romaine n'est poin◠la Veritable Eglise que so◠Authorité n'est point Infaillible qu'elle n'est remplie qu◠de Corruptions d'Erreurs INTRODUCTION La Providence fit naistre des
cy-devant est tombée dans la Corruption et dans l Erreur § 1. Corruption horrible dans ses Moeurs p. 80. § 2. Erreurs extremement grossieres dans sa Doctrine pag. 88. Conclusion Generale Que j'estois engagé de sortir de l'Eglise de Rome aprés que Dieu m'en eut fait connoître les Erreurs par les degrés que j'ay marqués dans les deux Parties de ce Discours pag. 88. § 1. L'Occasion d'un Sermon que je préchay sur le sujet du Sacrement me rappella dans l'Esprit toutes les idées que j'avois des Erreurs de Rome pag. 91. § 2. Les repugnances que je souffris et les difficultés qu'il me falut surmonter pag. 94. § 3. Les raisons que je meditay dans mon esprit pour differer ma Conversion pag. 96. § 4. Dieu par sa misericorde me fait vivement comprendre le grand peché que c'est que de s'opposer au saint Esprit et ainsi acheve ma Conversion en me faisant genereusement abandonner la Communion de Rome pag. 101. TABLE INTRODUCTION § 1. The Reasons wherefore I have been engaged to write these Memoires Pag. 1. § 2. That the Conversion of a man who did live in the Errors of the Roman Church is a very great Miracle pag. 5. § 3. After what manner and by what degrees the Spirit of God made me understand my Errors pag. 9. FIRST PART That the Doctrin of the Roman Church is not grounded neither upon the belief of the Primitive Church or the Authority of the Holy Fathers CHAP. I. How I understood that the Doctrin of the Roman Church is not grounded upon the Scripture § 1. The Reading of the Scripture disposes me to acknowledge the Errors of Rome pag. 11. § 2. The Errors of the Roman Church whereof I was perswaded made me find in the Scripture many Difficulties many Insufficiencies and many Contradictions pap 16. § 3. Circumstances which did contribute to hasten my Conversion pag. 22. § 4. Conclusion of this Chapter That the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church cannot be proved by Scripture pag. 26. CHAP. II. How I understood that the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church are not grounded upon the Belief of the Primitive Church nor upon the Authority of the Holy Fathers INTRODUCTION The reading of the Books concerning The Perpetuity of Faith in the Eucharist was an occasion to me to examin in particular the Belief of the Roman Church about that matter pag. 30. Division of the Errors of Rome concerning the Eucharist pag. 34. Section I. That the belief of Rome about the real Presence in the sense of Transubstantiation is a new Doctrin in the Church I. First Proof drawn out of the Arguments wherewith the Fathers of the Church had wont to Dispute against the Heathens pag. 36. II. Second Proof drawn out of the Reasons wherewith the same Fathers had wont to Dispute against the Hereticks pag. 41. III. Third Proof drawn out of the manner whereafter the Fathers had wont to speak of the Holy Saerament pag. 44. IV. Fourth Proof drawn out of the novelty of the Doctrin teaching Transubstantiation pag. 48 Section II. That that which is taught of the Sacrifice of the Mass in the Church of Rome is a Doctrin contrary to the belief of the Primitive Church I. In what sense it is true to say that the Holy Sacrament is a Sacrifice pag. 50. II. That the pretended Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Roman Church is contrary to the Scripture pag. 53. III. What has given occasion to that Error and the degrees of Corruption which brought forth that belief pag. 56. IV. That the horrid abuse which is slid in the Roman Church to offer their Sacrifices in the honour of Saints is a practice contrary to that of the Primitive Church pag. 59. Section III. That the manner of Administring the Sacrament in the Roman Church is quite different and very much opposed to that to which they were used in the first Ages of the Church I. That in the time of the Apostles and in the first ages of the Church they gave the Communion to all the People under both kinds they worshipped not the Host and celebrated not the Holy Mysteries in an unknown Tongue pag. 64. II. The beginning of all the Errors of the Roman Church in the Administration of the Sacrament pag. 70. 1. The beginning of the Abridgement of the Cup. pag. 71. 2. The beginning of the Worship of the Host pag. 74. 3. The beginning of the celebration of the Eucharist in an unknown Tongue pag. 78. Conclusion of the First Part. That the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church cannot be proved by the practice of the Primitive Church nor by the authority of the ancient Fathers pag. 80. Second Part. That the Church of Rome is not the true Church that it's Authority is not Infallible and that it is full of Corruptions and Errors INTRODUCTION The Divine Providence brought forth some occasions which made me resolve to examin the very first grounds of the Question concerning the Authority of the Roman Church pag. 1. 1. The occasion that I had to examin a-new all the Articles of Faith of the Roman Church all which I reduced to the Authority of the same Church pag. 3. 2. The occasion that I had to doubt of the Infallibility of the Pope made me resolve to examin again and without passion upon which is grounded that Authority which the Church of Rome boasts so much pag. 6. 3. Circumstances wherewith I began to examin the Authority of the Roman Church and what I do design in the Rehearsal of them pag. 12. CHAP. I. Of the pretended grounds of the Authority of the Roman Church pag. 16. Section I. That Antiquity Multitude and Succession are not priviledges which ever the Roman Church had enjoyed above all other Churches pag. 20. § 1. That the Roman Church is not the Eldest of all the Churches pag. 21 § 2. That the Multitude is not on the Roman Churches side pag. 25. § 3. That other Churches as well as the Roman have their Succession from Bishop to Bishop from the very Apostles pag. 29. Section II. That neither Antiquity neither Multitude neither Succession are not Infallible marks of the true Church and consequently that a Church may have them all and with them all be an Heretical Church pag. 32. § 1. That Antiquity is not an Infallible mark of the true Church pag. 33. § 2. That the Multitude is not an Infallible mark of the true Church pag. 39. § 3. That the Succession is not an Infallible mark of the true Church pag. 45. Conclusion That it is the Succession of the true Doctrin from the Apostles which is an Infallible mark of the true Church and that the Church of Rome which hath not the Succession of the Doctrin has no reason to boast neither of its Antiquity neither of the Multitude neither
Roman Church not to be grounded on the belief of the Primitive Church neither on the Authority of the Holy Fathers INTRODUCTION The Reading of the Books concerning the Perpetuity of Faith in the Eucharist was an occasion to me to examin in particular the belief of Rome about that matter THus the affairs of my Conversion depended when Providence that watched after the means to work out my safety brought forth an Occasion that did contribute very much to reduce all my Difficulties to the Question of the Authority of the Church of Rome to the end that this Authority being proved false the Doctrin of Rome which is grounded upon it might be presently destroyed It was in the Time when the Dispute of the Perpetuity of Faith concerning the Eucharist made a great Rumor in the World among learned Men. I read with as much application as I was capable of the Books and the Replies both of Mr. Claude and of Mr. Arnaud the Triumph of the Eucharist by Mr. Pavillon the Book of Father Noüet and the Book of the Testimony of our Senses in the Eucharist I do not intend to make my self an arbitrator to judge those rare men who are accounted without contradiction the most Witty and Learned of France Since I do but tell the History of my Conversion I do only rehearse the effects the Reading of those Books wrought in my Soul and I am not so unjust as to hinder the rest of the World to think what they please of those learned Mens writings and to judge them at liberty The reading of those Books brought me abundance of light in the Question of the Holy Sacrament I did consider the Argument of Perpetuity as an Argument which being not Metaphysical was to be reduced at last to a multitude of Probabilities from which one could never conclude any thing with necessity though he would suppose as true with Mr. Arnauld the Principle whereupon it is grounded to wit the Belief of all the Churches in the point of * Which in the Sence of the Roman Church is Transubstantiation reality All the Christian Churches saith Mr. Arnauld believe the real Presence therefore it was the belief of the Primitive Church for in a matter of so great Importance it is impossible there should have been made any alteration in Doctrin This Argument found I know not what repugnancy to be received in my mind for though I supposed the first Proposition to be true which since by the Study of the Histories and Relations of several Countries I acknowledge to be false yet I could not consent to the consequence because the proof of it was not true to my thinking and what endeavour soever of Rhetorick Mr. Arnauld Used to expound and sustain his Thought yet I did ever conceive that it was very likely some alteration had been made in the Doctrin of the Eucharist as well as in other Articles in which every body acknowledges there has been On the contrary I found Mr. Claude's Answer very reasonable This alteration has been made saith he therefore it is not impossible and his proof the Church of Rome doth believe the real Presence with Transubstantiation but they did not believe so in the Primitive Church therefore there has been made an alteration and afterwards he proves in his Book by the Authority of Authors who lived in that time that truly in the Primitive Church they did not believe the real Presence of Christ in the Holy Sacrament This Argument seemed to me very natural sincere and true the proof of it easie and well grounded But for that of Mr. Arnauld's it seemed to me rough uneasie intricate the proofs of it grounded upon suppositions in the Air which could not be reduced at last but to some appearances of truth proving nothing necessarily These Reasons incited me to judge in favour of Mr. Claude against Mr. Arnauld's Argument But though I was perswaded his Argument was not good yet I would not confess the Opinion he was for was not true May be said I Mr. Arnauld hath proceeded a little too far in a false proof and afterwards he hath been engaged for his honour sake to hold it earnestly But in fine Mr. Arnauld is but a private man the Church of Rome may disclaime his Argument and not hold with him So Mr. Arnauld's Reasons being false it doth not follow from thence that the belief of his Church is false since it could have other Proofs and other Reasons That was the cause why I resolved to examin the Question of the Eucharist for my own clearing and here is very near the Method I observed in it Division of the Errors of the Roman Church concerning the Matters of the Eucharist I supposed first as a principle which I received without examination that the Primitive Church was to be our Rule since that Church nearer to the Apostles and our Saviour Jesus Christ had the advantage to suck Truths out of their Source That being supposed I divided all that is to be said of the Eucharist in two parts First The Belief concerning the Sacrament Secondly The form of the Administration of it Since then said I the belief of the Council of (a) Consil Trid. sessi 33. Item sess 13. cap. 4. can 2. Trent touching the Eucharist is not to be found in the Scripture since the Form of Administrating the Sacrament in the Roman Church is so much different from that which is related by St. Paul in the First to the Corinthians chap. 11. and by the Evangelists we are to examin whether the Belief of Rome had not been the Belief of the Primitive Church and whether the Mass which is the Roman Form of Administring the Sacrament had not been instituted by the first Christians And whereas the Church of Rome believes the (b) Consil Trid. sess 33. sess 13. real Presence with (c) sess 13. cap. 4. can 2. Transubstantiation believes that the Mass is a propitiatory (d) Sess 22. cap. 1 2. can 1 2 3. Sacrifice both for the quick and for the dead believes that the Mass as it is now ordained by the Pope is the ancient Form of Celebrating the Eucharist I examined every one of those Questions Ch. 2. §. 1. and I found 1. That the Belief of Rome about Real Presence with Transubstantiation is a new Doctrin in the Church 2. That the Sacrifice of the Mass is contrary to the belief of the Primitive Church 3. That the manner of Celebrating the Eucharist is very much different and quite opposed to that which Christians were used to in the first Ages of the Church From whence I concluded that the Articles of Faith of Rome are not grounded upon the belief of the Primitive Church SECT I. The Belief of Rome about the real Presence with Transubstantiation is a new Doctrin in the Church I. First proof drawn out of the reasons wherewith the Fathers of the Church were used to dispute against the Heathens SEveral
of Christ jesus There was before the Table of the Communion a great Curtain like to that Vail which was in the old time before the (a) Exod. 26.33 Ark of the Testimony and when the Curtain was drawn to set open to the sight of the People the Holy Mysteries the Faithful imagained they saw the Heavens opened as (b) Homil. 3. sup Epist ad Ephes St. Chrysostome speaks they consider'd the Table of Communion as an Altar imbrued all over with Christ's Blood they came to the Sacred Table with an holy horrour and a trembling like to that of Moses when he came nigh to the bush out of the midst whereof God spake with him they were all penetrated throughout with the light of their Faith and they breathed nothing but Fire of Charity which consumend them And in this manner they came near our Lord J. Christ to eat his own Body and to drink his own Blood they regarded the Minister who divided to them the Bread and the Wine of the Holy Sacrament as a Seraphin who was to put upon their tongues a coal of fire to quicken them with the Love of God and the Spirit of Christ But if somebody in that time should have worshipped the Sacr ament in stead of worshipping Christ who is received in the Sacrament he would have been lookt upon as an Idolater he would have been rejected out of the Church and dealt with as an Heretick or else they would have taught him that it is a dreadful Error to worship the Sacrament as if Bread and Wine were transubstantiated into Christ's Body and Blood and that the Faith of the True Church and of all the Saints is to believe That by the means of the Holy Sacr ament we are truly and really partakers of the true Body and of the true Blood of Christ who is in Heaven settled at the Right Hand of God his Father where we worship Him in receiving the Sacrament 3. The Beginning of the Celebration of the Eucharist in an unknown Tongue Now for the third Error which is to be found in the Roman Church in the Administration of the Sacrament we know that it is but fince the Popes have made themselves Soveraigns since they have raised themselves to be Arbitrators of Crowns since they took upon them to depose Kings from their Thrones and usurped that Temporal Power which they now injoy We know that it is but since that time that they have endeavoured as by Right of Conquest to oblige all Nations to speak the Roman Language as a Mark of their Bondage to the Pope following the Example of the old Roman Emperors who after they had reduced several Provinces and Nations under their Jurisdiction constrained them to speak the Roman language That Tyranny of constraining the People to celebrate the holiest of our Mysteries in a Tongue which they understand not is a thing so evidently contrary to that which the Holy Ghost teaches us in the * 1 Cor. 14.16 Scripture that almost all the Christian Churches which have received from the Apostles their Belief and the Form of Celebrating the Eucharist do celebrate it unto this day in the Vulgar Tongue of the Countries whereof they are Inhabitants The Greeks have their Lyturgy in their own Tongue as every one knows the Christians of Moscovia who received of the Apostle St. Andrew the Faith of Christianity have their Lyturgy in the (a) Guagn de Relig. Moscov pag. 250. Slavonian tongue which is the vulgar Tongue of the Country they inhabit The Armenians converted for the most part by S. Bartholomew speak their (b) Cassander Lyturg. cap. 13. pag. 31. own Tongue in the Celebration of the Holy Mysteries The Jacobites who dwell in Syria speak 9c) Brerewood pag. 194. Syriack in celebrating the Eucharist The Abissine Christians celebrate the Divine Service and the Communion in the (d) Chytraeus pag. 28. Tongue of their Country Which makes me believe that all Christian Nations conformed themselves to the practice of the primitive Church and that they have wel perceived the Holy Ghost frobid the celebration of these holy Mysteries which consist in Blessings and Thanksgivings in an unknown Tongue to which the Unlearned could not answer Amen CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST PART The Articles of the Roman Church cannot be proved either by the Practice of the Primitive Church or by the Authority of the Ancient Fathers ALl those Reflexions which I made for my own particular Instruction and Edification brought a great Light into my Soul and overthrew in part the false principles wherewith the Errors of the Roman Church are ordinarily intricated and darkened First I began to mistrust that Church and then afterwards to draw some Consequences against the Errors thereof I thought since it is a thing very natural to mistrust one in all his Conduct after we have once surprised him in a Dault that after having discovered the Errors of the Roman Church concerning the Question of the Eucharist I might reasonably mistrust it in all the other Articles of Faith of which it makes a particular profession and so I saw nothing sure nothing fast in the Church of Rome I believed I might justly mistrust that this Church had done in the Doctrine of Indulgences Purgatory Prayer for the Dead and Invocation of Saints the same that it has done in that of Transubstantiation Reality and Sacrifice of the Mass that is to say I feared they were Articles which had been framed against the Doctrine of the Ancient Church the Testimony of the Holy Fathers and the Authority of the Word of God Moreover I thought that having remarked the Errors of Rome in the chief and most holy of all the Mysteries of Christianity I was not obliged to examine the other Articles and that that only was enough to make me suppose that it had erred in all the other Points of its Doctrine and that one must consequently forsake its Communion if he doth desire to be saved The desire of my Salvation was a desire which Grace had rooted very profoundly in my Soul but the thought of forsaking the Communion of a Church within which I had been brought up was a thought very contrary to my natural Inclinations I could not blind my self from seeing the Errors of Rome but I had not yet strength enough generously to forsake them to the peril of whatsoever could happen The Reasons which made me understand my Errors came every day to present themselves to my mind with some new Lights and Evidences The Church of Rome hereupon I look'd before as if it had been encompassed round about with the Truths of the Scripture grounded upon the Authority of the Saints of the Primitive Church appeared to me at that time bared of all those fine Testimonies But at last the same Pretence which caused me to defer my conversion when the Grace of God had made me understand that the Romish Faith was not grounded upon the Word of God
Christian Congregations do not agree together to know which of them has the true Faith and the true Religion instituted by Christ that was the point of my difficulty In that part of Europe wherein I find my self by the chance of my birth see two Congregation two Christian Churches the Roman and the Reformed which both boast to have that true Faith excluding the other now how to resolve that difference and to know which of them has truth of it's side The Roman Church brags it self to be the eldest it reckoneth a multitude of people and nations who conform themselves to it's Communion and shews a long Catalogue of Popes who have been settle one after another in the Seat of Rome but if it be asked to set open to the light its Articles of Faith and to examine whether or no they be agreeable to the word of God to that true Faith which has been taught us by Jesus Christ our Lord it cryes out frets and is disturb'd it cannot abide to come to that examination and would be believed upon its own word On the contrary the Reformed Church brags of nothing she could say that it is she truly that is the eldest since the doctrine she teaches if conformable to that which Christ himself taught us she could shew in all ages and in all parts of the world whole nations which are conformable to the same doctrine which she has learnt from Christ she could show long Catalogues of Bishops and Patriarchs who have succeded one another in the Chairs which the Apostles themselves have established which are with her in Communion and upon all those accounts she could demand as well as the Roman Church to be believed upon her own word without coming to the examination of her doctrine but forasmuch as she knows that this manner of dealing is unjust and that she is sure she teaches nothing but what is agreeable to the word of God she desires nothing so much as to be examined by the rule of the Scripture and gives leave to all the world to compare the doctrine she teaches with that which they taught in the Primitive Church with that which the Apostles with that which Christ himself taught when he was upon the earth Now which of these two Churches acts more sincerely and which of them have we most reason to suspect of error and falsehood If fomebody should come to a payment with you and you could not know surely whether his mony were good or false coyn would not you use weights and a touch-stone to examine the mony And if the man should be angry and alledge to you that the mony which he pays you seems very acnient that there is in the world a great deal more such as that and that he has received it successively from his great great Grandfather Would you not say to his Sir there is great quantity of ancient mony which is false for all that if this mony be not good all the mony in the world which is alike to it is not good neither and if these pieces be false you may give them your Children succes sively to the end of the world but they would not grow better for all that but if notwithstanding the man would be believed upon his word and could by no means abide you should bring his mony to the trial would not you take occasion from thence to think not without cause that such a man intended to cheat you SECTION I. Antiquity Multitude and Succession are not Priviledges of the Roman Church above all other Churches Such is the manner of dealing in the Church of Rome which is a great argument that the doctrine she teaches is not agreeable to the word of God since it cannot abide by any means that it should be examined by that rule she brags that she has on her side Antiquity the greatest number and succession and in repeating often those fine principles which dazle the world in saying them over and over and boldly in causing them to be published every where by her controversial and Theological Writers she has made the World almost believe that she is the eldest of all the Christian Churches and that among all the Christian Congregations there are but few which are not submitted to the Church of Rome and in fine that the Pope is the only true Successor of St. Peter these are the three false principles upon which the Roman Church grounds it self but which have no other foundation than the boldness wherewith those of that Church have used to publish them § 1. The Roman Church is not the Eldest of all the Churches WE learn of the ancient Ecclesiastical Authors Origine Eusebius Hierome Isidore and others that the Apostles after they had received the Holy Ghost which an order to go to publish the Gospel in all the world were scattered abroad as so many flouds full of the Holy Ghost to preach the word of God in all the Nations St. Peter preached in Judea Galatia cappadocia pontus Bithynia and Rome St. James the son of Zebedee in Judea and Spain St. John in Judea and Asia the less St. Andrew in Scythia Europea in Eprius Thracia and Achaia St. James the brother of our Lord in Jerusalem St. Philip in Scythia and Phrygia St. Bartholomew in the Indies and Armenia the great St. Matthew in Ethyopia St. Thomas preached to the Parthians Medes Persians Brachmans Hyrcanians Bactrians and Indians St. Simon in Mesopotamia and Persia St. Judas in Egypt and Persia St. Matthias in the higher Ethyopia St. Paul and Barnabas in many Countries of Europe and Asia Now I would very fain know upon what ground the Church of Rome would be accounted the eldest of all those Churches which have been erected by the Apostles of Christ if one of them have the right to be accounted and called the eldest of the Sisters it seems in all reason that it must be the Church of Jerusalem for it was in Jerusalem that Christ himself preach't the greatest part of his Sermons there he exercised his Offices of Priest and Bishop 't was in that City he was sacrificed for our sins 't was there the Apostles first declared the word of God as it is to be seen in (a) Chap. 24. v. 47. St. Luke it was of that Church St. James was created the first Bishop in the world it is the Church of Jerusalem which is called by Theodoret (b) Hist Ecclesiast lib. 5. cap. 9. Mother of all Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. it is the Church of Jerusalem which is to be acknowledged as the first of all Churches according to the Testimony of all the Fathers who were present at the Council of Constantinople as Baronius himself testifies in the year of our Lord 382. If the right of Antiquity is to be given only to a Church instituted by St. Peter the Church of Antioch in Syria is to have in that the priviledge above the Church of Rome for
year 1237 agreed together with the Patriarch of Constantinople to excommunicate the Pope Gregory the 9th and pronounce Anathema against his Errors In the Church of Alexandria the Patriarch Gelasius who ruled that Church in the year 1636 succeeded Cyrillus Cyrillus succeeded Meletius Meletius Joachim and so from Bishop to Bishop they succeeded the Evangelist St. Mark who was the first Bishop of Alexandria In the Church of Constantinople the Apostle St. Andrew who was the first Bishop of it as relates Nicephorus had for his successor Stachys Stachys had Onesimus Onesimus Polycarp and so successively 177 Bishops the most part great personages and learned men unto Cyrillus and Methodius who ruled that Church in our days and Parthenius who rules it unto this very day It was to one of those Patriarchs that the Ministers who Preached the Gospel in Germany sent their Confession of Faith in the year 1576 for a token of Uniformity of Doctrine they had with all the Eastern Church SECTION II. That neither Antiquity nor Multitude nor Succession are infallible marks of the true Church and consequently that one Church may have them all and with them all be an Heretical Church IT is very easie to know by all that which I have rehearsed before that if we must judge of the truth and of the right of a Church by its Antiquity or by the Multitude of those who profess the same belief or by the Succession of its Bishops it will not be in favour of the Roman Church shutting out all others since you may find some Churches more Ancient than the Roman Church some Churches more large and more numerous and whose Succession is as sure at least and without comparison a great deal less interrupted and less disturbed than that of the Church of Rome has been by Schismes of I know not how many years by the Heresies of its Bishops and the Monstrous life of a great many Popes But for as much as the truth of a Religion doth not depend upon a question of Chronology Geography or History I will shew that neither the Antiquity of a Church nor the Multitude of those who stand of its side nor the Succession of its Bishops are infallible marks which oblige us to believe that such a Church is the true Church of Christ since it may be very possible that such a Church may have all those marks and for all that be an Heretical Church §. 1. Antiquity is not an infallible mark of the true Church IT is a rule receive by all Lawyers that things which have been worth nothing in the beginning can never grow better in time (a) L. quae ab initio ff de reg Juris quae ab initio non valuerunt tractu temporis convalescere non possunt and Tertullian (b) de virg veland holds for a principle that there is no Prescription against truth veritati nemo praescribere potest if you be a possessor of a house of a field of land and you have enjoyed it peaceable during a hundred years though you should have lost all your Evidences or suppose you had never any the prescription of a hundred years would establish you rightful possessor of that field land or house But it is not the same in regard of error and truth if you have been in an error from the beginning of the world all that long Prescription of years will not give you a right to maintain such an error because error cannot be strengthened by Prescription and a thing which was false from the beginning of the world can never become true by continuance though it should last as long as Eternity it self it would be always new in respect of truth on the contrary the things which are true bring always with themselves the character of a right Antiquity according to that principle of the same Tertullian that truth is altogether antient and everlasting veritas sempiterna antique res est and is it from that principle that after he has supposed that there are several things which seem new which nevertheless are very Ancient he concludes that it is not so much novelty as truh that confutes throughly all Heresies Haereses non tam novitas quà m veritas revincit So that following this principle to prove that Prayers directed to Saints that the worshiping of Images that the Belief of Transubstantiation are so many errors 't will go a great way to shew their novelty that they be Articles of Faith of a New impression but yet it is not enough barely that they are new wemust moreover show that those Articles are contrary to Truth that is to say the word of God let a matter of Belief seem to you as much new as can be if the Articles it contains be true if they be agreeable to the word of God to that Doctrine which we have received from the very Apostles it is an Ancient belief therefore do not say that the doctrine they teach in the reformed Churches is a new doctrine you are to examine first if it be true if it be agreeable to the word of God and if you find it such you are to say that it is an Ancient doctrine but if so be that in one of those Churches which derive their Original from the Apostles they should teach a doctrine which is not conformable to the Gospel the priviledge of antiquity will not excuse them from error they would be ancient inveterate diseases whom the priviledge of being old would not be able to heal Is there in all the world a Religion more ancient than that of the Idolaters yet dare any say that the priviledge it hath of being old gives it that of being true and Infallible and do you think that the ancient Fathers of the Church who disputed against the Heathens would have urged against them that among all Religions and Churches that is always the most true which is the most Ancient it was on the contrary what the Heathens objected to them against the Gospel as (a) lib. 4. Recognit Clement Alexandrinus relates What then said those blind men shall we forsake our Idols the Religion which hath been given us from hand to hand by our great great Grandfathers And it was to that argument of antiquity the Fathers used to answer that antiquity signifies nothing in matter of Religion that the custome of worshiping Idols being an error the antiquity they boasted of was an Antiquity of error according to that of (b) Epist 74. ad Pomp. St. Cyprian consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est In fine said St. Clemens if your Father has been a Thief a deboshed and a dissolute shall you be obliged to be a Thief a deboshed and a dissolute becaue your Father was so is there any crime in the world which would not be committed without punishment if Antiquity could priviledge wickedness and free it from punishment The Prophets knew not this fine doctrine whereupon the Popes pretend to
hands on all the Churches there will be no other proof of Christianity no other shelter for the Christians who shall desire to know the truth than the Holy Scriptures than the word of God and truly in that time as well as in all those which I have marked heretofore the Multitude will follow the part of error and the true Church shall be reduced to a little flock which shall be strengthened only with the word of God against all the Stratagems and the persecutions of Antichrist To make an end of that proof I will rehearse what happened in the Council of Nice according to that which Sophronius (d) lib. 1. cap. 8. relates all the Bishops thought to introduce into the Church a new Law which was that those who would be in the Sacred Orders should lead a single life the good Priest Paphnutius a venerable old man of a holiness and purity free from all slanders rose in the middle of that multitude of Bishops You must not saith he to them lay so heavy a burthen upon the shoulders of those who are in the Sacred Orders you are to consider what St. Paul (e) ad Hebr. 13.9 saith that Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled to that voice a numerous multitude of Bishops Priests and Deacons who were present there vouchsafing their attention considered that Holy old man as an Apostle who came to declare to them the word of God and changed their resolution so knowing by the Doctrine of St. Paul that Marriage is honourable in all they left all the Church-men free to live in the state of Marriage as they had us'd to do before Do but judge now if in that time the Multitude got the advantage over truth and if the Fathers of that Council were of the opinion of the Roman Church that the Multitude of those who hold one and the same Doctrine is a mark of the truth of that belief §. 3. Succession is not an Infallible mark of the true Church IF Succession could give the right of being Infallible there is no Church in the world which had more right to be esteemed such than the Church of Jerusalem it is of Jerusalem that it is said (f) 2 Chron. 33.4 7. in Jerusalem shall my name be for ever In this house and in Jerusalem which I have chosen before all the Tribes of Israel will I put my name for ever (g) 2 Chron. 7.16 I have chosen and sanctified this house that my name may be there for ever and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually (h) Psal 132.13 14. The Lord hath chosen Zion he hath desired it for his habitation this is my rest for ever here will I dwell for I have desired it c. and I will also clothe her Priests with Salvation it was upon all those fair promises the Priests proceeded in withstanding the truth which was preached to them by the Prophets it was for that reason they exclaimed so often upon all occasions (i) Jerem. 7.4 The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord are these But hear what the Lord answers (k) v. 8 11 12 c. Behold ye trust in lying words that cannot profit Is this house which is called by my name become a Den of Robbers in your eyes behold even I have seen it saith the Lord but go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh where I set my name at the first and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel And now because you have done all these works saith the Lord Therefore will I do unto this house which is called by my name wherein ye trust and unto the place which I gave to you and to your Fathers as I have done to Shiloh and I will cast you out of my sight c. The same is to be seen in the other Prophets where Jerusalem after it had been established by the Lord as a Tabernacle which should never be removed it is said afterwards that for its abominations it is transported into Babylon If Shiloh hath ceased to be the house of God if Jerusalem be reduced into a Wilderness where nothing grows but Briers and Thorns where (a) Isaiah 5.6 God will command the Clouds that they rain no rain upon it hath the Church of Rome any reason to brag so much because it hath been in times past the Nurse of Martyrs the Seed-plot of Saints doth it follow from thence that it is still at this time in the same condition it was in the first Ages of the Church Hath not the present Church of Rome a great deal of reason to fear that after all the abominations it hath been filled withal by those who have had the government thereof it may be dealt with like Jerusalem that it may be made a Den of Robbers an horrible Babylon a dreadful Wilderness where grows nothing but Briers and Thorns and where God hath permitted that the Heaven of the Holy Scripture should be shut up and that there should not fall a drop of his word upon those who stubbornly persist in its abominations In fine could the Church of Rome be in hope of having more priviledges than many other Churches which have been built by the Apostles in the Eastern part which have conserved during long space of years their right succession preserved from Bishop to Bishop from Pastor to Pastor and which notwithstanding all that have been since by the Turks turned into several Mosquées where those Infidels have the exercise of their Religion If the Church of Rome would say that the Doctrine it teaches is to be followed because the Popes who do govern at this time have succeeded one another from Bishop to Bishop in St. Peter's Chair I answer that for the same reason in the time of Paul Samosatenus it was necessary for every body to be an Heretick because Paul of Samosate was right Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch that he had succeeded lawfully Demetrius Demetrius Fabius Fabius Babilas who succeeded Zebinus he Philetus he Asclepiades he Serapion he maximinus he Theophilus he Cornelius he Hero he Ignatius he Evodius who succeeded lawfully St. Peter I answer that in the Age wherein lived Nestorius every body was engaged to be a Nestorian because Nestorius was rightful Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople right successor to Sisinius to Atticus to Arsatius to John Chrysostomus to Nectarius to Gregory of Nazianze and so from Bishop to bishop the 36th according to the Chronicles of Nicephorus who had lawfully succeeded in that Chair the Apostle St. Andrew In fine to follow without partiality that principle of Rome and to give it the extent such a proposition ought to have which is always false if it is not universal and capable to be the first proposition of a Syllogism I answer the Popes are to revoke the Thunderbolts they have thrown against the Church of England
and must confess that they did wrong when they excommunicated it and that the Church of England is infallible and has the true Faith since in it they do conserve from Bishop to Bishop from the times of the Apostles a right Succession in all the Ecclesiastical powers But it is not upon Succession only that churches are to ground the Doctrines they profess the Reformed Churches are very willing to be examined after the very rule of the Gospel and do not defend a false principle by antiquity as those of the Roman Church do CONCLVSION That it is the Succession of the true Doctrine from the Apostles which is an Infallible mark of the true Church and that the Church of Rome which hath the Succession of Doctrine hath no reason to boast neither of its Antiquity nor of its Multitude nor Succession IT is true that the Fathers used the Argument of the Succession against the Hereticks Tertullian (a) De praescrip cap. 32. urged it against those of his time Optatus (b) Lib. 2 3. against the Donatists Augustin against the Manichees the Arians and the Pelagians but lest you should be mistaken do but read exactly those Fathers and you shall find that with the Succession of Churches and Bishops they required a Succession of Doctrine which Tertullian calls a Consanguinity and an affinity of Doctrine to prove they were the true Church which St. Augustin said it was impossible to prove throughly but by the Scripture Let them produce said Tertullian (c) De praescr cap. 32. the beginning of their Churches let them shew us the order and the succession of their Bishops from the beginning and at last bring forth some of the Apostles or some instructed by the Apostles who were Authors of their Churches c. But though they should have dispatched that step though they should have devised some Catalogue of Succession yet they should not have got very much by that for their Doctrines compared with that of the Apostles will make it appear by they diversity and the contrariety there is betwixt them that neither the Apostles nor those who have been instructed by them were the Authors of their Churches even saith he they shall be condemned by those Churches which though they have not for their Author neither one of the Apostles nor one instructed by them immediately as being erected after the time of the Apostles begun in our days are nevertheless Apostolical because of the Consanguinity of the Doctrine they teach which is the same with that which was taught by the Apostles And St. Gregory of Nazianze (d) In laud. Athan. shews that the succession is to be esteemed by Piety sooner than by Seat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he who professes the true faith is partaker of the same Seat he who doth the contrary though he doth sit in the same seat is an enemy directly opposed to that Chair which he sits on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Succession of the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be esteemed the true Succession for it hath the truth of it whereas the other hath but the appearance thereof Thus you see that even by the testimonies of the Fathers To be a true Church it is not enough to have the Succession of the same Chair and the Succession of the Bishops which the Roman Church boast of upon all occasions since one may shew a long Catalogue of Succession and be an Heretick for all that as you see by Tertullian his Testimony since one may sit upon the same Chair which was Catholick heretofore and for all that be the sworn enemy of that Chair as it is manifest by the testimony of St. Gregory of Nazianze but a Church ought to have the Succession of the Faith the Succession of the Piety and shew as Tertullian speaks a Consanguinity of Doctrine Consanguinitatem Doctrinae and this the Church of Rome doth not boast of at all since it cannot abide that we should speak of examining its doctrine by the word of God and of comparing it with the Faith of the Primitive Church with the belief of the Apostles Let not therefore the Church of Rome boast that it hath possessed almost all the finest Churches in the world the Arians have possessed them as well as they and St. Hierome for all that calls them Hereticks The Church saith that Father (a) In Psal 133. consisteth not in walls and buildings but in the truth of the Doctrine the Church is where the true Faith is 't is not above 15 or 20 years past since the Hereticks possessed all these buildings even all these glorious Churches but in that time the Church was there where the true Faith was Ecclesia autem ibi vera erat ubi fides erat Could not we have said the same in this Kingdom 'T is not above 120 or 160 years past before the time of Henry the 8th and Queen Elizabeth when the Papists possessed all these buildings even all these Churches but in that time the true Church was there where the true faith was Ecclesia autem ibi vera erat ubi fides erat Do not let them say that the Pope hath succeeded St. Peter for we will answer that Nero was Successor of Augustus and notwithstanding Nero was a Tyrant Augustus was a good Prince we will answer that the King Manasses succeeded Ezechias and yet for all that Manasses was a wicked King Ezechias was a Saint In fine we will say that the Arian Bishops had succeeded the Catholicks that the impious Nestorius was the right Successor of St. Andrew in the Chair of Constantinople that the famous Heretick Paul of Samosate was the right Successor of St. Peter in the Church of Antioch and that all those as well as the Popes have succeeded others who had ruled before them but as the night succedes the day sickness good health death life CHAPTER II. The true Grounds of the now Roman Church Chap. 2. AS soon as I had overthrown those three false imaginations of Antiquity Multitude and Succession wherewith they used to cloak the Errors of the Church of Rome it was very easie to know the true grounds and foundations whereupon it is built and those grounds being neither the Authority of the Scripture nor the Doctrine of the Primitive Church nor Antiquity nor the Concurrence of the Multitude nor the Succession of Churches or Bishops I knew aftere a diligent examination that they could not be other than the Ambition and Covetousness of those who govern it and it is from thence that all the corruptions and all the errors of that Church have proceeded SECTION I. The Ambition of the Popes §. 1. The Pope exalts himself above all Kings whereas by right he ought to be submitted to them POpe Gregory the 7th in a Synod held at Rome in the year 1076. established 27 Propositions upon which is grounded all the greatness of Rome which are called the Dictatorship of the