or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion then this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery then contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcilable Enemies to Popery as we are to Phanaticism and desire that all the World may know iâ— but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Phanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best Instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way then in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now J judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Dayes But I doubt whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has lest a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without the Information we receive by the Scripture I cannot Divine and yet we may as easily know that there is a Church as we can know which is the true Church without the Scripture For there is no other means of knowing either that there is a Church or what this Church is or what are the Properties of a True and Sound and Orthodox Church but by Revelation and we have no other Revelation of this but what is contained in the Holy Scriptures As for the Second That the Church is the means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures it is in some sense very true in some sense very false 1. It is in some sense true and acknowledged by all sober Protestants As 1. If by the Church we understand the Universal Church of all Ages as we receive the Scriptures themselves handed down by them to our time so what ever Doctrines of Faith have been universally received by them is one of the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture For the nearer they were to the times of the Apostles the more likely they were to understand the true sense of their Writings being instructed by the Apostles themselves in the meaning of them And thus we have a certain Rule to secure us from all dangerous Errors in expounding Scripture For the great and fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion are as plainly contained in the Writings of the first Fathers of the Church and as unanimously asserted by them as the Authority of the Scriptures themselves and therefore though we have not a Traditionary Exposition of every particular Text of Scripture yet we have of the great and fundamental Doctrines of Faith and therefore must never expound Scripture so as to contradict the known and avowed sense of the Catholick Church And this course the Church of England takes she receives the Definitions of the four first General Councils and requires her Bishops and Clorgy to Expound the Scriptures according to the profest Doctrines of those first and purest Ages of the Church 2. We ought to pay great deference to and not lightly and want only oppose the Judgement and Authority of the Particular Church wherein we live when her Expositions of Scripture do not evidently and notoriously contradict the sense of the Catholick church especially of the first and best Ages of it For it does not become private men to oppose their Sentiments and Opinions to the Judgement of the church unless in such plain cases as every honest man may be presumed a very competent Judge in the matter and no church nor all the churches in the World have such Authority that we must renounce our senses and deny the first principles of Reason to follow them with a blind and implicite Faith And thus the church that is the sense and Judgment of the catholick church is a means for the finding out the true sense of Scripture and though we may mistake the sense of some particular Texts which the Romanists themselves will not deny but that even infallible councils may do who tho' they are infallible in their conclusions yet are not alwayes so in the Arguments or Mediums whither drawn from Scripture or Reason whereby they prove them yet it is Morally impossible we should be guilty of any dangerous mistake while we make the catholick Doctrine of the church our Rule and in other matters follow the Judgment and submit to the Authority of the church wherein we live which is as absolutely necessary as Peace and Order and good Goverment in the church 2. But then this is very false if we mean that the church is the only means of finding out the true sense of the Scriptures on if by the church we understand any particular church as I suppose this Person does the Roman Catholick that is the particular universal church of Rome or if we mean the church of the present Age or by Means understand such a Decretory sentence as must determine our Faith and command out Assent that we must seek
Imprimatur February 15th 1686. Jo. Edinburgh A COLLECTION OF DISCOURSES Lately Written by some DIVINES of the CHURCH OF ENGLAND AGAINST THE ERROURS and CORRUPTIONS OF THE Church OF Rome To which is prefix'd a Catalogue of the several Discourses EDINBVRGH Re-Printed by John Reid for Thomas Brown Gideon Schaw Alexander Ogston and George Mosman Stationers to be sold at their Shops Anno DOM. 1687 THE CATALOGUE Of the DISCOURSES contained in this Book I. A Discourse concerning the Guide in Matters of Faith with Respect especially to the Romish pretence of the necessity of such an One as is infallible Page 1 II. The Protestants Resolution of Faith being an Answer to three Questions First How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of the Scripture Secondly Whither a visible Succession from Christ to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an Infallible Interpreter of Scripture And whither no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture Thirdly Whither the Church of England can make out such a Visible Succession Page 31 III. A Discourse about the Charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther Page 57 IV. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is mean'd by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be rejected Page 82 V. A Discourse concerning the Vnity of the Catholick Church maintained in the Church of England Page 117 VI. A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship or a Scripture proof of the unlawfulness of givng any Religious Worship to any other Beeing besides the One supreme GOD. Page 158 VII A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue Page 212 VIII A Discourse concerning the Devotions of the Church of Rome especially as compared with those of the Church of England in which is shewn that what ever the Romanists pretend there is not so true Devotion amongst them nor such a Rational Provision for it nor encouragement to it as in the Church established by Law among Vs Page 250 IX A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints Page 295 X. A Discourse against Transubstantiation Page 345 XI A Discourse concerning the Adoration of the Host as it is taught and practised in the Church of Rome wherein an Answer is given to T. G. on that subject and to Monsuer Boileau's late Book de Adoratione Eucharistiae Paris 1685. Page 375 XII A Discourse against Purgatory Page 421 XIII A Discourse concerning Auricular Confession as it is prescribed by the Council of Trent and practised in the Church of Rome With a Postscript on occasion of a Book lately Printed in France called Historia Confessionis Auricularis Page 447. FINIS A DISCOURSE CONCERNING A GUIDE IN MATTERS OF FAITH THE design of this Discourse is the Resolution of the following Query Whither a Man who liveth where Christianity is The Question professed and refuseth to submit his judgment to the Infallibility of any Guide on Earth and particularly to the Church or Bishop of Rome hath notwithstanding that refusal sufficient means still left him whereby he may arrive at certainty in those Doctrines which are generally necessary to the Salvation of a Christian Man Satisfaction in this Inquiry is of great Moment For The moment of this Question it relateth to our great end and to the way which leads to it And it nearly concerneth both the Romanists and the Reformed If there be not such a Guide the Estate of the Romanists is extreamly dangerous For then the Blind take the Blind for their unerring Leaders and being once misled they wander on without correcting their Error having taken up this first as their fixed Principle that their Guide cannot mistake the way On the other hand If God hath set up in his Church a Light so very clear and steddy as is pretended the Reformed are guilty of great presumption and expose themselves to great uncertainty by shutting their Eyes against it Now there lyes before Men a double Temptation to a belief The Temptations to believe the Affirmative part of this Question of the being of such a Guide in the Christian Church Sloth and Vitious Humility of mind Sloth inclineth Men rather to take up in an Implicit Faith then to give themselves the trouble of a strict Examination of things For there is less Pain in Credâ—lity then in bending of the Head by long and strict Attention and severe Study Also there is a Shew of Humility in the deference which our understandings pay unto Authority especially to that which pretends to be under Christ Supreme on Earth Although in the paying of it without good reason fiâ—st understood Men are not Humble but Slavish But these Temptations prevail not upon honest and considerate Minds which inquire without prejudice The true Resolution of the Query after Truth and submit to the Powerful Evidence of it Such will resolve the Question in the Affirmative and they may reasonably so do by considering these propositions which I shall treat of in their order First The Christian Church never yet wanted nor shall it ever want either the Doctrines of necessary Faith or the Belief and Profession of them Secondly Wheresoever GOD requireth the Belief of them he giveth means sufficient for Information and unerring Assâ—nt Thirdly Whatsoever thâ—se means are every Man 's Personal reason giveth to the Mind that last Weigh which turneth Deliberation into Faith Fourthly The means which God hath given us towards necessary Faith and the ceâ—â—ainâ—y of it is nâ—t the Authority of any infallible Guide on Earth Yet Fifthly All 〈…〉 is not to be rejected in our pursuance of the 〈…〉 in the finding out or â—â—ating of which it is a very 〈…〉 Sixthly By the 〈…〉 to us the Holy Scriptures in the 〈…〉 â—â—ans sufficient to lead us to certainty 〈…〉 to â—iâ—e Eternal First 〈…〉 and Profession of the nâ—â—essâ—r 〈…〉 Faith are annexed Prop. I 〈…〉 the Chriâ—â—â—â—â— Church There â—â— but 〈…〉 and accâ—â—â—ing â—â— he saying of Leo the great * Nisi 〈…〉 Fides non est â— M Ser. 2â— If 〈…〉 at all For it cannot be contrary â—â— it seâ—â— And though it be 〈◊〉 â—et Men oâ— diâ—â—ering Creeds â—ret 〈…〉 it as the Merchants of Reliâ—â—s in the Church of 〈◊〉 shew in several places the one â—â—amless Coat of Christ †â—ee Ferrand l. 1. c. 1. Sect 4. disquis Relig. This one Faith never did nor ever shall in all places fail The Apostles were themselves without error both in their own assent to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith and in the delivery of them They heard the Oracles of Christ from his own mouth and they were Witnesses of his Resurrection And they spake * Act. 4. 19 20. what they had seen and heard And they gave to the World Assurance of the Truth by the
Palaestinians Egyptians Thebaeans Libyans Mesopotamians a Persiaâ— a Socrat. â— Hâ—l c. 8. p. 19. Scythian Bishop and many others from other Countries But there was but one Bishop for Africa one for Spain one for Gaul two Priests as Deputies of the infirm and Aged Bishop of Rome Whilst for Instance sake there were seventeen Bishops for the small Province of * V. Concil Labb Tom. 2. p. 50. c. Isauria yet such Councils are very useful such we reverence but God did not set them up as the only and the infallible Guides of Faith If there were such Guides what Guided the Church which was before them By what rule was Ebion judged before the Council of Nice How can we be infallibly Guided by them in Controversies of Faith not determined by them nay not brought before them nay scarce moved till these latter dayes Such for the purpose are the Controversies about the vertue of the Sacrifice of Christ and of Justification by the Faith of meere recumbence upon his Merits Or how shall a private Man who erres in the Faith be delivered from his Heresy seing he may die some years ere a Council can assemble or being assembled can form its decrees Arius vented his Heresie about ten years before the Council of Nice was called for the suppressing of it And soon after he had given vent to it it spread throughout Egypt and Lybia and the upper Thebes as Socrates †has reported And in a short time many other Provinces and Cities were Socr. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 6. p. 9. infected with the contagion of it And in the pretended Council of Trent no less then five Popes were successively concerned and it lasted in several places longer then two legal lives of a Man * From A. 1545. to A. 1563. There was indeed a Canon in the Western Church †V. Council Const sess 39. for the holding of a Council once in the space of each ten years But that Canon has not been hitherto obeyed and as affairs stand in the Church it is impracticable For the Pope will exclude all the Greek and Reformed Bishops He will crowd the Assembly with Bishops of his own Creation and with Abbots also he will not admit of former Councils unless they serve his purpose not so much as that of Nice it self * V. Greg. magn Ep. 6. 31. Leo. 1. Ep. 53. Gelas 1. Ep. 13. He will be the Judge though about his own Supremacy He will multiply Italians and others who upon Oath †Concil Labb Tom. 10. p. 23. 379. Pontific Roman owe their votes to him He will not hold a Council upon the terms approved by all Romish Princes Nor did they agree at their last Council the Emperour would noâ— send his Bishops to Bologna nor the French King his to Tren ' And though the French Church believed the Doctrines of that Synod yet they did not receive them from the Authority of it but they embraced them as the former Doctrines of the Roman Church And the Parisian ' Faculty a A. D. 1542 in coll Soâ—b See Richer H. conc general vol. 4. p. 162 163. c. prepared the way to the Articles of Trent Notwithstanding all this we firmly believe that at least the first four general Councils did not err in Faith and it is pious to think that God would not suffer so great a temptation in the Church on Earth Yet still we believe those Councils not to be infallible in their constitution but so far as they followed an infallible rule For the greaâ—est Truth is not alwayes with the greatest number And great numbers may appear on contrary sides The Council of Constantinople under Constantine Copronymus consisting of three hundred thirty eight Bishops decreed against the use of Images in Churches Yet the 2d Synod of Nice consisting of about three hundred and fifty Bishops determin'd for it And a while after in the West the council of Frankford consisting of about three hundred Bishops reversed that decree And after that the council of Trent did re-establish it though there the voting Persons were not fifty With such uncertain doubts of belief must they move who follow a Guide in Religion without reference to a farther rule But here there is offered to us by the Guide in Controversiâ—â— * an Objection of which this is the sum The fifth Canon of the Church of England does declare Object R. H. Annot. on D. Stil Answer p. 82 83. that the thirty nine Articles were agreed upon for the avoidance of the diversities of opinions and the establishing of consent touching true Religion Consent touching true Religion is consent in Matters of Faith Establishing of consent relateth both to Layety and Clergy The third and fourth Canons of 1640. Decree the Excommunication of those who will not-abjure their holding Popery and Socinianism The Reformed Churches in France teach the like Doctrine threatning to cut them off from the Church who acquiesce not in the resolution of a National Synod ‡ Art 31. ch 5 du consisâ—â—ire si un ou plusieurs c. The same course was taken with the Remonstrants in the Synod of Dort * Syn. Dord sess 138. Wherefore Protestants ought not to detract from the Authority of general Councils whilst they assume to themselves so great a Power in their particular Synods The force of this Objection is thus removed Answer Every Church hath Power of admitting or excluding Members else it hath not means sufficient to its end the order and concord of its Body Every particular Church ought to believe that it does not erre in its deflnitions for it ought not to impose any known error upon its Members But though it believes it does not erre it does not believe it upon this reason because God hath made it an infallible Guide but rather for this because it hath sincerely and with Gods assistance followeth a rule which is infallible And upon this supposition it imposeth Doctrines and excludeth such as with coâ—umacy dissent from them a See Artic. 20. 21 22. 4. This Guide is not the present Church declaring to particular Christians the sense of the church of former Ages How can this declaration be made seing Churches differ and each Church calls it self the true one and pretendeth to the Primitive pattern The Church of Rome hath on her side the suffrages of all the Councils and Fathers the first the middle the last if Campiain the Jesuite may be believed b camp Rat. 3. p. 180. Rat. 5. p. 185. On the other hand Monsieur Larroque hath Written a Book of the confirmity of the Protestant churches in France with the Discipline of the Christian Ancient church taking it for granted that their Doctrine was catholick And we likewise pretend both to the Doctrine and Discipline of it All of us cannot be in the right The Roman church without any proof calleth her self the church catholick and she pretendeth to
Tertulliâ—â— argues against Hereticks in his Book De Praescriplionibus â—â—t when they reason about the sense of Scripture they never direct us to any infallible Judge but use such Arguments as they think proper to convince Gain-sayers Nay this is the way which was observed in all the Ancient Councils the Bishops of the church met together for common counsel and advice and in matters of Discipline and Government which were subject to their Authority they considered what was ' most for the publick benefit of the church and determined them by their Authority not as infallible Judges but as Supreme Governours of the church In the disputes of Faith they reason from Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not from their own Authority and what upon a serious debate and inquiry they found to be most agreeable to the sense of Scripture and the Doctrine of the church of former Ages that they determined and decreed to be received in all churches as the catholick Faith That this is so is evident from all the Histories of the most Ancient and celebrated councils which any man may consult who pleases Now I would ask some few Questions about this matter 1. Whither-these councils took a sure and safe way to find out Truth If they did not what reason have we to believe that they determined right If they did then we may use the same way which they did for that which is a good way in one Age is so in another and then there is no necessity of an Infallible Judge to find out the sense of Scripture because we have other certain wayes of doing this the same which all the ancient Councils observed 2. I would know whither it be not sufficient for every Christian to receive the Decrees and Determinations of these councils upon the same Reason and Authority which moved the Fathers assembled in council to make these Decrees Whither for instance we must not believe the Eternal God-head of Christ and that he is of the same substance with his Fatherâ— for the same Reasons for which the Nicene Fathers believed this and required all christians to believe it If we must then Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not the Authority of a general council or any Infallible Judge is the Reason of our Faith For the Nicene Fathers who were the first that met in a General council could not believe this upon the Authority of any other General council much less upon their own Authority unless we will say that they first Decreed this then believed it because they themselves Decreed it If Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church antecedently to the determinations of a General council or any other pretended Infallible Judge be not a sufficient foundation for our Faith then the whole christian World before the council of Nice which was the first general council had no sufficient Foundation for their Faith for there was no particular Bishop or church in those dayes which pretended to be the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures We Protestants have the same way to understand the Scriptures have the same Reason and Foundation of our Faith which the Nicene Fathers themselves had or which any christan could have before there was any general council and if the church of Rome do not think this enough we cannot help that we are abundantly satisfied with it The Authority of a general council in those dayes was deservedly sacred and venerable not as an infallible Judge which they never pretended to but as the most certain means they could possibly have to understand what was and in all Ages had been the received Doctrine of the catholick church They met together not to make new Articles of Faith which no council in the World ever had any Authority to do but to declare what was the truly ancient and. Apostolick Faith and to put it into such words as might plainly express the catholick sense and meet with the distempers of that Age. For this end Grave and Reverend Bishops assembled from all parts of the christian World not meerly to give their private Opinions of things but to Declare what was the received Doctrine oâ— those churches over which they presided and I know no better Argument of an Apostolick Tradition then the consent of all churches as remote from each other as East and West which were planted by several Apostles and differed very much from each other in some External Rites and Usages but yet all agreed in the same Faith And this is the true Authority of those ancient councils that they were most likely to understand the true sense of Scripture and of the Catholick Church This is the Protestant Resolution of Faith and the Nicene Fathers themselves had no other way nor pretended to any other Nay the church of Rome her self as much as she talks of Infallibility makes very little use of it She has never given us an infallible comment on Scripture but suffers her Doctors to write as fallible comments and in many things as contrary to each other as any Protestant Divines do And I cannot imagine what good Infallibility does if an infallible Church has no better means of understanding Scripture then the comments of fallible men that is no better means then every fallible Church has for no man can understand the Scripture ever the better for the Churches being infallible unless this infallible Church improve this glorious Talent of Infallibility in Expounding Scripture which she has not done to this day and I believe never will Indeed it is apparent that infallibility as it is pretended to by the church of Rome can be of no use either in the Refolution of Faith or in confuting Hereticks who deny this Infallibility and then I cannot imagine what it is good for but to multiply Disputes instead of ending them As for the Resolution of Faith suppose I ask a Papist why he believes such Articles as the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the dead to be contained in Scripture If he answer as he must do Because he is taught so by the church which is infallible my next Question is How he knows the Church to be infallible If he says he learns this from Scripture I ask him how he comes to understand the Scripture and how he knows that this is the sense of it If he know this by the infallible interpretation of the church then he runs round in a circle and knows the Scripture by the church and the church by the Scripture as I observed before if he can find out the Churches infallibility by the Scripture without the help of an infallible Judge then it seems the Scripture is to be understood without the infallible interpretation of the Church and if men can find out infallibility in Scripture without the Church I am confident they may find out any thing else in Scripture as well without the Churches infallibility For there iâ— no Article of our creed so hard to be
same Doctrines which she does and she looks upon it as a just prejudice against any Expositions of Scripture if they contradict the common Faith of the first Christians and therefore when the words of Scripture are fairly capable of different senses she chooses that sense which is most agreeable with the Catholick Faith and practice of the Primitive Church but should any Doctrines be imposed upon her as Articles of Faith which are no where to be found in Scripture or which are plainly contrary to it as the new Trent Creed is whatever pretence there be for the Antiquity of such Doctrines she utterly rejects them she will not put out her Eyes to follow any other Guide and thanks be to God she needs not reject any truly Catholick Doctrine in this way We still retain the Faith of the Primitive Church and are greatly confirmed in it from that admirable consent there is between the Scriptures as Expounded by us and that Faith which was anciently owned and received by all Christians Having thus shewn in what sense the Church is the Interpreter of Scripture I proceed now to the Second thing contained in this Paper That this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now these few words contain a great many and very great mistakes The subject of the inquiry is how we may find out such a Church whose word we may safely take for the true sense and meaning of Scripture Now 1. The Author of this Paper whither ignorantly or designedly I know not alters the state of the Question and in stead of a Church which is an unerring and Infallible Interpreter of Scripture which would be very well worth finding he tells us how we may know a true Church now I take a true Church and and an infallible Interpreter of Scripture to be very different things A Church may be guilty of Schism and Heresie and yet may be a true Church though not a sound Orthodox and Catholick Church for a true Church is such a Church as has all things necessary and essential to the Beeing and Constitution of a Church this a Church may have and superadd other things which are destructive of the Christian Faith and very dangerous and fatal mistakes as we believe and are able to prove the Church of Râ—me has done and yet we acknowledge her a true Church because she retains the true Christian Faith though miserably Corrupted by Additions of her own as a man is a true man though he be sick of a mortal Disease Now if a true Church may corrupt the Christian Faith we have no reason to rely on the Authority of every true Church for the true sense and meaning of Scripture 2. Let us suppose that by a true Church he means an Infallible Church whose Authority we may safely rely on in Expounding Scriptures this Church he sayes is to be known by a continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now if this visible uninterrupted Succession be the mark of such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then 1. The Greek Church is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture for she has as visible uninterrupted a Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day as the Church of Rome has and so we have two infallible Churches not to instance in any more at present who have as good a Succession as either of them which are directly opposite to each other and what shall we do in this Case Must we believe Contradictions or must we dis-believe infallible Churches 3. If a visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles makes aâ—y church an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then all the churches which were planted by the Apostles were infallible All the churches which were planted by the Apostles have an equally visible Succession from Christ those churches which were planted by the Apostles may be presumed as infallible while the Apostles were present with them as they were afterwards and those churches which succeeded these Apostolical churches at the distance of an Age or two may be supposed as infallible as any church of this Age is for if a visible Succession from Christ makes a church infallible why should not a Succession of a hundred or two hundred years make them as infallible as a Succession of sixteen hundred years unless they think that Infallibility increases with the Age of the Church which I could wish true but we see very little sign of it Now according to these Principles all the churches which were planted by the Apostles and have a continual visible Succession from Apostolical Churches through all Ages since the time of the Apostles must be infallible for if a continual visible Succession confers Infallibility and is the mark whereby we must know it then every Church which ever had or has to this day this visible Succession must have Infallibility also which it seems is entailed on Succession And thus we have found out a World of infallibility and it is wonderful how any Apostolical Church came to be over-run with so many Errors and Heresies and to grow so corrupt and degenerate as to provoke GOD to root them up if every Apostolical Church was infallible I cannot imagine how whole Churches which visibly succeeded the Apostles should be infected with Heresie for if Infallibility it self will not secure a Church from Heresie the LORD have mercy upon us 3. This mark he gives how to find out such a true Church at is an infallible Interpreâ—er of Scripture viz. A continual visible Succession from Christ till this day includes another great mistake for it supposes that there is some church now in being on whose Authority we must rely for the sense of Scripture for otherwise there can be no use of a visible Succession to this day in this Controversie If as I have already Proved at large we must rely only on the Authority of the Primitive Church not of the church of this present Age for the sense of Scripture and that not as an infallible Judge buâ— as the most Authentick Witness of the Apostolical Doctrine and Practice then we cannot find out this church by a visible Succession to this day but by examining the ancient Records of the Primitive Church where we shall find what the Faith and Practice of the Church in those dayes was which is the safest Rule to guide us in the Exposition of Scripture Though there were no Church in the World at this day which could prove a continual visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles yet while we have the Scriptures and the Records of the Primitive church we have very sufficient means for the understanding the true meaning of Scripture So that of whatever use this talk of a continual visible Succession may be in other cases it is wholly impertinent in this A church which cannot prove such a continual visible Succession which was not founded by any Apostle
or Apostolical men or has lost the Memory or Records of its first Plantation may yet have very certain means of knowing the true sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self and the Doctrine and Practice of Apostolical and Primitive Churches and a Church which has the most visible uninterrupted Succession from Christ and his Apostles may be so far from being an infallible Interpreter of Scripture that she may be very corrupt and erroneous her self if she forsake the Apostolical Tradition contained in the Writings of the new Testament and Expounded by the Catholick Faith and Practice of the first Churches as we know the Church of Rome has done which is so far from being an infallible Church that we believe her to be the most corrupt Church in the World And thus I think we are prepared to venture upon the last Clause of this Paper wherein the whole force of the Argument such as it is is turned upon the poor Protestant Churches But I doubt sayes the Author of this Paper whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed The sting of which Argument lies in this that we Protestants have no certain way of knowing the true seâ—nse and meaning of Scripture because we cannot prove the continual visible Succession of our Church from Christ unto this day and therefore we ought to go over to the church of Rome who has this visible Succession and receive all her Dictates as infallible Oracles But for Answer to this consider 1. That suppose the Protestant Church could not make out such a continual visible Succession yet we may understand the Scriptures very well without it and need not go to the church of Rome to Expound Scripture for us as I have already shewn at large Had he proved that we had been no church for want of a visible Succession of church Officers or that our Religion were a Novelty which was never heard of it in the world before Luther this had been something more to the purpose but to pretend that we cannot understand the Scriptures for want of a visible Succession is such a loose and inconsequent way of reasoning as a poor fallible Protestant would be ashamed of 2. But pray why can't the Protestant Church of England prove her continual visible Succession from Christ till this day as well as the church of Rome Here was a Christian Church planted in this Nation as very good Historians say as early as at Rome and it has continued here ever since to this day when Austin the Monk came over to England he found here a company of resolute Brittish Bishops and Monks who would not submit to the Usurpations of Rome and the English and Brittish Churches under several Changes and Alterations have continued to this day with a visible Succession of Christian Bishops and what better Succession can Rome shew than this I suppose no Roman Catholick will disown the Succession of the church of England till the Reformation and I pray how came we to lose our Succession then Did the Reformation of those Abuses and Corruptions which had crept into the Church unchurch us Just as much as a man ceases to be the same man when he is cured of some mortal Disease Did not the Church of England consist of the same Persons before the Reformation and after A great many indeed disowned the Reformation but were not all those Persons who were so active and zealous in the Reformation formerly of the Roman communion And did they lose their Succession too when they became Reformers When a Church consists of the same Bishops Priests and People which she had before though she have not all the same that she had when she retains the same ancient Catholick and Apostolick Faith which she did before only renounces some Errors and Innovations which she owned before how does this forfeit her Succession The Church of England is the very same Church now since the Reformation which she was before and therefore has the very same Succession though not the same Errors to this day that ever she had and that I think is as good a Succession as the Church of Rome has There are but two things to be considered in the case of Succession Either a Succession of Church Officers or a Succession of the Faith and Doctrines of the Church 1. As for a Succession of Church Officers we have the same that the Church of Rome has Those English Bishops who embraced the Reformation received their Orders in the Communion of the Church of Rome and therefore they had as good Orders as any are in the Church of Rome and these were the Persons who Consecrated other Bishops and so in Succession to this day For as for the story of the Nags-head Ordination that is so transparent a Forgery invented many years after to Reproach the Reformation that I presume no sober Roman Catholick will insist on it But we are Hereticks and Schismaticks and this forfeits our Orders and our Succession together But 1. This charge ought first to be proved against us that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks we deny and abhor both the name and thing and if we be not Hereticks and Schismaticks as we are sure we are not and as the Church of Rome can never prove us to be then according to their own Confession our Orders must be good 2. However be we Hereticks or Schismaticks or what ever they please to call us how does this destroy our Orders and Succession The Catholick Church would not allow in former Ages that Heresie or Schism destroyed the validity of Orders St. Jerome disputes against this at large in his Book Contra Luciferianos And St. Austin allows the Donatists Bishops to have valid Orders though they were Schismaticks and therefore that the Sacraments adminstred by them were valid And indeed if Heresie will destroy Orders and Succession the Church of Rome will be as much to seek for their Orders and Succession as we are which by their own Confession have had several Heretical Popes and no body knows how many Bishops Ordained by them 2. As for Succession of Doctrine which is as considerable to the full as Succession of Orders the great Articles of our Faith are not only plainly contained in Scripture but have been delivered down to us through all ages of the Church by an uninterrupted Succession The Church of Rome her self in her greatest Degeneracy did own all that we do in pure matters of Faith When we reformed the Church we did not make a new Religion but only separated the old Faith from new and corrupt Additions and therefore the quarrel of the Church of Rome with us is not that we believe any thing which they do not believe but that we do not believe all that they would have us The Doctrine of the Church of England is truly Primitive and Catholick taught by Christ and his Apostles owned by the Primitive Church and
but had great numbers of Disciples a visible Society of Christians who followed their Judgements Some of these sadly bewailed the degenerate state of the Roman church others petitioned for and advised not only the correction of the abuses of good Doctrines and innocent Institutions but the Reformation of gross Errours and scandalous Additions to the christian Faith and others in great Authority promised an amendement and to reduce the whole frame of christianity to its Primitive sense Model And the famous council of Trent was promis'd and begun to rectifie Errours and Abuses creept into the Romish Faith and Government yet after a long Sitting it fatally concluded confirming those corruptions which was hop'd after so many complaints and addresses with strong reasons for them should have been throughly redrest and reform'd The Original of their barbarous Inquisition will be a standing record of the frequent and stout oppositions that were made against the Romish Innovation in the christian Faith And so long as the Blood of the numerous Albigenses and Waldenses cryes to Heaven for Vengeance against the Papal cruelty we have a cloud of Witnesses for this Truth who resisted unto Death the new Doctrines of Rome The carriage of old Wicliff and his Followers tells us plainly in story that the corruptions of Rome had no such quiet possession but ever and anone some or other inconsiderable numbers did endeavour to eject them out of their hold though they paid dear for it And so long as the Treachery of their council of Constance about the safe conduct granted to poor Huss and his Disciples in number above forty thousand remains upon record never to be forgotten or forgiven so long we have clear evidences of strong resistance made to the Romish Religion before the times of Luther And in most Countries and times where and when the Romish corruptions began from small and obscure beginings to be gross and plain some or other in greater or lesser numbers began to Renounce and Protest against them What though some of these early Reformers might hold some erroneous Opinions which we our selves condemn yet however they opposed the Romish Church in her corruptions and these tended to a Reformation which was compleated only by degrâ—eâ—â— and 't is no wonder some Stumbled in such a night of Ignorance And have not the Agents of Rome destroyed the Papers and Records disguis'd their Adversaries and falsify'd their Opinions to serve the power and Interest of their great Mistriss They therefore branded the Waldenses with the name of Manichaism and that they affirmed two Principles or Originals of all things because they asserted that the Emperour was independent of the Pope and that they denyed CHRIST to be the Son of GOD because they could not believe a crust of Bread to be CHRIST And they have fram'd as lewd stories against many excellent Men of the latâ—r Ages who withstood the approaches of their Doctrine and Government which we certainly know and the more ingenuous among them confess to be notoriously false Though we have reason to believe because of the severity and industry of the Romish Factors ever warm against those who opposed her Practises a great number of Honest and Learned Men as those Ages would afford are buried in obscurity and their names unknown there being an Expurgatorian Index for the merits of such Men as well as Books and Editions yet we have a sufficient Catalogue of them who kept up the Title and claim of old Christianity would not suffer their new Errors to plead prescription 2. By shewing what Errours and Mistakes are included in the Question 1. That these new Errors of Rome are absolutely necessary to the being of a Christian Church For though we believe all that Christ and his Apostles taught all things that are contain'd in the Holy Scriptures all things that undoubted Tradition or good Reason proves to drive themselves from both or either yet because we do not assent and Subscribe to the new Articles of Faith that Rome hath invented for us we cease to be a Christian Church are mark'd for Hereticks which are worse than Pagans with them and must be certainly damn'd Nay should we embrace all the other Doctrines of Rome and deny only the Popes Authority and Supremacy that Epitome of their Christianity it would avail us little we are Heathens still Should we reject but one Article of Pope Pius's Creed suppose the Doctrine of Purgatory or Merit yet because this questions Infallibility the centâ—e of all their Religion we are in the state of Damnation still Should we receive their Doctrines as probable and in a larger and more favâ—urable meaning yet because we do not entertain them as Articles of Faith in the sense of the Church our case is not mended we shall meeâ— with Fires here and hereafâ—er for our reward Should we wink and swallow them all down with a good Catholick stomach yet iâ— the Bishop of Rome should give out a new Edition of Faith enlarged with many more monstrous Doctrines and Opinions yet if we boggle and kick at them all our former Righteousness shall not not be remembred we are Apostates worse than Truks and Infidels and who can tell what this Infallible and powerful Guide of â—â—â—â—stendom will do For when things obscure or of an indifferent Nature when things wherein they differ among themselves and only serve a temporal Interest when Opinions which they can dispense withal upon occasion when only the modes and manner of Truth when Contradictories and Doctrines directly leading unto impiety and things Barbarous and Blasphemous have been christened Articles of Faith and Fundamentals of Religion have we not just reason to suspect as ill or worsé may be done again And the intrigues of Trent may be acted once more and as many new Articles of Faith as Titular Bishops by the same Spirit moving in the same manner were not the first and early Christians sound Members of Christs Body though they never thought of such wild Opinions as these and publish'd truths directly contrary to them And could I suppose them to have known these Innovations out of Zeal and Fidelity to their trust would have detested and abhor'd them Was Christ negligent in the discharge of his mighty Office and his Apostles defective in their Duties and Ministry not to acquaint the first Christians with these great truths and were they reveal'd in the Tridentine Council only to us upon whom the ends of the world are come These Primitive Disciples of Christ thought themselves secure of Heaven by this short Creed that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God And the contrary was the character of the Man of Sin that denied that Jesus was come in the Flesh that he was the God incarnate and the true Messiah and were scandalized at his meanness and obscurity S. Paul told the Jaylor that certainly he would be saved if he believed that Jesus was the Christ all other Fundamentals of Christianity one
to be conformed to the Image of his Son and â—hom he did predestinate them he called and whom he called them he Justified and whom he Justified them he Glorified The Apâ—stle having said in the verse before verse 28 We know that all things work together for good unto them that love GOD to them who are called according to his purpose adds as a proof of what he had said whom he did foreknow would be persons of Great and noble minds and so fit for the work them he did predestinate to be conformed to the Image of his Son them he did decree to suffer for his sake and by sufferings to be made conformed to his Son who was made perfect through sufferings and whom he did predestinate them he also called them in due time he actually called forth to suffer for his name and whom he called them he justified them he approved of as Faithfull Servants as Loyal Souldiers as Invincible Champions of Truth and Righteousness and whom he Justified he Glorified them he Crowned with Honour and Renown here and with immortal Glory hereafter This was the Testimony God bore to the Apostles and first Bishops of the Church to the Authority they had received to the Doctrine they taught and for which they died this was the Honour the Primitive Christians deservedly shewed to their Victorious Martyrs they did not Invocate them but Loved their Memories Commemorated their Vertues and Blessed God for their example they performed to them not any part of Religious Worship that was Cultus officiâ—sus dilectionis soâ—ietatis specialis observantia S. Aust contr Faust l. 20. 21. ou latreutikâ—s alla schetikos kai ti metikâ—s Cyril l. o. contr Jul. due to God only but as they called it an officious Worship a Worship of Love and society a special and particular observance a respect convenient and proper and which they could not but think was due to them on the account of the great service they had done to the the cause of Christ and the more then ordinary worth and excellency that shined in them But afterwards in succeeding Ages when through the good providence of God and favour of Constantine the great the church had rest and ease and Prosperity began to dawn upon it the Devil finding he coulde not prevail over the Christian Faith by fiery trials and temptations betook himself to other more secret it may be but equally dangerous stratagems and by working on the strong inclinations and affections of Men to ease and softness he too successfully attempted to deprave and corrupt it by loose and superstitious Doctrines most Men are for some kind of Religion whither the Devil will or no which because he canâ—ot hinder he labours what he can it may be such that whilst it pretends fair may do them but little good and Men are forâ—ard enough to close with that which offers at carrying them to Heaven on the easiest terms The Church being now out of Persecution and Riches and Honours attending that profession for which such multitudes had lost all and endured the flames the people began to be more loose and vain in their conversations then when they still expected martyrdom now they began to place their Religion in shews and pretences more then in a sincere and substantial Piety and whereas before they were wont to frequent the Tombs of the Martyrs that at the sight of the place their affections might be raised their Devotions enlivened and their Faith and Charity receive farther degrees of warmth and heat from their burning and shining examples now they placed all their Religion in the bare outward observance of that Solemnity and took more care to Honour the Saints by their lofty Praises and commendations of them then to become Saints themselves by imitating their Graces and Vertues and that what was wanting in the one they might make up in the other they now began to fall into many Superstitious Conceits and Opinions concerning them to break out into too lavish and indeed extravagant expressions of their worth and to fly too high in their Panegyricks and Laudatory Orations Now they began To attribute the miracles done at the Martyrs Tombs to the Martyrs own Power or at least mediation with God the common People observing that many Cures were wrought upon those that at those monuments applied themselves to God were led by degrees to look upon them as so many Testimonies of the Martyrs great interest in the Court of Heaven and instead of begging relief of God to speak directly to the Martyrs themselves To fancy that the Souls of Martyrs were alwayes hovering about their Tombs and Ashes and so joyned their Intercessions with the Prayers of Christians that were put up to God in those places so 't was objected by Vigilantius to St. Hierom To wish that the Martyrs would Pray for them Oret pro nobis Flavianus so they cried out in the Council of Chalcedon Let Flavianus Pray for us and in Theodoret's History of the Lives of the Fathers we find in the close of most of them though some think them not to be his words but Additions and Insertions afterwards I wish and desire that by their Intercession I may obtâ—in Divine help To commend themselves to the Martyrs intercessions Commendare nos orationi St. Aust to beg to be heard for their sakes to be helpt by their prayers to be vouchsaf't the effects of the Prayers that were made by them in behalf of the Church below To pray to them upon supposition if they heard or knew what was done here below Hear oh thou soul Nazian Orat. 2. in Jultan ei de iis soi kai ton hemeteron esti logos Orat. â—nd in Gorgon of great Constantius sayes St. Gregory Nazianzen if thou hast any understanding of these things the like he hath in his Funeral Oration which he made upon his sister Gorgonia If thou hast any care of things done by us and Holy souls receive this Honour from God that they have any feeling of such things as these receive this Oration of ours By such steps and degrees as these the frequenting the places where the Martyrs were enshrined and Honouring their Names and Memories was turned into Superstitious Devotion and that soon ended in solemn and downright Invocation To all this we may add what a Learned Author of our own has ingeniously guest that the great compliance Dr. Tenison and yielding of the Roman Christians in this particular to those Northern Nations the Goths and Vandals when they invaded and overun the Empire did not a little contribute to raise and propagate this Saint-Worship and Invocation in the Church of all the Heathen Nations none were more Zealously Devoted to the Worship of Daemons then those were whereof he gives many Testimonies now it 's not improbable that the Christians to mollify their fierce natures and to induce them the more readily to embrace Christianity might indulge them still that
denial that Transubstantiation hath not been the perpetual belief of the christian church And thâ—s likewise is acknowledged by many great and learned men of the Roman church a In Sent. l. 4. Dist 11. Q. 3. Scotus acknowledgeth that this Doctrine was not alwayes thought necessary to be believed but that the necessity of believing it was consequent to that Declaration of the Church made in the council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the III. And b In sent l. 4. dist 11. q. 1. n. 15. Durandus freely discovers his inclination to have believed the contrary if the Church had not by that determination oblidged men to believe it c de Euchar. l. 1. p. 146. Tonstal Bishop of Durham also yields that before the Lateran council men were at liberty as to the manner of Christ's presence in the Sacrament And d In 1. Epist ad corinth c. 7. citan te etiam Salmerone Tom. 9. Tract 16. p. 108. Erasmus who lived and died in the communion of the Roman Church and then whom no man was better read in the ancient Fathers doth confess that it was late before the Church defined Transubstantiation unknown to the Ancients both name and thing And e De Haeres l. 8. Alphonsus a castro sayes plainly that concerning the transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ there is seldom any mention in the ancient Writers And who can imagine that these learned men would have granted the ancient Church and Fathers to have been so much Strangers to this Doctrine had they thought it to have been the perpetual belief of the Church I shall now in the Second place give an account of the particular time and occasion of the coming in of this Doctrine and by what steps and degrees it grew up and was advanced into an Article of Faith in the Romish Church The Doctrine of the Corporal presence of Christ was first started started upon occasion of the Dispute about the Worship of Images in opposition whereto the Synod of Constantinople about the year DCCL did argue thus That our Lord having left us no other Image of himself but the Sacrament in which the substance of bread is the image of his body we ought to make no other image of our Lord. In answer to this Argument the second Council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII did declare that the Sacrament after Consecration is not the image and antitype of Christs body and bloud but is properlie his body and bloud So that the corporal Body of Christ in the sacrament was first brought in to support the stupid worship of Images And indeed it could never have come in upon a more proper occasion nor have been applied to a fitter purpose And here I cannot but take notice how well this agrees with * De Eucharist l. 1. c. 1. Bellarmine's Observation that none of the Ancients who wrote of Heresies hath put this errour viz. of denying Transubstantiation in his catalogue nor did any of the Ancients dispute against this errour for the first 600 years Which is very true because there could be no occasion then to dipute against those who denied Transubstantiation since as I have shewn this Doctrine was not in being unless amongst the Eutychian Heretiques for the first 600 years and more But ‡ Ibid. Bellarmine goes on and tells us that the first who call'd in question the truth of the body of the Lord in the Eucharist were the ICONOMACHI the opposers of Images after the year DCC in the Council of Constantinople for these said there was one image of Christ instituted by himself viz the bread and wine in the Eucharist which represents the body and bloud of Christ Wherefore from that time the Greek Writers often admonish us that the Eucharist is not the figure or image of the body of the Lord but his true body as appears from the VII Synod which agrees most exactly with the account which I have given of the first rise of this Doctrine which began with the corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament and afterwards proceeded to Transubstantiation And as this was the first occasion of introducing this Doctrine among the Greek so in the Latine or Roman Church Paschasius Radbertus first a Monk and afterwards Abbot of Corbey was the first broacher of it in the year DCCCXVIII And for this besides the Evidence of History we have the acknowledgment of two very Eminent Persons in the Church of Rome Bellarmine and Sirmondus who do in effect confess that this Paschasius was the first who wrote to purpose upon this Argument * Descriptor Eccles Bellarmine in those words this Author was the first who hath seriously and copiously written concerning the truth of Christs body and bloud in the Eucharist And †In vita Paschasii Sirmoâ—dus in these he so first explained the genuine sense of the Catholick church that he opened the way to the rest who afterwards in great numbers wrote upon the same Argument But though Sirmondus is pleased to say that he only first explained the sense of the Catholique Church in this Point yet it is very plain from the Records of that Age which are left to us that this was the first time that this Doctrine was broached in the Latin Church and it met with great opposition in that Age as I shall have occasion hereafter to shew For Rabanus Maurus Arch-biship of Meâ—tz about the year DCCCXLVII reciting the very words of Paschusius wherein he had deliver'd this Doctrine hath this remarkable passage concerning the novelty of it ‡ Epist. ad Heribaldum c. 33. Some sayes he of late not having a right opinion concerning the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord have said that this is the body and bloud of our Lord which was born of the Virgin Mary and in which our Lord suffered upon the cross and rose from the dead which errour sayes he we have opposed with all our might From whence it is plain by the Testimony of one of the greatest and most learned bishops of that Age and of eminent reputation for Piety that what is now the very Doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning the Sacrament was then esteem'd an Errour broach'd by some particular Persons but was far from being the generally received Doctrine of that Age. Can any one think it possible that so eminent a Person in the Church both for piety and learning could have condemned this Doctrine as an Errour and a Novelty had it been the general Doctrine of the Christian Church not only in that but in all former Ages and no censure pass'd upon him for that which is now the great burning Article in the Church of Rome and esteemed by them one of the greatest and most prenicious Heresies Afterwards in the year MLIX when Berengarius in France and Germany had raised a fresh opposition against this Doctrine he was compelled to recant it by pope Nicholas
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
to this effect That Tradition which was of so much use in the Primitive Church was not unwritten Traditions or Customs commended or ratified by the supposed infallibility of any visible Church but did especially consist in the Confessions or Registers of particular Churches And the unanimous consent of so many several Churches as exhibited their Consessions to the Nicene Council out of such Forms as had been framed and taught before this Controversie arose about the Divinity of CHRIST and that voluntaâ—ily and freely these Churches being not dependent one upon another nor overswayed by any Authority over them nor misled by Faction to frame their Confessions of Faith by imitation or according to some patern set them was a pregnant argument that this Faith wherein they all agreed had been delivered to them by the Apostles and their Followers and was he true meaning of the holy Writings in this great Article and evidently proved that Arius did obtrude such interprerations of Scripture as had not been heard of before or were but the sense of some private persons in the Church and not of the generality of Believers In short the unanimous consent of so many distinct visible Churches as exhibited their several Consessions Catechisms or Testimonies of their own Forefathers Faith unto the Council of Nice was an argument of the same force and efficacy against Arius and his Partakers as the general consent and practice of all Nations in worshipping a Divine Power in all Ages is against Atheists Nothing but the ingrafted notion of a Deity could have induced so many several Nations so much different in natural disposition in civil Discipline and Education to effect or practise the duty of Adoration And nothing but the evidence of the ingrafied word as St. James calls the Gospel delivered by CHRIST and his Apostles in the holy Scriptures could have kept so many several Churches as communicated their Confessions unto that Council in the unity of the same Faith The like may be said of the rest of the four first General Councils whose Decrees are a great confirmation of our belief because they deliver to us the consent of the Churches of CHRIST in those great Truths which they assert out of the holy Scriptures And could there any Traditive Interpretation of the whole Scripture be produced upon the Authority of such Original Tradition as that now named we would most thankfully and joyfully receive it But there never was any such pretended no not by the Roman Church whose Doctors differ among themselves about the meaning of hundreds of places in the Bible Which they would not do sure nor spend their time unprofiâ—ably in making the best conjectures they are able if they knew of any exposition of those places in which all Christian Doctors had agreed from the beginning V. But more then this we allow that Tradition gives us a considerable assistance in such points as are not in so many letters and syllables contained in the Scriptures but may be gathered from thence by good and manifest reasoning Or in plainer words perhaps whatsoever Tradition justifies any Doctrine that may be proved by the Scriptures though not found in express terms there we acknowledge to be of great use and readily receive and follow it as serving very much to establish us more firmly in that Truth when we see all Christians have adhered to it This may be called a confirming Tradition of which we have an instance in the Doctrine of Infant-Baptism which some ancient Fathers call an Apostolical Tradition Not that it cannot be proved by any place of Scripture no such matter for though we do not find it written in so many words that Infants are to be baptised or that the Apostles baptised Infants yet it may be proved out of the Scriptures and the Fathers themselves who call it an Apostolical Tradition do alledge testimonies of the Scriptures to make it good And therefore we may be sure they comprehend the Scriptures within the name of Apostolical Tradition and believed that this Doctrine was gathered out of the Scriptures though not expresly treated of there In like manner we in this Church assert the authority of Bishops above Presbyters by a Divine right as appears by the Book of Consecration of Bishops where the persons to be ordained to this Office expresses his belief That he is truly called to this Ministration according to the will of our LORD JESVS CHRIST Now this we are perswaded may be plainly enough proved to any man that is ingenuous and will fairly consider things out of the holy Scriptures without the help of Tradition but we also take in the assistance of this for the conviction of gain-sayers and by the perpetual practice and Tradition of the Church from the beginning confirm our Scripture proofs so strongly that he seems to us very obstinate or extreamly prejudiced that yields not to them And therefore to make our Doctrine in this point the more authentick our Church hath put both these Proofs together in the Preface to the Form of giving Orders which begins in these words It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been three Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons I hope no body among us is so weak as to imagine when he reads this that by admitting Tradition to be of such use and force as I have mentioned we yield too much to the Popish Cause which supports it self by this pretence But if any one shall suggest his to any of our people let them reply That it is but the pretence and only by the Name of Tradition that the Romish Church supports it self For true Tradition is as great a proof against Popery as it is for Episcopacy The very foundation of the Popes Empire which is his succession in St. Peters Supremacy is uâ—terly subverted by this the constant Tradition of the Church being evidently against it And therefore let us not lose this Advantage we have against them by ignorantly refusing to receive true and constant Tradition which will be so far from leading us into their Church that it will never suffer us to think of being of it while it remains so opposite to that which is truely Apostolical I conclude this with the Direction which our Church gives to Preachers in the Books of Canons 1â—71 in the Title Concionatores That no man shall teach the people any thing to be held and believed by them religiously but what is consentaneous to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the Catholick Fathers and Ancient Bishops have gathered out of that very Doctrine This is our Rule whereby we are to guide our selves which was set us on purpose to preserve our Preachers from broaching any idle novel or popish Doctrines as appears by the conclusion of that Injunction Vain and old Wives Opinions and Heresies and Popish Errours abhorring from the Doctrine and
first General Councils are received with great Veneration and a particular a In libro canonum in Synodo Londinensi an 1571. titulo de concionatoribus Imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populoreligiose teneri credi velint 〈◊〉 quod consentaneum sit doctrinae Veteris Novi Testamenti quodquo ex illa ipsa doctrina catholici Patres Veteres Episcopi collegerint Injunction was laid upon its Ministers to press upon none the necessary belief of any Doctrine but what may be proved from Scripture and the generall current of the Expositions of the Fathers thereupon So carefull it hath been in all points to keep within the bounds of catholick Principles in those first instilled into its young Disciples in the catechisms and in those delivered in its Articles to be subscribed by such to whom it entrusts any Office that the positive part of them will hardly be disowned by our very Adversaries and can scarce appear otherwise to any then the common Faith of all christians of Orthodox repute in all Ages And for other determinations in the Negative she only declares thereby how little concerned she is to receive or own the false or corrupt additions to the first unalterable Rule No church hath professed and evidenced a more awful and tender regard to Antiquity next to the express Word of GOD. Both which she oft appeals to desires to be ruled by and where their footsteps are not sufficiently clear chooses not to impose upon her own Children nor censure her Neighbours keeps within the most safe and modest boundaries is not forward in determining nice and intricate disputes which have perplexed and confounded many in their hasty and bold Positions particularly about the Divine Decrees and such like sublime Points In which few understand where the main stress of the Controversie lies It may be none can comprehend the depth of the matters upon which the Decision ought to grounded But alas how many have been forward to lay down and fiercely contend for on each side their private opinions herein as the first Rudiments of Theology to be placed in their very Creeds or Catechisms and so a foundation must be laid for endless Contests and Divisions But most cautious hath our Church been in not laying such occasions to fall in the way of any So that both sorts of Adversaries have made their complaints against her for not being positive and particularly in such Declarations though none can charge her justly with defect in any point of Faith so owned in the best Ages of the Church 2. As clear and unexceptionable hath been her proceeding in Church Government preserving that form which from all Testimonies of Antiquity hath continued in the Church from the very Apostles under the conduct and happy Influence of which Christianity hath been propagated and continued throughout the World whatever different measures some other Reformed Churches have taken whither forc'd by necessity or swayed by particular inclination or prejudice The Church of England kept up the universally received distinct prime Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons not desiring to censure others who can best answer for themselves but endeavouring to confine her self to what was most Canonical and Regular and to shew how little affected she was to alteration from any establishment except in notorious corruptions and abuses And how necessary she thought due Order and Subordination in the Church to prevent Schisms and Heresies and to give the greater Authority and advantage to her Ministrations and finally to free her self from all suspicion of irregularity in her Succession derived down from Christ and his Apostles which she as much as any Church in the World may pretend unto And though some intermediate Ages have been blemished with much degeneracy yet she was concerned only to separate this but retain and convey down to others whatsoever good and wholsome provision she received from those before Farther to evince this particular care was taken by express Law a See the Statute 25 of Henry the 8. cap. 19. Sect. 7 expresly revived 1 Eliz c. 1. sect 6. to confirm the Rules of Government or Canon Law before received in the Church till some better provision could be made so far as it contradicts not the Law of the Land or the Word of GOD making as few changes in the outward face of the Church as was possible and sensibly proving it her design properly not to destroy but build nor yet therein to erect a new but reform an old Church 3. Alike Canonical and orderly hath been her Constitution in matters of Worship Her Forms of Prayer and Praise with the whole order of her Liturgy are composed with the greatest temper and expressed in the most plain and comprehensive terms to help forward uniform devotion pious Affection the most Orthodox Profession and catholick communion So that I think it may be universally affirmed that there is not any thing required in her publick Service necessary to those who communicate with her which any that own the name of christians or are owned for such by the general body of them can almost scruple unless because it is a Form by one sort and because it is ours by another sort But how unreasonable herein are both So careful she hath been to lay the ground of most catholick Unity and to remove whatever might obstruct it This our Adversaries the Romanists confirmed by their own practice when for several years as we have been told a Camdeni Eliz. an 1570 in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign they frequented our churches joyn'd in our Prayers and Praises attended on our Sermons and other Instructions and received as some add our Sacraments according to the order for substance the same as now and had it is like done so still having nothing to object against them but from the after-prohibition of the Pope who had reason to fear they who were so well provided of all needfull supply and defence at home might thus by degrees be withdrawn from subjection to his Authority abroad that darling point never to be dispensed or parted with whatever else might have been yielded b Camd. Eliz. an 1560. Our Reformers who composed our Liturgy carefuly collected the remainders of true Primitive Devotion a camdeni Eliz an 1560. then in use and separated from them all those corrupt additions which ignorance superstition and crafty policy had mixed therewith Therefore it is so far from being an objection that any part of our Liturgy was translated from the Roman Offices that while nothing is retained contrary to wholsome Doctrine and sound Piety it is a convincing argument of her impartial Sincerity and desire to preserve Uniformity as much as possible with all christians abroad as well as at home in her own Members securing all the Substantials of Worship according to the plain sense of Scripture and the pattern of the Primitive church And as to Circumstantials
case to God and interceed with him on their behalf but how could Eve alive request this of the Virgin Mary and Eve dâ—ed above three thousand years before Mary was born Or how could Irenoeus think the blessed Virgin in a capacity to do this whose opinion it was with the Iren. l. 5. c. 31. generality of the Fathers in that Age that her Soul as all others of departed Saints were yet in an invisible place and not admitted to the Beatiâ—ick Vision Or how could Eve stand in need of her Advocatship who if it were true as the Romanists hold that our Saviour at his Resurrection Aquin. Durand freed the Saints of the Old Testament from their Limbus and carried them up with him into heaven and the presence of God was a Glorified Saint in Heaven whilst she was living upon the Earth and so was in a better State to be an Advocate for the Virgin Mary then the Virgin Mary for her Thus you see as clear a proof as Bellarmin Bellar. de Sanct. beat l. c. 19. thinks this to be nothing can be more ridiculously and impertinently quoted some other meaning then of the words must be found out and the most obvious and natural is this that the Virgin Mary is here by a figure put for Christ her Son according to the Flesh and said to do that as she was the happy Mother of a Son who did it and thus indeed she is Advocate for Eve and all Eves Posterity instrumentally not by her self personally but by her Son she being that vessel made choice of by the Holy Ghost to bear him in her Womb who by taking Flesh of her became the Saviour of Eve and all Mankind For the Testimony of Eusebius it as Bellarmine Bellar. de Sanct. beat l. 1. c. 19. reports it runs thus We Honour those Heavenly Souldiers â—s God's Friends we approach unto their Moâ—â—ments and Pray unto them as unto Holy Men by whose intercession we profess to receive much help and assistance but it is apparent as many Learned Men have shewn that Bellarmine took this allegation not out of Euseâ—ins's Original but a corrupt translation made by Trapezuntius and afterwards followed by Dadrâ—â—uâ— a Doctor of Paris who set forth Eâ—sebius there being no such words as Praying to them as unto Holy Men to be found in him speaking his own Language his words are these hâ—then kai ept tas thekas aut on ethos Evang praep l 13 c. 7. hemin parienai kai tas euchas para tautais poiesthai c. It is our custom to come to their Tombs and Monuments and to make our Prayers not autois to them those Martyrs as the Translaâ—or and Bellarmine would have it buâ— para tautais i e thekais at or before their â—ombs and Monuments and to Honour those blessed â—ouls I might now pass over St. Ambrose he living beyond the time I undertook to answer for Anno 374. but whatsoever he said of this nature was said when he was but a young Christian and recalled and contradicted by him afterwards Speculatores vitae actuùmque nostrorum in his book of Widows he exhorts them to pray to the Angels and Martyrs whom he calls beholders of our Lives and Actions â—ut Baronius himself Confesses as Bishop Andrews proves â—â—out oâ— the life of St. Ambrose that this Book was written presently after his Conversion when he was but a raw Divine and had not thâ—â—ughly Learned the Christian Doctrine and this appears by some other mistakes he was guilty of besides this that are of as dangerous a Nature when in the same Book he asserts that the Martyrs either had no Sin at all or what they had they did themselves wash away with their own Blood But that St. Ambrose changed his opinion concerning this Proprio Sanguine point of Invocation we are as sure as that once he held it since we find him afterwards plainly asserting the Contrary in such words as these That to procure God's favour we need no Amb. in Rom. c. 1. tom 5. Tu tamen Domine solus es invocandus De â—bitu Theâ—d tom 3. Advocate but a devout Mind and again speaking with relation to the two young Sons of Theodosius Thou only Oh Lord art to be Invocated and Prayed unto namely for a blessing and protection upon them 2. They make the Rhetorical Flourishes and Apostrophes of the Fathers in their Panegyricks of the Martyrs to be folemn forms of Invocation of them The Fathers about the laâ—ter end of the Fourth Century observing Piety and Devotion to decay and wax cold as the Church encreafed in Riches and Prosperity thought themselves obliged by all the Wit and Art and Rhetorick they had to retrieve if it was possible the pristine heat of Devotion that was formerly in it to that purpose they spake hâ—gh and large in commendation of their Martyrs and sometimes in their Oâ—ations directed their words to them as though they had been there present not with an intent to teach the People to Pray unto them or to rely upon their merits but to signify the mighty favour they were in with God and the more effectually to excite them to an imitation of their vertues Many such strains of Rhetorick occur in the Writings of St. Hierom St. Basil St. Gregory Nyssen St. Grâ—gory Nazianzen and others Orat. in Sanâ—â— Theod. So St. Gregory Nyssen speaks to â—heodore the Martyr in his Oration Gather together the Troops of thy Brethren Martyrs and thou with them beseech God to stay the Inâ—â—sâ—on of the Barbarians So St. Gregory Nazianzen in his Oration calls unto Orat. in Athan. St. Cyprian St. Basil St. Athanasius to each after this manner Do thou favourably look upon us from on high After the same manner does St. Hierom conclude his Funeral Oration on Paula Farewel Oh Paul and help the Old Age of thy Honourer with thy Prayers Now what is there in all this but what 's usual in all Authors both Sacred and Profane The design of the Faâ—â—â—â—s was to raise the People to as hâ—gh an opinion as they could boâ—â— of the Persons of the Martyrs and their vertues that made them so illustrious and might they not make useof their best Art and Rhetorick to do it What is more in this then those Apostrophes frequently found in the Sacred Writings even to insensate Creatures Hear ye Oh Mountains the Lord's Controâ—ersy Praise the Lord ye Dragons and all Deepâ— And who will infer from hence that the inâ—ensate Creatures were hereby invock'd and addrest unto 3. A great part of the Testimonies they produce out of the Fathers are to prove the Intercession of Saints in Heaven for us and not our Invocating of them and so they change the Question and are at a great deal of pains to prove that which no body denies such sayings as assert the Saints Praying for us are frequent among the ancient Fathers and that not only for the Church
penalties then of temporal death and Eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of so false a Doctrine and to lay open the monstruous absurdity of it And in the handling of this Argument I shall proceed in this plain method I. I shall consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine II. I shall produce our Objections against it And if I can shew that there is no tollerable ground for it and that there are invincible Objections against it then every man is not only in reason excused from believing this Doctrine but hath great cause to believe the contrary FIRST I will consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine Which must be one or more of these five Either 1. The Authority of scripture Or 2ly The perpetual belief of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an belief of of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an evidence that they alwayes understood and interpreted our Saviour's words This is my body in this sense Or 3ly The authority of the present Church to make and declare new articles of Faith Or 4ly The absolute necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive this Sacrament Or 5 ly To magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle 1. They pretend for this Doctrine the Authority of Scripture in those words of our Saviour This is my Body Now to shew the insufficiency of this pretence I shall endeavour to make good these two things 1. That there is no necessity of understanding those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation 2. That there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise First That there is no necessity to understand those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation If there be any it must be from one of these two reasons Either because there are no figurative expressions in Scripture which I think no man ever yet said or else because a Sacrament admits of no figures which would be very absurd for any man to say since it is of the very nature of a Sacrament to represent and exhibit some invisible grace and benefit by an outward sign and figure And especially since it cannot be denied but that in the institution of this very Sacrament our Saviour useth figurative exressions and several words which cannot be taken strictly and literally When he gave the Cup he said This Cup is the new Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you and for many for the remission of Sins Where first the Cup is put for Wine contained in the Cup or else if the words be literally taken so as to signifie a substantial change it is not of the Wine but of the Cup and that not into the bloud of Christ but into the new Testament or new Covenant in his bloud Besides that his bloud is said then to be shed and his body to be broken which was not till his Passion which followed the Institution and first celebration of this Sacrament But that there is no necessity to understand our Saviour's words in the sense of Transubstantiation I will take the plain concession of a great number of the most learned Writters of the Church of Rome in this Controversie a de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. Bellarmine b in 3. dis 49. Qu. 75. Sect. 2. Suarez and c in 3. part dis 150. Qu. 75. art 2. c. 15. Vasquez do acknowledge Scotus the great Scholman to have said that this Doctrine cannot be evidently proved from Scripture And Bellarmine grants this not to be improbable and Suarez and Vasquez acknowledge d in sent l. 4. dist 11. qu. 1. n. 15 Durandus to have said as much e in 4. sent Q. 5. quod 4. q. 3. Ocham another famous schoolman sayes expresly that the Doctrine which holds the substance of the Bread and Wine to remain after the consecration is neither repugnant to Reason nor to Scripture f in 4 sent Q 6. art 2. Petrus ab Alliaâ—â— Cardinal of Cambray say plainly that the Doctrine of the substance of Bread and Wine remaining after Consecration is more free from absurdity more rational and no wayes repugnant to the authority of scripture nay more that for the other Doctrine viz. of Transubstantiation there is no evidence in scripture g in canon Miss Lect. 40. Gabriel Biel another Schoolman and Divine of their Church freely declares that as to any thing express'd in the Canon of the scripture a man may believe that the substance of Bread and Wine doth remain after Consecration and therefore he resolves the belief of Transubstantiation in to some other Revelation besides scripture which he supposeth the Church had about it Cardinal h in Aquin 3. part Qu. 74 art 1. Cajetan confesseth that the Gospel doth no where express that the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ that we have this from the authority of the Church nay he goes farther that there is nothing in the Gospel which enforceth any man to understand these words of Christ this is my body in a proper and not a metaphorical sense but the Church having understood them in a proper sense they are to be so explained Which words in the Roman Edition of Cajetan are expunged by order of Pope i Aegid â—â—nink de sacrâ—â—â— Q. 75. art 1. n. 13. Pius V. Cardinal k de sacram l. 2. c. 3. Contarenus and l Loc. Theolog l. 3. c. 3. Melchior Canus one of the best most judicious Writers that Church ever had reckon this Doctrine among those which are not so expresly found in scripture I will add but one more of great authority in the Church and a reputed Martyr m contra captiv Babylon c. 10 n. 2. Fisher Bishop of Rochester who ingenuously confesseth that in the words of the Institution there is not one word from whence the true presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in our Mass can be proved So that we need not much contend that this Doctrine hath no certain foundation in Scripture when this is so fully and frankly acknowledged by our Adversaries themselves Secondly If there be no necessity of understanding our Saviours words in the sense of Transubstantiation I am sure there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise Whither we consider the like expressions in scripture where our Saviour sayes he is the door and the true Viue which the Church of Rome would mightily have triumph'd in had it been said this is my true Body And so likewise where the Church is said to be Christ's body and the Rock which followed the Israelites to be Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. They drank of that Rock which followed them and that Rock was