put his hand upon (a) Mar. 8.24 he did see truly but yet he was not able to distinguish Men from Tree the Word of God had restored my Eyes but they were but weak and subject to a great many dimnesses it was need to have some time to strengthen me in the Truth which I had but a glimpse of and to take away the Ignorance of Divinity under the pretences of which the Devil would cloak the Word of God Therefore the Divine Providence that took care for my Conduct disposed all things to hasten my Conversion it brought to pass several incidents which the Profane would call chance but the Saints stile The hand of the Lord. First I was destinated for the study of Divinity four years before all my Companions let the Flatterers and Profane say what they please those who judge holily of things that come to pass understand very well that the design of the Lord in that was no other but to take away as soon as it could be the fair Pretences wherewith Error would have offuscated Truth Secondly the Lord permitted I should come to an able man learned in Divinity both Scholastical and Positive perfect in Right Canon which is the Decrees of Fathers Councils and Popes in a word a man who was marvellous in Study of Controversies and in every thing which can contribute to make an absolute Divine But He permitted also that there might be in so excellent a man the fair Dealing and the Sincerity of a Child that was the reason that some Years after when he had known the Truth of God and the Errors of Rome because he knew not how to disguise Truth he published it every where he could not forbear to say that Indulgences Purgatory and the Obligations of Believing the Articles of Faith of the Pope and of keeping his Commandements upon â—ain of a mortal Sin were so many â—rafty Tricks of Rome to get Money He could not forbear to tell every Body the Mysteries the Factions the Impostures of the most part of those last Councils which are accounted General and Oecumenical by the Church of Rome he defended generously all the Truths which we profess in the Church of England wherefore he drew upon himself all the Persecutions he suffered for Truth so that afterward he died a Martyr for the Gospel by the severity of the Laws of Rome Oh! had he been in the time that I conversed with him as much lightned as he has been since he had saved me many troubles and perplexities he had doubtless delivered me out of that Suspension of Spirit whereunto I was reduced by the subtilty of his Answers and the height of his Resolutions But in that time the Lod did but begin his Conversion as well as mine and lighten us both by degrees yet with these two differences First the Lord destinated him to suffer all kinds of Persecutions to make him a Witness of his Holy Word a Martyr of the Gospel and he has not yet judged me worthy of Persecutions nor of Martyrdom Secondly he would have him raised up to the number of those great Saints whom the World afflicts and torments Ch. 1. §. 4. (a) Heb. 11.38 Of whom the World is not worthy Therefore the Lord ravished betimes that innocent Soul in the liveliness of his Years and speedily was he taken away (b) Wisd 4.11 as saith Solomon Lest Wickedness should alter his Understanding or deceit beguile his Soul Whereas the Divine Justice has looked upon me as a grievous Offendor who am suffered to live that I might Mourn and Weep longer for my Sons §. 4. The Conclusions of this Chapter How I came to know that the Articles of faith of Rome cannot be proved by Scripture IT was under the Conduct of that learned and holy Man that I began to give my self to the Study of Divinity I read what Authors do write concerning those Questions but specially and more exactly concerning the Questions which are controverted which are for the most part the Doctrines the Church of Rome hath received out of pride and covetousness without any ground in the Scripture I found in those Questions several difficulties I came to propound them to my Master there is said he what Bellarmin Answers there is for this matter the Exposition of Cardinal du Perron there is what Bonaventure what Thomas Aquinas what Scotus what Suarez what Valentia what Boivin what Herincx what others say touching that difficulty But when I asked him Tell me I beseech you freely what do you think He Answered me almost to every one of those Questions To tell you the truth said he the Doctrin of Purgatory of Indulgences of Worshiping Images and Reliques the Doctrin of Transubstantiation c. I do not find all these Doctrins very evident in the Scripture I do not see neither how they can be drawn very directly out of those places of the Bible th Authors of Rome are wont to produce to prove them by I give them you said he only to alledge to those who would have a place of the Bible he brought forth in every matter to have some pretence to say seasonably or unseasonably the Scripture speaks of that Matter and to content the Hereticks But to speak plainly I do sincerely confess it is not the Scripture which obliges or perswades me to believe all those Articles but the true and the only reason why I do hold them is because the Church teaches them so There are said I in self at once a great many difficulties abridged it is a great deal more just and more reasonable to deal after this manner than to consume all our brain to find in the Scripture with great pains of false discoursing what the Holy Ghost had never intention to teach therein Let us acknowledge then freely that all the Articles of the Faith of Rome are not in the Scripture nor grounded upon any thing else but upon the Authority of the Church After that all these difficulties may be very easily resolved All the business will be but to know whether or no I am obliged to believe as an Article of Faith what the Roman Church teaches without any ground from the Scripture This was the pass to which I was reduced to this I thought all the Theologie of Rome was to be reduced I did but loose my labour in consulting other Professors of Divinity in Conferring with those Friends of mine who were some Bachelors some Licentiates some Doctos of Sorbon and Curates of some chief Parishes in Paris They spoke but Gibbrish or some Latin words contrary to the good common Secne and Reason when they would have grounded the Doctrin of the Church of Rome upon the Scriptures and they never spake with reason but when at last they reduced themselves as to a Principle to the infallible definitive and final Judgement of the said Church in such matters CHAP. II. Chap. 2. How I understood the Articles of Faith of the
be found in the Roman Church who durst prove against them as did Tertullian against Marcion that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is the Figure of Christs Body and that consequently Christ was not a Ghost On the contrary a Protestant would be able to bring against those Heresies the same Arguments which the first Christians used and he would be warranted therein by all his Church From whence comes that difference if not from that that a Protestant believes nothing concerning the Sacrament but what they believed in the Primitive Church whereas a Divine of the Church of Rome acknowledges several articlesof Faith which were unknown among the First Christians and which consequently are the cause he cannot speak the same Language nor use the same Arguments they used These two Reasons seemed to me so much the stronger because I looked upon them not as the opinion of a single man who may be deceived or some place of a Book which may be corrupted and drawn into an ill sense but I looked upon these Reasons as the Reasons of all the Church and publick Weapons both of Learned Men and of the People to fight the Heathens and the Hereticks with all III. Third Proof drawn out of the manner whereafter the Fathers were wont to speak of this Holy Sacrament THat which confirmed me that in the Primitive Church they did not believe the Real Presence with Transubstantiation was the manner wherewith the Fathers both Greek and Latin were wont to speak of those Mysteries Theodoret (a) In 55 Quaestiosuper genesim says It is an extreme foclishness and extravagancy to Worship what one Eats 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the same in (b) Dialog 1. Intitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another place The LORD says he did the honour to the visible Signs to call them his BLOOD and his BODY not having changed their Nature but having added Grace to Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is there any appearance that the Fathers believed what the Council of Trent teaches A Divine of the Church of Rome who should say that it is an extreme extravagancy to Worship what one Eats That Christ hath not changed the Nature of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament would he not presently be sent to the Inquisition and condemned as an Heretick to be burnt a live The Eucharist say the Fathers of the Church (a) Cyprian de Caena cap. 6. is a visible Sacrament whereupon the Divine Essence imparts it self after an unutterable manner It (b) Idem cap. 2. is an Holy Nutriment capable of rendering us Immortal which is very much different from the ordinary Nutriments we are daily fed withal It keeps indeed the kind of a corporeal substance but it makes known by an invisible efficacy that it possesses the Presence of a Divine Vertue (c) Hilary de Trinit lib. 8. we are in Christ by his corporeal Birth and he is in us by the Mysteries of his Sacraments (d) August cap. 12. cont Adimant The Lord did not doubt to say this is my Body when he gave the Sign of his Body He (a) Idem in Psal 3. permitted Judas to be present at the Banquet wherein he committed and gave to his Disciples the Figure of his Body and Blood If a Roman Author should use these expressions which the Holy Fathers used would not a Bishop of the Roman Church zealous for the Interests of the Council of Trent say to him Sir 't is not enough to say with Cyprian tha tthe Divine Essence imparts it self in the Eucharist after an unutterable manner the Hereticks say all that You must say furthermore the Body and Soul of Christ are there really in the room of the substance of Bread 'T is not enough to say the Eucharist is an Holy Nutriment of a Divine Vertue the Hereticks do confess all that You must say moreover it contains the Real Presence of Christs Body and Blood 'T is not enough to say that Christ is in us by the Mysteries of his Sacraments the Hereticks do believe the same thing but you must say he is in us really his Body his Soul his Divinity In fine you must have a very great care of saying the Sacrament is the Sign and the Figure of Christ's Body and Blood as St. Austin said you must say to the contrary that it is not the Figure of Christ's Body and Blood you must say that it is Christ's own Body and Blood into which the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper is Transubstantiated Certainly this Bishop would speak well according to the belief of the new Roman Church but he would be far from the Doctrin of the holy Fathers He would forsake the Faith of the Primitive Church he would bring forth propositions of which the first Christians have been wholly ignorant he would even condemn the Belief of 330 Bishops of a general Council held at Constantinople in the year 754. for those 330 Bishops condemning as Idolatry the Worshiping of Images among the Reasons they brought did exhort the People to be contented with the Images that Christ has instituted giving in the Holy Sacrament Bread and Wine as Images and Figures of his own Body and Blood and speaking of the Bread of the Eucharist Behold there is said those Fathers the Image of his life-giving Body and a little after The Lord say they has commanded us to put upon the Table this Image especially chosen to wit the substance of Bread least Idolatry should slip in among the Christians if he had been represented under an Human Figure IV. Fourth Proof drawn out of the Novelty of the Doctrin teaching Transubstantiation ALl those Reasons perswaded me not only that the belief of the Real Presence with Transubstantiation was not the belief of the Primitive Church but furthermore that they were Articles of Faith newly devised And I knew afterwards they were no older than the beginning of the thirteenth Age when Pope Innocent the Third in the (a) Scotus in 4. Sent. dist 11. quaest 3. Council of Lateran in the year â—214 set among the Articles of Faith the Belief of Transubstantiation since we see that in the end of the Ninth Age about the Year of our Lord 870. Bertram or John Scot one of the most learned Men of that time wrote a Book by the command of Charles the Bauld King of France touching the question of the Eucharist wherein he maintains openly the Belief of the Protestant Church since we (a) Biblioteca Patr. de Div. Offi. find a letter of the Emperour Charles Magne to his Teacher Alcuinus wherein these words are to be read Jesus christ supping with his Disciples broke the Bread and gave it to them likewise the Cup in figure of his Body and Blood In fine since even in the Canon of the Mass instead of these words which are to be found there now Ut nobis Corpus Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui c. That it may become to us
Christian Congregations do not agree together to know which of them has the true Faith and the true Religion instituted by Christ that was the point of my difficulty In that part of Europe wherein I find my self by the chance of my birth see two Congregation two Christian Churches the Roman and the Reformed which both boast to have that true Faith excluding the other now how to resolve that difference and to know which of them has truth of it's side The Roman Church brags it self to be the eldest it reckoneth a multitude of people and nations who conform themselves to it's Communion and shews a long Catalogue of Popes who have been settle one after another in the Seat of Rome but if it be asked to set open to the light its Articles of Faith and to examine whether or no they be agreeable to the word of God to that true Faith which has been taught us by Jesus Christ our Lord it cryes out frets and is disturb'd it cannot abide to come to that examination and would be believed upon its own word On the contrary the Reformed Church brags of nothing she could say that it is she truly that is the eldest since the doctrine she teaches if conformable to that which Christ himself taught us she could shew in all ages and in all parts of the world whole nations which are conformable to the same doctrine which she has learnt from Christ she could show long Catalogues of Bishops and Patriarchs who have succeded one another in the Chairs which the Apostles themselves have established which are with her in Communion and upon all those accounts she could demand as well as the Roman Church to be believed upon her own word without coming to the examination of her doctrine but forasmuch as she knows that this manner of dealing is unjust and that she is sure she teaches nothing but what is agreeable to the word of God she desires nothing so much as to be examined by the rule of the Scripture and gives leave to all the world to compare the doctrine she teaches with that which they taught in the Primitive Church with that which the Apostles with that which Christ himself taught when he was upon the earth Now which of these two Churches acts more sincerely and which of them have we most reason to suspect of error and falsehood If fomebody should come to a payment with you and you could not know surely whether his mony were good or false coyn would not you use weights and a touch-stone to examine the mony And if the man should be angry and alledge to you that the mony which he pays you seems very acnient that there is in the world a great deal more such as that and that he has received it successively from his great great Grandfather Would you not say to his Sir there is great quantity of ancient mony which is false for all that if this mony be not good all the mony in the world which is alike to it is not good neither and if these pieces be false you may give them your Children succes sively to the end of the world but they would not grow better for all that but if notwithstanding the man would be believed upon his word and could by no means abide you should bring his mony to the trial would not you take occasion from thence to think not without cause that such a man intended to cheat you SECTION I. Antiquity Multitude and Succession are not Priviledges of the Roman Church above all other Churches Such is the manner of dealing in the Church of Rome which is a great argument that the doctrine she teaches is not agreeable to the word of God since it cannot abide by any means that it should be examined by that rule she brags that she has on her side Antiquity the greatest number and succession and in repeating often those fine principles which dazle the world in saying them over and over and boldly in causing them to be published every where by her controversial and Theological Writers she has made the World almost believe that she is the eldest of all the Christian Churches and that among all the Christian Congregations there are but few which are not submitted to the Church of Rome and in fine that the Pope is the only true Successor of St. Peter these are the three false principles upon which the Roman Church grounds it self but which have no other foundation than the boldness wherewith those of that Church have used to publish them § 1. The Roman Church is not the Eldest of all the Churches WE learn of the ancient Ecclesiastical Authors Origine Eusebius Hierome Isidore and others that the Apostles after they had received the Holy Ghost which an order to go to publish the Gospel in all the world were scattered abroad as so many flouds full of the Holy Ghost to preach the word of God in all the Nations St. Peter preached in Judea Galatia cappadocia pontus Bithynia and Rome St. James the son of Zebedee in Judea and Spain St. John in Judea and Asia the less St. Andrew in Scythia Europea in Eprius Thracia and Achaia St. James the brother of our Lord in Jerusalem St. Philip in Scythia and Phrygia St. Bartholomew in the Indies and Armenia the great St. Matthew in Ethyopia St. Thomas preached to the Parthians Medes Persians Brachmans Hyrcanians Bactrians and Indians St. Simon in Mesopotamia and Persia St. Judas in Egypt and Persia St. Matthias in the higher Ethyopia St. Paul and Barnabas in many Countries of Europe and Asia Now I would very fain know upon what ground the Church of Rome would be accounted the eldest of all those Churches which have been erected by the Apostles of Christ if one of them have the right to be accounted and called the eldest of the Sisters it seems in all reason that it must be the Church of Jerusalem for it was in Jerusalem that Christ himself preach't the greatest part of his Sermons there he exercised his Offices of Priest and Bishop 't was in that City he was sacrificed for our sins 't was there the Apostles first declared the word of God as it is to be seen in (a) Chap. 24. v. 47. St. Luke it was of that Church St. James was created the first Bishop in the world it is the Church of Jerusalem which is called by Theodoret (b) Hist Ecclesiast lib. 5. cap. 9. Mother of all Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. it is the Church of Jerusalem which is to be acknowledged as the first of all Churches according to the Testimony of all the Fathers who were present at the Council of Constantinople as Baronius himself testifies in the year of our Lord 382. If the right of Antiquity is to be given only to a Church instituted by St. Peter the Church of Antioch in Syria is to have in that the priviledge above the Church of Rome for
it is the most ancient of all the Churches which have been ever governed by St. Peter in antioch St. Peter executed the function of Bishop even according to Baronius seven years before he had ever been at Rome it was in Antioch that the faithful were first called Christians as it is reported in the Acts of the Apostles and it is the Church of Antioch which is called by St. Chrysosthome the chief and Capital of the whole world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In fine if the Mother is more ancient than the Daughter if the Spring is before the Brook the Greek Church is more ancient than the Roman the Greek Church was erected by St. Paul and S. Andrew and it was from that Church as from an holy Spring the name of Jesus Christ was scattered abroad afterward through the Kingdoms and Nations of the earth it was from the Greek Church the Roman received the New Testament the Apostles Creed that of Nice and St. Athanasius it was of the Greek Church that the Roman learnt the very names of Baptisme of Eucharist of Bishop of Priest of Deacon c. So that the Bishop of Bitonto (c) lib. de actis conc Trident. pag. 18. acknowledges in the Council of Trent that the Greek Church is the mother of the Roman and that it is from that Rome has received all it possesses ea igitur Graecia mater nostra cui id totum debet quod habet Latina Ecclesia You may judge now upon what are grounded those fine Titles of Eldership of the Roman Church of which they make so much noise and so much boasting §. 2. That the Multitude is not of the Roman Church's side THE vanity the Church of Rome is puffed up withal to have Multitude of its side is not better grounded than the Antiquity of it Truly if you should dwell in the middle of Paris or of Rome and without taking any notice of the things which are acted in the world should take the word of the Preachers of the Church of Rome they would make you believe that all the Christians in the world belong to the Roman Church and that there is but a very small number of those who will not submit themselves to the Pope's jurisdiction But if you will lift up your eyes and look upon that which is done in the world you shall find that of all the three great parts of the world which have been known to our Fathers ASIA is all full of Christians who have received their Faith from the very Apostles and who never have received nor receive yet the domination of the Pope you may find there the Christians of Palestine submitted to the Patriarch of Jerusalem the Syrians and the Melchites under the Patriarch of Antioch the Armenians and Georgians subjected to their own Patriarchs and Metropolitans who do not acknowledge the dominion of the Pope you may see there the Mingrelians the Circassians the Christians of the less Asia submitted to the Patriarch of Constantinople the Jacobites the Christians of St. Thomas submitted to their peculiar Patriarchs and not to the Pope of Rome If you set your eyes on AFRICA and on those in that part of the world who have received the Gospel you may find there the Egyptians and the Cophtes to be subjected to the Patriarch of Alexandria the Ethiopians or Abissins have their own Patriarch who doth not acknowledge yet unto this day the jurisdiction of Rome what relation soever the Pope's Missionaries had made of it As for that Province whereof the Jesuites make so much noise which they call the Kingdom of Congo the Governours whereof have submitted to the Popes Dominion it is very easie to know that it is nothing but a Mission of Jesuites such as those which they have erected in Goa in Jappan even in England in the very chief Town of this kingdom to root therein in spight of all the Laws of the Kingdom and all Magistracy In EVROPE the Greeks are submitted to the Patriarch of Constantinople the Moscovites have a Patriarch at Moskow who relies not on the Pope the Christian Protestants and Reformed in England in Danemark in Swedeland in Holland in Switzerland in Germany and in Hungaria are subjected to their Bishops and Metropolitans who are not subjected to the Pope and every body knows that in Bohemia in Poland even in France even in some Countrys of Italy all is full of Reformed Churches which do not acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Pope So that all that great huge multitued whereof the Roman Church boasts so much is Spain most part of Poland France and It aly some Cantons of Switzerland part of the Low-Countries and of Germany this is that great multitude of people parturiunt montes c. what is that in respect of the whole world And lest some body should think that those Churches which are not submitted to the Pope be some small Churches those who will take the pains but to read the Historians shall find that the only Patriarchat of Constantinople has contained 80 Bishopricks and 40 Archbishopricks the Church of Antioch 150 both Bishopricks and Archbishopricks that of Jerusalem more that 76 and that there have been only in Africa 420 both Bispopricks and Archbishopricks according to Myraeus's relation a Pag. 94. which have never followed the belief of the Roman Church from thence you may Judge of the rest §. 3. Other Churches as well as the Roman have their Succession from the very Apostles AS for the matter of Succession if you hearken to those of the Church of Rome you would think that only in the Church of Rome the Bishops have succeeded one another from the beginning of the Christendom Those Gentlemen would make all the world believe that the Churches which are not of their Communion have neither Vocation nor Title nor Ordination and consequently no right in the Ecclesiastical Functions in the Administration of the Sacraments or Preaching the word of God But if you will but open your eyes and read Nicephorus Cedrenus and other Historians you shall find in the Churches which have never submitted to the Pope which have ever kept the purity of the word of God several Catalogues of Bishops and Patriarchs who have succeeded one another from the Apostles time In Jerusalem Jesus Christ our Lord the Son of God the Holy one began the function of an Everlasting Bishop which he will continue to exercise during all Eternity St. James was the first Bishop afterwards next Simon Cleophas then Justus the Jew c. and so successively Bishop after Bishop Patriarch after Patriarch unto Germanus and Theophanes who in our days have ruled that Church being the Patriarchs thereof In the Church of Antioch St. Peter was the first Bishop whom succeeded Evodius then Ignatius then Hero then Cornelius and others successively who have so well conserved the doctrine of the Primitive Church with the right succession of St. Peter that he of those Bishops who lived about the
year 1237 agreed together with the Patriarch of Constantinople to excommunicate the Pope Gregory the 9th and pronounce Anathema against his Errors In the Church of Alexandria the Patriarch Gelasius who ruled that Church in the year 1636 succeeded Cyrillus Cyrillus succeeded Meletius Meletius Joachim and so from Bishop to Bishop they succeeded the Evangelist St. Mark who was the first Bishop of Alexandria In the Church of Constantinople the Apostle St. Andrew who was the first Bishop of it as relates Nicephorus had for his successor Stachys Stachys had Onesimus Onesimus Polycarp and so successively 177 Bishops the most part great personages and learned men unto Cyrillus and Methodius who ruled that Church in our days and Parthenius who rules it unto this very day It was to one of those Patriarchs that the Ministers who Preached the Gospel in Germany sent their Confession of Faith in the year 1576 for a token of Uniformity of Doctrine they had with all the Eastern Church SECTION II. That neither Antiquity nor Multitude nor Succession are infallible marks of the true Church and consequently that one Church may have them all and with them all be an Heretical Church IT is very easie to know by all that which I have rehearsed before that if we must judge of the truth and of the right of a Church by its Antiquity or by the Multitude of those who profess the same belief or by the Succession of its Bishops it will not be in favour of the Roman Church shutting out all others since you may find some Churches more Ancient than the Roman Church some Churches more large and more numerous and whose Succession is as sure at least and without comparison a great deal less interrupted and less disturbed than that of the Church of Rome has been by Schismes of I know not how many years by the Heresies of its Bishops and the Monstrous life of a great many Popes But for as much as the truth of a Religion doth not depend upon a question of Chronology Geography or History I will shew that neither the Antiquity of a Church nor the Multitude of those who stand of its side nor the Succession of its Bishops are infallible marks which oblige us to believe that such a Church is the true Church of Christ since it may be very possible that such a Church may have all those marks and for all that be an Heretical Church §. 1. Antiquity is not an infallible mark of the true Church IT is a rule receive by all Lawyers that things which have been worth nothing in the beginning can never grow better in time (a) L. quae ab initio ff de reg Juris quae ab initio non valuerunt tractu temporis convalescere non possunt and Tertullian (b) de virg veland holds for a principle that there is no Prescription against truth veritati nemo praescribere potest if you be a possessor of a house of a field of land and you have enjoyed it peaceable during a hundred years though you should have lost all your Evidences or suppose you had never any the prescription of a hundred years would establish you rightful possessor of that field land or house But it is not the same in regard of error and truth if you have been in an error from the beginning of the world all that long Prescription of years will not give you a right to maintain such an error because error cannot be strengthened by Prescription and a thing which was false from the beginning of the world can never become true by continuance though it should last as long as Eternity it self it would be always new in respect of truth on the contrary the things which are true bring always with themselves the character of a right Antiquity according to that principle of the same Tertullian that truth is altogether antient and everlasting veritas sempiterna antique res est and is it from that principle that after he has supposed that there are several things which seem new which nevertheless are very Ancient he concludes that it is not so much novelty as truh that confutes throughly all Heresies Haereses non tam novitas quà m veritas revincit So that following this principle to prove that Prayers directed to Saints that the worshiping of Images that the Belief of Transubstantiation are so many errors 't will go a great way to shew their novelty that they be Articles of Faith of a New impression but yet it is not enough barely that they are new wemust moreover show that those Articles are contrary to Truth that is to say the word of God let a matter of Belief seem to you as much new as can be if the Articles it contains be true if they be agreeable to the word of God to that Doctrine which we have received from the very Apostles it is an Ancient belief therefore do not say that the doctrine they teach in the reformed Churches is a new doctrine you are to examine first if it be true if it be agreeable to the word of God and if you find it such you are to say that it is an Ancient doctrine but if so be that in one of those Churches which derive their Original from the Apostles they should teach a doctrine which is not conformable to the Gospel the priviledge of antiquity will not excuse them from error they would be ancient inveterate diseases whom the priviledge of being old would not be able to heal Is there in all the world a Religion more ancient than that of the Idolaters yet dare any say that the priviledge it hath of being old gives it that of being true and Infallible and do you think that the ancient Fathers of the Church who disputed against the Heathens would have urged against them that among all Religions and Churches that is always the most true which is the most Ancient it was on the contrary what the Heathens objected to them against the Gospel as (a) lib. 4. Recognit Clement Alexandrinus relates What then said those blind men shall we forsake our Idols the Religion which hath been given us from hand to hand by our great great Grandfathers And it was to that argument of antiquity the Fathers used to answer that antiquity signifies nothing in matter of Religion that the custome of worshiping Idols being an error the antiquity they boasted of was an Antiquity of error according to that of (b) Epist 74. ad Pomp. St. Cyprian consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est In fine said St. Clemens if your Father has been a Thief a deboshed and a dissolute shall you be obliged to be a Thief a deboshed and a dissolute becaue your Father was so is there any crime in the world which would not be committed without punishment if Antiquity could priviledge wickedness and free it from punishment The Prophets knew not this fine doctrine whereupon the Popes pretend to
ground their Religion for when they would have excited the Jews to forsake their errors and to give over their sins they said to them that a great while ago they had entertained the word of God contumeliously I spake unto thee in thy prosperity (c) Jerem. 22.21 saith the Lord but thou saidst I will not hear this has been thy manner from thy youth that thou obeyedst not my voice (d) Jerem. 32.30 31 32. The Children of Israel and the Children of Judah have only done evil before me from their youth for this City hath been to me as a provocation of mine anger and of my fury even unto this day that I should remove it from before my face because of all the evil of the Children of Israel and of the Children of Judah which they have done to provoke me to anger they their Kings their Princes their Priests and their Prophets and the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem c. Whereby it is very easie to see that the Prophet believed not that the people of Israel had any right to deal wrongfully with the word of God because they had done so during I do not know how many ages neither that the Kings the Princes the Priests the Prophets and the People could pretend to stay still in their blindness because in all ages before there had been found many of the Kings of the Priests the Prophets and the People who had gone astray from the Law of God to prostitute themselves to errors In fine jesus Christ himself knew not that fine maxime of Rome that antiquity is a true mark of Infallibility for when the Scribes and the Pharisees said (e) Joh. 8. that they were Children of Abraham he answered them that their Genealogie was a great deal more Ancient since they were Children of the Devil himself but he thought not all that fair Antiquity could render them Infallible could give them right to reject his holy word and the truths he came to preach to them §. 2. Multitude is not an infallible mark of the true Church IF the Multitude be a mark of the true Church we must need say that there was no true Church in the time of Enoch in the time of Noah in the time of Abraham that there was no true Church neither whilst Christ Jesus lived upon the earth nor in the time of the Apostles nor in the time of the Arians if the accounts we have received of their numbers be true When the Antichrist shall appear in the world the Church and the true worshipping of God shall be almost destroyed or what would be yet more horrible to imagine we must say that the Church of Antichrist shall be the true Church that in the time of the Arians those who denied Christ our Lords Divinity were the true Church that in the time of the Apostles and the Martyrs the Heathens had the true manner of worshipping God that Christ and his Apostles were not the true Church but that it was those who Crucified him who had reason on their side and who doth not see that all these propositions are so many Blasphemies which yet are good consequences from this principle urged by the Romanists but are horrible impieties and falsehoods How far be these propositions from the thoughts of the Fathers and from truth St. Augustin (a) In Psal 128. faith that the true Church was for a while inclosed in the single person of Abel a while in the single person of Enoch a while it did consist all in the family of Noah and since in that of Abraham I should be ashamed to prove here among reasonable people that it was among that people of God before Christ his coming and among the faithful in the Primitive Church that the true Religion was to be sought after not among the Idolaters and the Heathens and you would look upon me as a man who thinks all the Christians very little zealous for the love of Christ if speaking to those who profess to follow him I would engage my self to prove what all the world ought to suppose as a principle not to be contested that whilest Christ lived upon the Earth with his Apostles it was in that holy Colledge of Christ the true Church was to be found not in the Synagogue of the Jews which was all compacted of men who gasped but for the blood of the righteous who sought but to oppress the truth As for the time of the Arians it is true as Theodoret witnesses (b) Lib. 2. Hist Ecclesiast cap. 16. that the Emperour Constantius spake of Athanasius as of a naughty fellow whom all the world looked upon with detestation because he held Christ's Divinity Who art thou said that Emperour to Liberius what part of the world art thou to come all alone to trouble the quiet of all the Earth It is true as Hilary (c) In lib. de Synod witnesses that in all the ten Provinces of Asia there was but the bishop Eleusius and a very small number of people with him who persisted in the true knowledge of God it is true as St. Hierome (d) Contra error Joan. Jerosolim witnesses that in all the East there was but Athanasius and Paulinus who followed not the errours of Arius nevertheless the true Church was not destroyed it was not in the Communion of the Arians though they were the Multitude it was in the single Bishop Eleusius it was in Athanasius it was in Paulinus because as Liberius answered to the Emperour Constantius the word of Faith is not lessened by the small number of those who profess that Holy word neither by their loneliness non diminuitur solitudine mea verbum fidei and according to the witness of Tertullian (e) De pudicitia it is not the great number of Bishops that makes the Church the Church may consist in one or two saith (f) De poenit cap. 10. the same and Gregory of Nazianze where are those saith he (g) Orat. cont Arian who describe the Church by the Multitude they have the People for them and we have the Faith they have abundance of Gold and Silver but we have the true doctrine of Faith whereby you may see that in that time the true Church did not consist in the Multitude Neither shall it be in the Multitude that the true Church shall be found in the time of Antichrist the Church shall be reduced to a very little number according to the testimony of Christ (a) Luke 18.8 when the Son of man cometh shall he find Faith on the Earth St. Hierome (b) In Sophron. 2. saith that in that time the Church shall be reduced to a Wilderness shall be deivered to the wild Beasts and shall suffer all the evils whereof the Prophet gives a description and St. Chrysostome (c) In Mathaeum homil 49. saith that when the ungodly Heresie which is the Army of the Antichrist will come to lay
hands on all the Churches there will be no other proof of Christianity no other shelter for the Christians who shall desire to know the truth than the Holy Scriptures than the word of God and truly in that time as well as in all those which I have marked heretofore the Multitude will follow the part of error and the true Church shall be reduced to a little flock which shall be strengthened only with the word of God against all the Stratagems and the persecutions of Antichrist To make an end of that proof I will rehearse what happened in the Council of Nice according to that which Sophronius (d) lib. 1. cap. 8. relates all the Bishops thought to introduce into the Church a new Law which was that those who would be in the Sacred Orders should lead a single life the good Priest Paphnutius a venerable old man of a holiness and purity free from all slanders rose in the middle of that multitude of Bishops You must not saith he to them lay so heavy a burthen upon the shoulders of those who are in the Sacred Orders you are to consider what St. Paul (e) ad Hebr. 13.9 saith that Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled to that voice a numerous multitude of Bishops Priests and Deacons who were present there vouchsafing their attention considered that Holy old man as an Apostle who came to declare to them the word of God and changed their resolution so knowing by the Doctrine of St. Paul that Marriage is honourable in all they left all the Church-men free to live in the state of Marriage as they had us'd to do before Do but judge now if in that time the Multitude got the advantage over truth and if the Fathers of that Council were of the opinion of the Roman Church that the Multitude of those who hold one and the same Doctrine is a mark of the truth of that belief §. 3. Succession is not an Infallible mark of the true Church IF Succession could give the right of being Infallible there is no Church in the world which had more right to be esteemed such than the Church of Jerusalem it is of Jerusalem that it is said (f) 2 Chron. 33.4 7. in Jerusalem shall my name be for ever In this house and in Jerusalem which I have chosen before all the Tribes of Israel will I put my name for ever (g) 2 Chron. 7.16 I have chosen and sanctified this house that my name may be there for ever and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually (h) Psal 132.13 14. The Lord hath chosen Zion he hath desired it for his habitation this is my rest for ever here will I dwell for I have desired it c. and I will also clothe her Priests with Salvation it was upon all those fair promises the Priests proceeded in withstanding the truth which was preached to them by the Prophets it was for that reason they exclaimed so often upon all occasions (i) Jerem. 7.4 The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord are these But hear what the Lord answers (k) v. 8 11 12 c. Behold ye trust in lying words that cannot profit Is this house which is called by my name become a Den of Robbers in your eyes behold even I have seen it saith the Lord but go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh where I set my name at the first and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel And now because you have done all these works saith the Lord Therefore will I do unto this house which is called by my name wherein ye trust and unto the place which I gave to you and to your Fathers as I have done to Shiloh and I will cast you out of my sight c. The same is to be seen in the other Prophets where Jerusalem after it had been established by the Lord as a Tabernacle which should never be removed it is said afterwards that for its abominations it is transported into Babylon If Shiloh hath ceased to be the house of God if Jerusalem be reduced into a Wilderness where nothing grows but Briers and Thorns where (a) Isaiah 5.6 God will command the Clouds that they rain no rain upon it hath the Church of Rome any reason to brag so much because it hath been in times past the Nurse of Martyrs the Seed-plot of Saints doth it follow from thence that it is still at this time in the same condition it was in the first Ages of the Church Hath not the present Church of Rome a great deal of reason to fear that after all the abominations it hath been filled withal by those who have had the government thereof it may be dealt with like Jerusalem that it may be made a Den of Robbers an horrible Babylon a dreadful Wilderness where grows nothing but Briers and Thorns and where God hath permitted that the Heaven of the Holy Scripture should be shut up and that there should not fall a drop of his word upon those who stubbornly persist in its abominations In fine could the Church of Rome be in hope of having more priviledges than many other Churches which have been built by the Apostles in the Eastern part which have conserved during long space of years their right succession preserved from Bishop to Bishop from Pastor to Pastor and which notwithstanding all that have been since by the Turks turned into several Mosquées where those Infidels have the exercise of their Religion If the Church of Rome would say that the Doctrine it teaches is to be followed because the Popes who do govern at this time have succeeded one another from Bishop to Bishop in St. Peter's Chair I answer that for the same reason in the time of Paul Samosatenus it was necessary for every body to be an Heretick because Paul of Samosate was right Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch that he had succeeded lawfully Demetrius Demetrius Fabius Fabius Babilas who succeeded Zebinus he Philetus he Asclepiades he Serapion he maximinus he Theophilus he Cornelius he Hero he Ignatius he Evodius who succeeded lawfully St. Peter I answer that in the Age wherein lived Nestorius every body was engaged to be a Nestorian because Nestorius was rightful Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople right successor to Sisinius to Atticus to Arsatius to John Chrysostomus to Nectarius to Gregory of Nazianze and so from Bishop to bishop the 36th according to the Chronicles of Nicephorus who had lawfully succeeded in that Chair the Apostle St. Andrew In fine to follow without partiality that principle of Rome and to give it the extent such a proposition ought to have which is always false if it is not universal and capable to be the first proposition of a Syllogism I answer the Popes are to revoke the Thunderbolts they have thrown against the Church of England
and must confess that they did wrong when they excommunicated it and that the Church of England is infallible and has the true Faith since in it they do conserve from Bishop to Bishop from the times of the Apostles a right Succession in all the Ecclesiastical powers But it is not upon Succession only that churches are to ground the Doctrines they profess the Reformed Churches are very willing to be examined after the very rule of the Gospel and do not defend a false principle by antiquity as those of the Roman Church do CONCLVSION That it is the Succession of the true Doctrine from the Apostles which is an Infallible mark of the true Church and that the Church of Rome which hath the Succession of Doctrine hath no reason to boast neither of its Antiquity nor of its Multitude nor Succession IT is true that the Fathers used the Argument of the Succession against the Hereticks Tertullian (a) De praescrip cap. 32. urged it against those of his time Optatus (b) Lib. 2 3. against the Donatists Augustin against the Manichees the Arians and the Pelagians but lest you should be mistaken do but read exactly those Fathers and you shall find that with the Succession of Churches and Bishops they required a Succession of Doctrine which Tertullian calls a Consanguinity and an affinity of Doctrine to prove they were the true Church which St. Augustin said it was impossible to prove throughly but by the Scripture Let them produce said Tertullian (c) De praescr cap. 32. the beginning of their Churches let them shew us the order and the succession of their Bishops from the beginning and at last bring forth some of the Apostles or some instructed by the Apostles who were Authors of their Churches c. But though they should have dispatched that step though they should have devised some Catalogue of Succession yet they should not have got very much by that for their Doctrines compared with that of the Apostles will make it appear by they diversity and the contrariety there is betwixt them that neither the Apostles nor those who have been instructed by them were the Authors of their Churches even saith he they shall be condemned by those Churches which though they have not for their Author neither one of the Apostles nor one instructed by them immediately as being erected after the time of the Apostles begun in our days are nevertheless Apostolical because of the Consanguinity of the Doctrine they teach which is the same with that which was taught by the Apostles And St. Gregory of Nazianze (d) In laud. Athan. shews that the succession is to be esteemed by Piety sooner than by Seat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he who professes the true faith is partaker of the same Seat he who doth the contrary though he doth sit in the same seat is an enemy directly opposed to that Chair which he sits on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Succession of the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be esteemed the true Succession for it hath the truth of it whereas the other hath but the appearance thereof Thus you see that even by the testimonies of the Fathers To be a true Church it is not enough to have the Succession of the same Chair and the Succession of the Bishops which the Roman Church boast of upon all occasions since one may shew a long Catalogue of Succession and be an Heretick for all that as you see by Tertullian his Testimony since one may sit upon the same Chair which was Catholick heretofore and for all that be the sworn enemy of that Chair as it is manifest by the testimony of St. Gregory of Nazianze but a Church ought to have the Succession of the Faith the Succession of the Piety and shew as Tertullian speaks a Consanguinity of Doctrine Consanguinitatem Doctrinae and this the Church of Rome doth not boast of at all since it cannot abide that we should speak of examining its doctrine by the word of God and of comparing it with the Faith of the Primitive Church with the belief of the Apostles Let not therefore the Church of Rome boast that it hath possessed almost all the finest Churches in the world the Arians have possessed them as well as they and St. Hierome for all that calls them Hereticks The Church saith that Father (a) In Psal 133. consisteth not in walls and buildings but in the truth of the Doctrine the Church is where the true Faith is 't is not above 15 or 20 years past since the Hereticks possessed all these buildings even all these glorious Churches but in that time the Church was there where the true Faith was Ecclesia autem ibi vera erat ubi fides erat Could not we have said the same in this Kingdom 'T is not above 120 or 160 years past before the time of Henry the 8th and Queen Elizabeth when the Papists possessed all these buildings even all these Churches but in that time the true Church was there where the true faith was Ecclesia autem ibi vera erat ubi fides erat Do not let them say that the Pope hath succeeded St. Peter for we will answer that Nero was Successor of Augustus and notwithstanding Nero was a Tyrant Augustus was a good Prince we will answer that the King Manasses succeeded Ezechias and yet for all that Manasses was a wicked King Ezechias was a Saint In fine we will say that the Arian Bishops had succeeded the Catholicks that the impious Nestorius was the right Successor of St. Andrew in the Chair of Constantinople that the famous Heretick Paul of Samosate was the right Successor of St. Peter in the Church of Antioch and that all those as well as the Popes have succeeded others who had ruled before them but as the night succedes the day sickness good health death life CHAPTER II. The true Grounds of the now Roman Church Chap. 2. AS soon as I had overthrown those three false imaginations of Antiquity Multitude and Succession wherewith they used to cloak the Errors of the Church of Rome it was very easie to know the true grounds and foundations whereupon it is built and those grounds being neither the Authority of the Scripture nor the Doctrine of the Primitive Church nor Antiquity nor the Concurrence of the Multitude nor the Succession of Churches or Bishops I knew aftere a diligent examination that they could not be other than the Ambition and Covetousness of those who govern it and it is from thence that all the corruptions and all the errors of that Church have proceeded SECTION I. The Ambition of the Popes §. 1. The Pope exalts himself above all Kings whereas by right he ought to be submitted to them POpe Gregory the 7th in a Synod held at Rome in the year 1076. established 27 Propositions upon which is grounded all the greatness of Rome which are called the Dictatorship of the
was Bishop of the place where that Council was held since according to the Authority of the Chancellour (b) Tom. 4. in propos utilibus ad exterminat schismatis Gerson in the Apostles times four Councils were held where St. Peter was not present now it is a principle in the Doctrine of Rome that the title of Universal Bishop gives one the right of presiding in all Councils from whence the consequence is manifest As for the times which have followed those of the Apostles we know that the Popes have not always presided in all general Councils and that the only thought of being elevated above other Bishops and stiled UniversAl was an abomination among all the Antients and a thing lookt upon as an Apostasie and a monstrous error proceeding from the bottom of Hell to plant Impiety and Idolatrie in the middle of the Temple of God About the end of the fifth Age about the year 600. John Patriarch of Constantinople would have challenged to himself the title of Universal Bishop and was in that enterprise supported by the favour of the Emperor Mauricius at the novelty of that monstrous title all Christendom was stricken with horror Pope Gregory the Great stirred up with the zeal of the honour of God withstands vigorously the establishment of that new title he writes to Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria and to Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch (a) Epist 36. Never a one of my predecessors saith he has been willing to consent to a title so profane as that of universal Bishop challenging to himself the primacy over the other God forbid that Christian minds should ever be infected with such an opinion as to believe that there may be in the world some Bishop who could by right take to himself the title of Universal And in another (b) Epist 24. lib. 6. epistle to the same Without speaking saith he of the wrong which is done to you if some body be called Vniversal Bishop this Vniversal Bishop being faln all the Vniversal Church must need fall to the ground together with him and what madness saith he what levity is it to run after such a Doctrine To the Emperor Mauricius (c) Epist 32. lib. 4. he protests that it is not for his own particular interest that he withsTands that pretended Primacy of the Bishop of Constantinople he makes him understand that it is the business of all the Church that such a title is contrary to the ordinances of the Gospel to the Holy Canons of the Church and that it is an usurpation Nunquid ego in hac re piissime domine propriam causam defendo c. Causam Vniversalis Ecclesiae ago c. That such a title is new in the Church never one of my predecessors saith he again has been willing to consent to that title of singularity lest other Bishops should be thereby deprived of the honour which is owing to them and in another Epistle (d) Epist 30. lib. 4. to the same Emperour he doth openly declare that if any Bishop desires to be called Universal Bishop he is the forerunner of the Antichrist In fine he writes to the Bishop of Constantinople himself he prays him he beseeches him he exhorts him not to consent to that title full of error of ambition and madness he saies that it is a temptation of the Devil of which he must beware and that to consent to receive so mischievous a title is nothing else but to lose the Faith and to become an Apostate from Christianity But alas those words full of zeal and truth were the last words of the true Roman Church that Church ceased with Gregory the Great and there succeeded in its place a corrupted Roman Church whose Bishop challenged to himself that monstrous name full of Blasphemy and Apostasie which his predecessor withstood so generously The Emperour Mauricius was murthered by Phocas Phocas usurped the Empire and made himself a Tyrant and to have some prop for his tyranny he gave Boniface III. to make him his creature the title of Universal Bishop and that title which the Bishop of Rome thus usurped was established by degrees fair and softly by the Pope's cunning tricks so that about the year 642. they began in the superscription of Letters whcih were written to the Pope Theodorus to set these words which are related by Sygebertus in his Chronciles To the holy Father of Fathers and Soveraign Prelate of Prelates c. Against that monstrous name full of Blasphemy and Apostasie the Churches of Greece of Dacia and Illyrium made opposition and the Kingdoms of France Spain and England were a long while afore they could abide that huge and heavy burthen of the Popes dominion and submit themselves to that primacy and universality of the Roman Bishop This is the story and the progress of that primacy and it is upon that title of Universal Bishop and sovereign Prelate that the Church of Rome asserts the Pope to be infallible that it is by his judgment that the other Bishops must be governed and likewise on the contrary that there is none upon earth capable of redressing what the Pope has once ordained as it is written in one of those 27 Propositions in which consists the Dictatorship of the Pope § 3. That the Ambition of the Popes extends it felf as far as Impiety YOU would imagine that proposition to be a Paradox viz. That the Roman religion is grounded upon Impiety since there is nothing more contrary to Religion than Impiety but as much paradox as it is it is very true for all that or if one of the members of that Proposition is to be destroyed to hinder it from being a Paradox we are to say that the Romish is not a Religion As for the other member of the proposition to wit that it is grounded upon Impiety nothing is more true and more easie to to be proved The Church of Rome is all grounded upon the Authority of the Popes now the Authority of the Popes is injurious unto God's Majesty it doth establish a manifest Impiety therefore it is evident that the Religigion or the Church of Rome is grounded upon Impiety To prove the 2d Proposition of that argument I have nothing else to do but to shew that the Popes challenge to themselves the power of dispensing with the Gospel and the commandments of God and after they have taken to themselves a power as mighty as that of God Almighty they had the temerity to take also to themselves the same titles that we use to attribute only to God or to Jesus Christ our Saviour 1. The Pope takes to himself as great an Authority as that of God Almighty ACcording to the Maxime of Optatus (a) Lib. 3. That there is none but God about Kings and Emperours that he who exalts himself above those anointed of God raises himself above all men and makes himself equal with God Cum super Imperatorem non sit nisi solus