visible in her Pastors and people by a continued succession from the Apostles which held S. Augustine in her Tenet me in Ecclesiâ says he Successie facerdotum I am holden in the Church by the succession of Priests then he reckons out the only high Priests and Bishops of Rome as the lawful Successors of S. Peter as in his 162. Epistle he says in the Roman Church has ever been the Authority of the Apostolick Sea In ecclesiâ Romanâ semper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit authoritas No other having unity in Faith or the means to preserve it by General Councils which have all been holden in her No other and specially the Protestant Church having either Universality or Antiquity as is clear from their late Rise and little Extent Whatever Protestants and other Sectaries sophistically or Subtilly Object against all this is but weak and should stumble none many stronger Objections Atheists Infidels and Hereticks have made against God our Saviour Christ and the holy Scripture The first Principles most clear by the light of Nature suffer their Objections whence the Scepticks amongst Philosophers as the Socinians amongst Hereticks those admitting of nothing as unquestionably clear and these as infallibly true Wherefore to conclude all I have said the Catholick Roman Church being so gloriously marked so generally attested and so notoriously known to be the true Church established by Christ and his Apostles ever conspicuous and visible ever working Miracles converting Infidels making Saints ever holding Councils deciding controversies keeping unity opposing Hereticks and maintaining true Faith upon Solid and Infallible Grounds having so clear testimony from the Fathers from Scripture from God having charisma veritatis certum the Gift and Grace of certain and infallible Truth says S. Irenaeus origines firmas sure beginnings saith Tertullian Veritatem undequaque munitam verity solidly grounded and guarded says S. Epiphaniâ—s haeres 55. authoritatem stabilissimam most solid and constant Authority says S. Augustine Ep. â—8 may 〈◊〉 not say justly with our Countryman Richard of S. Victor l. 1. de Trinit c. 2. Si error est quem credimus à te decepti sumus If it be Error we do believe in this Church and upon her Authority it is thou O God who hath deceived us for with such signs this Doctrine is confirmed that it can be from no other but thee Let the impartial Reader here compare both Protestant Grounds and Doctrine with ours and see after all their Objections and Cavils what they bring for their new doubtful and inconstant Opinions against our old infallible and constant Faith what against our just claim our clear right our long and uninterrupted possession They come in with the Scripture in hand as the Fundamental Law against which there can be no prescription but what Scripture I pray you save that they have wrested from us olim possideo prior possideo says Tertullian it was first delivered to us we have it of old and we conserve it whole and intire But not so Protestants the many Books they reject shows it is but like a torn bond in their hands blotted in as many places as there be things put in of new or others rased out in their Bibles And then as they bring it it is altogether forceless and can make no security as a rent Charter without Subscription Witness or Seal Gods Subsciption would be seen and acknowledged if it were presented by them as at first by the Apostles with Supernatural 〈…〉 Motives witnesses if they could show it handed down from age to age by infallible Propounders his-Seal in Miracles But the Protestant Church granting her self to be fallible and being destitute both of infallible Motives of credibility and miracles can be no sure propounder of Gods Word neither can it as propounded by her be any sure ground to us Yea Examine well all the Principles Protestants build their Pretended Reformation upon and you shall find them all mearly Whimsecal Paradoxal and improbable For what Probability can there be 1. Of what they say against us that the Popish Church as they call it which they grant to be most antient should have continued so long and ever possessed the greatest part of the Christian World holding Councils condemning Heresies converting Infidels working Miracles and that the Protestant Church which they will have to be the Catholick or Universal all this time was no where to be found never once made mention of by any Author without Councils Statutes or Laws published to the World never converting one Kingdom opposing one Heresie having one Writer of note witnessing her Faith and Doctrine her doings or sufferings her Pastors or People That the antient Congregation diffused through the whole World should be Heretical and the new one in some few corners be Orthodox That corruption of Doctrine did enter so insensibly into the Roman Church that no Councils no Fathers did see or censure it who have observed many lesser things in private men that all the Fathers I have quoted in my 6. Section should have unanimously holden ever since the Apostles what Protestants call Popish Errors or that so many Learned men in the Roman Church who have dived into the very depth of most abstract Sciences could not see before Luther what in Scripture was clear 2. What probability for what they vent of their first Apostles and Reformers that God did send one Apostate Friar who in the Monastery as he confesseth lived so mortified chast and devote but quitting it is so hurried with his passions of Lust and stings of Conscience even for this his new Doctrine as may be seen in the Preface of his Works in Latine and his Table Conferences without any visible mark of his Mission to reform both his Word and Church in opposition to all her ordinary Pastors at that time that the Church before him I mean Luther as he himself glories should have been destitute of the true Letter and sense of Scripture of true Worship true form of Government c. that notwithstanding so many solemn promises made by God the Word should not depart out of the mouths of Pastors nor the true Church be so much as obscured yet that Christ should have suffered the light of the Gospel to be under a Bushel and the Cuhrch invisible for more then a thousand years That his Reformation should be the work of God and the world ever worse since it That Protestancy should bring back true Faith which is divided into so many Heresies and has caused so many Troubles Divisions and Schisms 3. What show of probability or solidity in Protestant grounds that the ground of Faith which they will have to be sole Scripture as every one reads and understands should support all the Heresies in the World That this Ground given us for keeping of Unity should make all our Divisions in Religion To deny the Authority and Tradition of the Church infallible and yet take Scripture on it that the whole Representative Church in a General Council is not infallible in its Decrees and yet private men reading Scripture are infallible in what they believe That what was at the Margent in their first Bibles would be now put in the Text That pure Scripture should be a cleer Ground for Protestancy and not one Point specifical or special to it to be found in Scripture in express words In fine that Protestants should have the pure Word and rely on the Originals their best Writers granting they have not found so much as an Authentick Copy any where If you will see what probability at last they have either for their Doctrine or Church consider amongst Protestants with the Author of a late Answer in Writ Faith without Unity a Body without united Members a Law without a Judg a Church without an Altar Religion without a Sacrifice Sacraments that do not sanctifie Divine Service without Religious Ceremonies Preachers without a call Doctrine without Infallibility Belief without a ground Commands impossible to be kept Exhortation to what is not in our power Reward without Merit Reprobation without demerit Sin punished where there is no free will new Apostles without Mission or Miracles Reformation without Authority the private Spirit against the whole Church new lights against old revealed Verities single mens Opinions against the common consent of the Fathers Scripture received or rejected upon the Catalogue of the Jews in a word wavering Pastors unsetled Government unstable Faith FINIS
Religion from Prelaticks to Presbyterians from Presbyterians to Independants from Independants to I know not whom again is more like the Weathercock on the Steeple turning at every wind then the Member of any one Church His Exclamations wherewith he concludes his two long Epistles are both ludibrious and childish in misapplying so many Scripture Phrases to the Catholick Roman Church whose Faith is so highly commended by the Apostle St. Paul and holy Fathers in all Ages who ever amongst them did tax her of Errour flie her Communion renounce her Faith decline her Censures question her Authority disapprove her Doctrine or chalenge the Supreme power and Headship of her Bishop In the second age St. Irenaeus extols her Authority All Churches says he l. 3. c. 3. round about ought to resort to the Roman Church by reason of her more powerful Principality In the third St. Cyprian Ep. 55. calls her St. Peters Chair and the principal Church to which Infidelity or false Doctrine cannot have access In the fourth St. Athanasius has his recourse both to her Bishop and her against all his Adversary Hereticks In the fifth St. Augustine thinks her Sentence an end of Controversie Scripsimus Romam Roma rescriptum est quaestio finita est c. And in following ages do not St. Gregory St. German St. John Damascene Venerable Bede St. Bernard St. Thomas of Aquine and generally all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church the same So that I answer his places of Scripture as St. Augustine Petilian's the Donatist Heretick l. 2. c. 5. He brings the words of the Law but takes not heed against whom as the Devil speaks Scripture to Christ not discerning to whom Verba legis dicitis sed in quos dicitis non attenditis sicut Diabolus verba legis dicebat sed cui diceret non agnoscebat And with the same St. Augustine I answer to all Mr. Menzeis pretended victory and triumph over Mr. Dempster Facile est ut quisque Augustinum vincat quanto magis ut vicisse videatur aut si non videatur vicisse dicatur facile est St. Aug. Ep. 174. SECT II. Wherein the Question is stated as propounded by Mr. Dempster and Mr. Menzeis great Principle and Grounds set down as cleared by him with the Design of the Author thereon THe sole Argument that I find Mr. Dempster urges in all his papers in substance runs thus in this one Syllogism That Religion cannot be a true Religion which hath no peculiar principle or ground to prove that it is a true Religion and conform to the true sense of the word of God But the Protestant Religion hath no peculiar ground or principle to prove it self the true Religion c. Then the Protestant Religion cannot be true Mr. Menzeis cavils at this Syllogism as not being in form both the premises being Negatives as well as the Conclusion Mr. Dempster Answers the second is Affirmative and only objectively Negative As if one should say in Latin wherein the form of Syllogisms best appears Sed omnis Religio Protestantium est talis ut nullum habeat peculiare fundamentum quo se probet veram or else Est habens nullum peculiare fundamentum c. which the least Logician in the Colledge presently sees to be an Affirmative Proposition And yet what Clamours hath not Mr. Menzeis made for this as if at the first bout he had disarmed his Adversary So well this great Professor of Divinity is versed in Logick that he cannot resolve and answer a proposition if not set down as to a Bajan Like to that young man who lately come from the Fencing-School and hardly put to it mistaking the thrust is put off his Guard and so both wounded and mocked So the Syllogism standing in good Form the first Proposition in it suffers no debate The second is denyed by Protestants whereupon they are required to produce this peculiar Ground which proves their Religion to be true Master Menzeis after many Wheelings Turnings and Windings in his Scoldings Digressions Retorsions at the end brings two grounds for the Protestant Religion The first Scripture and that clear in Fundamentals or things necessary to Salvation The second its agreement in Essentials with the Faith of the purest and most ancient Primitive Church in the first three Centuries or Ages To clear his first Ground which in his sixth paper he storms to have called his Achilles or strength seeing he had given another which it seems he holds no less strong then it he sets down That all Scriptures are not clear Secondly that Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation Thirdly by perspicuity he understands in Terms or by firm and clear consequence Fourthly that by this perspicuity again he means an External and objective Evidence which is nothing impeached by the misunderstanding of Hereticks or others Fifthly that by things necessary is here understood whither necessary as means or as commands What he cites in his eight paper as Maximes taken out of George Scholarius a Grecian is but to the same purpose with what he hath formerly said One onely thing I add which he urges most in all his Book that though Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation in explaining of Scripture and in deducing consequences from it yet no necessity there is that we should know that he who gives the true Interpretation and Sense have the assistance of the Holy Ghost because forsooth this savours rankly says he of that Erroneous Popish Tenet concerning the necessity of an infallible visible Judg of Controversie whereof he proves in his third paper there is none for that a Jurist without any such Infallible assistance may be known to explain aright a Municipal Law and a Mathematician to demonstrate a Proposition of Euclydes This is the state of the Question as propounded by Mr. Dempster and this in substance is Mr. Menzeis Answer to it their debate is long Mr. Dempster constantly putting Mr. Menzeis to it that he would prove these Grounds to be peculiar to Protestants and support their Controverted Tenets with us but this he still declines to bring any Positive proof for either desiring his adversary should rather Positively prove the contrary No says Mr. Dempster make good your Assertion as he who affirms should prove I will not be so put off of my medium I have taken against you Let us see the Grounds you build on in the sence you take them and without any Infallible visible Judg of Controversie assuring you either of the uncorrupt Writings and sincere Doctrine of the Fathers in the first three ages or of the uncorrupt Letter and genuine sense of Scripture first to be solid and Infallible and then to agree peculiarly to you and the business is done You confidently assert both but what Sectary sayes not the same their claim to the foresaid Grounds say ye is meerly pretended rests to see how your own is proved as just Many Digressions and Retorsions against Popery are made Many
who in his Book against the Sacramentarians says plainly They believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost in vain all these things avail them nothing for as much as they deny this Article of the Real Presence and attach him of falshood who said of the Sacrament This is my Body And he had reason for St. Thomas 2.2 q. 5. a 3. with other Divines teach he has no Spiritual Faith who believeth not every thing little or great Fundamental or not Proposed to him by the same Authority Whereupon they infer that no Sectary upon his own choice adhering to this or that believeth any thing So Tertullian l. de praesc speaking against Valentine says some things of the Law and Prophets he approveth some things not that is difalloweth all whil'st he disproveth some 3. From all this appeareth how idlely this distinction of fundamntals not fundamentals in the Protestans sense was brought in by them it serving to no other purpose then to palliate their divisions at present deceive Ignorants in the pretended succession they claim to in old condemn'd Hereticks whose Errors they will have to be no Fundamentals As M. Menzeis taking Hierome of Prague John Huss Wickcliff the Waldenses and Grecians for true Protestants before Luther to make up an imaginary Succession in the Protestant Church which to do with any apparent shew of Truth 1. He should prove those Sects to have been the Catholick Church spread through the whole world and owned as such by the Fathers of those times 2. Justifie their Doctrine which we find partly in their own Writings partly in the most Authentick Records of the Ages wherein they lived to have been in many things most false erroneous and unchristian 3. Their succession from the Apostles times finding their Bishops and Pastors in the Registers of the Church History or Fathers Neither will he make this good by the Authority of Friar Reiner who speaking of the Waldenses whom he names Lionists says at most even as Illiricus quotes his words some affirm they have been from the time of Pope Sylvester others from the dayes of the Apostles M. Menzeis to make the Argument stronger will have Friar Reiner to say absolutely they were from the time of the Apostles with his ordinary ingenuity but what I pray you concludes he from this Those who said so being Lionists themselves as witnesseth Piliâ—hdorphius So a little before Waldo there arose Hereticks who falsly bragged of the same even as after them Protestants do now But if you or they either sir were in all ages from the Apostles tell us the Authours in every age who marked the succession of your Pastors where lived your people c. then refute the great number of learned Writers who lived when such Sects did start up in a suddain as a Mushrome in a night marking their Rise and noting their Errours which certainly they had never done if such Doctrine had been professed before as that of the true and visible Church But to speak a word in particular of every one of those Sects with what ignorance and falshood M. Menzeis calls them true Protestants you shall presently see And first in John Huss to whose name I am sure he has a more just claim then to his Religion if we trust all the most Authentick Records of Huss his Doctrine I cite not for this the Juridick Acts of the Council at Constance because Popish not Father Gordon of Huntley no less eminent for his Learning then Birth because a Jesuit though living in Prague in Boheme where Hussits most abound and having made most diligent enquiry of their Tenents he found as he witnesseth Cont. 3. de Euch. c. 17. they did hold Invocation of Saints Prayer for the dead the Fastings and Ceremonies of the Catholick Church with free will confession of Sins seven Sacraments c. But I hope he will trust Fox a most firy Protestant speaking thus upon the 2. Ch. of the Revelation What did Huss at any time teach or defend in the Council wherein he did not seem superstitiously to consent with the Papists what did the Popish Faith decree concerning Transubstantiation which he likewise with the Papists did not confirm who celebrated Mass more Religiously then he or more Religiously observed the Vows of Priestly Chastity Concerning Free Will Predestination informed Faith that is without Charity the cause of Justification and merit of good Works what other thing did he hold then is taught at Rome All this he and more in his Monuments that he did acknowledge seven Sacraments and the Popes Supremacy p. 216. and 227. And if he should as yet disown Fox as a private Writer yet must he trust Luther as a man extraordinarily sent by God to Reform the Church and the 14. Apostle The Papists burned Huss says he Colloq Germ. C. de Antich when as yet he departed not a fingers breadth from the Papacy for he taught the same which the Papists do only he found fault with their Vices against the Pope he did nothing To the same purpose Luther has much more Tom. 2. in Assert art 30. and Tom. 3. in Ps 2. But in fine should not Huss himself be trusted better then any his works are extant and perusing them you shall find he did hold seven Sacraments upon the fifth of S. James Transubstantiation in his Book of the Lords Supper Ch. 2. and 3. the Sacrifice of the Mass in his Sermon of Funerals Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead in the same place confession of sins to a Priest in his Treatise of pennance invocation of Saints in his Epistles 22.30.35 Veneration of Relicks upon Ps 115. yea in his question of believing the Popes Supremacie as to his office dignity and power though with this Caveat common to him with Wicliff that ecclesiastical dignity as well as Civil was grounded on Inherent Justice and so lost by Mortal Sin which neither Catholicks nor Protestants do teach Nevertheless M. Menzeis is not ashamed to own Huss for a Protestant so constant is he in professing his Fundamentals which he will have to be in Scripture so clear I insist not so much on the rest yet to say a little of every one Of Hierome of Prague Fox pag. 585. relateth whatever was his Opinion in other things yet stood he constantly in defence of the real Presence and Transubstantiation saying he did give more credit to S. Augustine and other Doctors of the Church who affirmed the same then to any that denyed it Wikcliff again M. Menzeis is not ashamed to call a Protestant who in his own Writings so expresly holds against them 1. Worship of Images in his 9. Ch. of the Eucharist Images says he we adore purely as signs but God we must adore with all our power It is therefore granted that Relicks Images and the Sacraments be with prudence to be adored He did also hold Invocation of Saints in his Sermon of the Assumption into Heaven of our blessed Lady
de Unit. eccl We must obey his Precepts and Admonitions that our Merits may receive their reward And in his Serm. de Eleem. If the day of our return shall find us unloadned swift and running in the way of good works our Lord will not fail to reward our merits 10. Protestants deny the possibility of keeping the Commandements which S. Basil orat in illud attende tibi calls a wicked thing to say S. Hierome on the 5. of S. Matthew Blasphemy S. Augustine serm 61. de tempore a denial both of the justice and holiness of God In the the third Age Tertullian as cited by the Centurists Cent. 3. says No Law could tye him who had not in his power due obedience to the Law This is a maxime in Philosophy wherefore Origen hom 9. in Jos sayes plainly the baptized may fulfil the Law in all things Now not to be more tedious or prolix in ciing either Passages or Fathers whose Quotations could easily make a just Volume of the Sacraments I have spoken in the former Section and of the Pastors of the Church their infallible Authority in a general Council in the third which with what is here said are the main things and most substantial denyed by Protestants but clearly asserted by the Fathers cited who all confessedly did live in the first three ages a very few excepted I have brought of the fourth and fifth age only as witnesses of what was practised in the Church before their time leaving the Canons of the Apostles and many things by Tradition from them conserved in the Church and witnessed by the Fathers with the Decrees of most holy Popes and Martyrs of the first and second Age as these of Anacletus Alexander Sixtus Telesphorus Pius Anicetus Soter c. holding out so many of our Tenets against Protestants and this to shun Cavils and Exceptions which they might take either at their writings or place as they do As for the same cause many other most renouned Authors as Policarpus Cornelius Prochorus Methodius Nilus Agapetus Dorotheus and others upon this only account with the Book of Hermes of whom S. Paul to the Romans Ch. 16. maketh mention called the Pastor which Hamelmanus and M. Hooker both Protestants grant to have been reckoned by the antient Fathers in the number of Ecclesiastical Books and particularly as seemeth to Hamelmanus by no less men then Irenaeus Clement and Origen Yet this Book in such esteem with them he will have to be impure as laying the ground of Purgatory Prayer for the dead Merit and Justification of Works of professed Chastity in Priests and Church-men of fasting from certain Meats at times c. But I hope M. Menzeis will make no exception against most Authors I have produced unless passing from his appeal to the Fathers of the first three ages he pass also from his second ground of Faith as certainly after all has been said he should do seeing I may justly speak home to him here with S. Augustine in his 11. Book against Julian the Pelagian Heretick c. 10. What the Catholick Fathers and Doctors have found in the Church that they hold what they have received from their forefathers that they have delivered to their children Whilest we had no debate as yet with you before them as Judges our case was pleaded amongst them we were not as yet contesting with you and nevertheless by their decree we have the victory over you Neither is this victory imaginary as that of M. Menzeis but real as the three Arguments I have brought make good which by way of recapitulation I set before him in this one Argument the Doctrine of the Church and writings of the Fathers in the first three Ages can be no ground to Protestants for what they teach First if the chief Reformers disown them Secondly if most learned Protestants accuse them of many Errours Thirdly If their own Writings in all controverted Tenets be flatly against Protestant Doctrine but all this is true from the places produced then their Writings can be no ground to them Yet Protestants will needs make up their Religion from the Writings of the Fathers as some Poets from the Centons and broken Verses of Virgil and Homer the life of Christ They challenge the Fathers for their Heresie upon a word or two picked out of places wherein they have an Orthodox sense In so many hundred Volumes of the Fathers writings that some word or passages seem to favour Heresie what wonder Gods own Word if we will stick to the naked Letter seeming to favour so many as we have seen above They oppose Fathers to Fathers and sometimes one to himself so they are possessed with the Spirit of contradiction that all may turn Problematick and be controverted among them They cite the Scriptures against the Fathers as if their new and giddy headed start-ups did better understand them then the most antient and solid Divines they will at times by passages of the Fathers or Scripture strive to condemn the practice of the Church and Decrees of Councils but whoever amongst the Fathers did so doth any one of the Fathers with the first Reformers oppose Scripture as understood by them to the Authority of the Church or to the same Scripture as explained by her Doth any of them attach the Roman Church of Errour To say such a Church so great and glorious in the Christian world did Apostatize and none did remark her Apostacy is like a general Eclipse of the Sun remarked by none The least Errours of particular Hereticks the Fathers have so narrowly sifted so sharply censured so solidly confuted and shall we think they have either not spyed or spared to censure the corruptions of a whole body and Church But let wise men and greatest Shcollars be at variance as they please about some places both of Scriptures and Fathers as surely it will be to the Worlds end God hath given us both a sure and short way promised by the Prophet wherein even ignorants and fools cannot err Christ having left us the present Catholick Church in all ages as the most faithful Depositary of his Doctrine and the Infallible Visible Judge of all that can be controverted in matters of Faith Before I end this Section to give you but a scantling with what sincerity and candor Hereticks cite the Fathers this I borrow from M Menzeis in his third paper where in general he most confidently says That whatever the antient Apologists as Justin Martyr Tertullian and Athenagoras have said for the Christian Religion the same Protestants may say for their own Whereupon having diligently read over the first of these Apologies which is that of Justin Martyr as any may do in an hour I have found him so grosly mistaken in citing this Father that I may justly say he could not more forfeit his reputation This I evidence in four chief Points asserted by us and denyed by Protestants The first is Free Will for which Justin in his Apology
is so clear that having said If men had not in their Free Will to fly what is filthy and choose what is honest they should be no wise to blame for what ever action he will have it a Demonstration That men have freedom to live virtuously or fall in sin because we see them by experience to pass from one of these contraries to the other His words are ac nisi libero arbitrio ad turpia fugienda ad honesta deligenda facultatem habeat mortalium genus non fuerit in causâ sive culpâ qualiumcunque demum factorum Sed enim libero id delectu tum recte per virtutem vivere cum per peccatum labi ad hunc demonstramus modum hominem eundem ad contraria subinde transire videmus The second is Merit of Works in acknowledging a reward to them his words again are Atque hoc etiamsi paucis persuaferimus maximum tamen inde feremus lucrum nam ut boni agricolae amplam à domino capiemus mercedem The third is the efficacy of Baptism in cleansing us by water from all former sins and making us the children of God Ut ne necessitatis ignorantiae liberi permaneamus sed â—â—â—ectus scientiae filii fiamus ac remissionem ante commissorum peccatorum consequamur in aquâ The fourth the Real Presence saying of the Consecrated Bread and Wine in so express words Not as common Meat and common Drink do we take these things but even as by the Word of God our Saviour JESUS Incarnate had flesh and blood for our Salvation so we are taught that the Eucharist is the flesh and blood of the self same JESUS Incarnate His words are Non enim ut communem panem neque communem potum ista sumimus sed quemadmodum per verbum dei caro factus Jesus Christus Servator noster carnem sanguinem habuit ad eundem modum etiam eam in quâ per preces verbi ejus ab ipso profecti gratiae sunt actae alimoniam incarnati illius Jesu carnem sanguinem esse edocti sumus Nam Apostoli in commentariis à se scriptis quae Evangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt Diverse other things in the same Apology I pass these few things being sufficient to shew M. Menzeis ingenuity and how he with other Hereticks dare cite the Fathers who even most evidently and expresly condemn them But to close this Section which citations have made longer then I intended with one Query I ask M. Menzeis where he shall find so much as in one of the Fathers any point of Doctrine taught by the present Roman Church condemned of Heresie as many Protestant Tenets they hold against us are declared Heretical by so many as by S. Ireneus l. 1. c. 20. to say with Simon Magus that men are not saved by good works by S. Epiphanius haeres 8. to say with Cerinthus That children may be saved without Baptism By the same S. Epiphanius to say with the Pâ—oâ—â—maâ—s That God has commanded some impossible things By S. Augustine l. 20. contr Faust to pull down Altars with the Manichees By the same S. Augustine l. 2. Contra lit Petil. C. 32. and 34. To say with the Donatists That the Baptism of Christ and that of S. John Baptist were all one by S. Epiphanius haeres 75. and S. Augustine haeres 53. To say with the Arians that Fasts of the Church are not to be observed nor Prayers nor Sacrifice to be used for the dead By Sozomenus l. 5. c. 20. and Eusebius l. 7. C. 14. To forbid with Julian the Apostate the use of Images and Sign of the Cross by S. Hierome l. contr Helvidianum To equal marriage with Virginity By the same S. Hierom l. contr Vigilant To say with Vigilantius Saints are not to be Invocated nor their Relicks to be honoured By S. Hierome again l. 3. contr Pelagian To brag as the Pelagians did that they were sure of their Salvation By S. Augustine to say with Jovinian That such as are regenerate by Baptism and once received in Gods grace and favour cannot finally fall away By S. Hierome contr Vigilant To say Churchmen ought to marry By S. Cyril in Epist ad Calo-syrium Episc of Madness as well as Errour To say with some in these dayes Christs body did not remain in the Eucharist if it were kept untill the morrow By S. Augustine l. 6. contra Julian C. 2. 3. and ad Bonifac. C. 2. 4. To say with the Pelagians That the children of the Faithful are born holy and need no Regeneration by Baptism By S. Augustine l. de haeres C. 54. To teach with the Eunomians A man is saved by Faith only By S. Augustine l. 1. C. 2. ult contra Maximin To deny Apostolical Traditions in the Church By S. Cyprian Ep. 55. to say with most Hereticks To Peters Chair and the Principal Church Infidelity or false Doctrine can have access By Irenaeus l. 3. C. 3. to deny all Churches round about ought to resort to the Roman Church by reason of her more powerful Principality By all the Fathers in the Council of Calcedon Act. 16. To deny that all Primacy and chief Honour is to be kept for the Arch-Bishop of Old Rome So that the Protestant Religion is not only void of all Solid Ground either in the Divine Scriptures or Holy Fathers but also in most clear and express words is condemned as Heretical by both It being indeed nothing but a new Heresie patcht up of many old condemned Errours joyned to some fresh Notions and Conceits flowing from the same Spring and Spirit of Pride and Rebellion against all the Antient Fathers and present Pastors of the Church It s frequent changes show it is not from God It s Monstrous Divisions in so many Sects that it has not the Unity of Faith Its inconstancy in Principles Tenets Form of Worship and Government that it is not built upon the Rock and consequently hath no solid Foundation or Ground Conclusion of all that has been said wherein also the true Grounds of the Catholick Religion are set down A Little Error in the beginning turns great in the end sayes the Prince of Philosophers Aristotle in his Physicks which as it is most true in the first Principles of all Natural Sciences so it is in the Grounds of the Christian Faith The innumerable by-wayes of Sectaries their monstrous and manifold Divisions from the true Church amongst themselvs so many Controversies among Christians in our days such wranglings and jars for Religion flow all from one Spring to wit The mistake of true Principles and Grounds And this one Errour in the beginning makes them run themselves in so many and infinite great in the end Pride and Contention the two Pillars of Heresie will let them acknowledge no Authority of Councils or Fathers yield to no evidence of Reason submit to no Judge Whence Controversies are driven to nothing but idle and
have it believed no more For who can prudently believe things not clear in themselves or at least not so to us without some infallible Propunder evidencing by Supernatural Motives as Miracles that such a Doctrine is from God Neither can a Protestant standing to his Principles say any more whence no conversion of Infidels amongst them But no end of their cavelling with us They here urge 1. Suppose the true Church were infallible in her Pastors assembled in a Council yet all we bring in proof of this may be retorted against our private Teachers who are not infallible in propounding But to this it is easily answered that as God most infallibly both by his general Providence and particular Promise directs rules and governs his Church so she by vertue of his special assistance oversees infallibly her private persons in order to our certainty in Faith For in the holy Hierarchy of the Church God hath placed Watchmen most vigilant over their flocks who suffer them not to be misled they have discovered the very least Errors sowen in Corners and branded their Authors as false Teachers Wherefore as unity in belief is the Form and Soul of that great body of the Catholick or Universal Church so whatever Doctrine is commonly taught and received in her without any contradiction from her Pastors is sufficiently known to be infallible 2. They object there is no infallible Propounder of this Article of our Faith The Church is Infallible Answer Yes 1. God shows himself the Propounder of this in the Markes of the Church which we shall presently see 2. As our Saviour Christ calling himself the Son of God and working Miracles did sufficiently yea infallibly evidence to the Jews that it was true what he said So the Church calling her self infallible and working the like Miracles in all Ages doth infallibly evidence to the world that it is true what she says otherwise it would follow that God did employ his Omnipotency and Power to work Miracles in favour of an Impostor thus cheating the world with a lye 3. Therefore I say the Catholick Roman Church is the only true Church in which the Doctrine of Christ is infallibly propounded and certainty in Faith and Salvation to be found This Point is of highest concern according to the Fathers For it is only the Catholick Church says Lactantius l. 4. that hath the true Worship and Service of God That is the Well-spring of Truth the dwelling place of Faith the Temple of God into which whosoever entereth not and from which whosoever departeth is without all hope of Life and Salvation Whosoever is divided from her says S. Augustine in his Epistle 152. how laudable soever he seems to himself to live for this only crime that he is separated from the unity of Christ he shall be excluded from life and the wrath of God shall remain upon him And again in his 50. Epistle as a Member cut off wants the spirit of life so a man separated from the body of Christ cannot have the spirit of Justice c. They have not the Holy Ghost who are out of the Church S. Cyprian de Unitat. Eccl. The Spouse of Christ cannot be defiled with adultery whosoever divided from this Church cleaveth to the Adulteress he is separated from the Promises of the Church he cannot have God for his Father who hath not the Church to his Mother S. Irenaeus l. 3. C. 40. in the Church God hath constituted Apostles Prophets Doctors and all the rest of the Operation of the Spirit whereof those are not partakers who repare not unto the Church where the Church is there is the Spirit of God Vincentius Lyrinensis contr haeres C. 1. 2. says That he having very often most diligently inquired of many Holy and Learned men how he might certainly distinguish the true Catholick Faith from all Heresies it was ever answered him by the Law of God and the Tradition of the Church Divinae legis authoritate Catholicae ecclesiae traditione Then making to himself the common Objection of Protestants seeing the Rule of Scripture is perfect what necessity of joyning to it the Tradition of the Church He presently Answers because all take not Scripture one way and in the same sense because of its deepness All the Fathers run upon this out of the Catholick Church no true Religion no Divine Faith no infallible Guide no sure way to Salvation no hope of Heaven no means to attain Eternal Happiness and Life Wherefore God by his Divine Appointment Order and Decree having tyed us and that under no less pain then the damnarion of our Souls to live in the Unity and Communion of this Church in which only he has placed the Chair of his Doctrine and Channels of his Graces I presuppose 1. This Church may be easily known and that by clear Marks in all Ages and by all she being so amply great and Eminently high that the Prophet Isa Ch. 2. calls her The Mountain of the Lords house established in the top of Mountains and exalted above the Hills to which all Nations should flow 2. Tat those Marks be the same now which did evidence her in Christs and in the Apostles time for all things are best conserved by the same means by which they received their being says the Phylosophers Conservatio continuata productio 3. That whatever Church is found to have these Marks should be undoubtedly acknowledged for the true one otherwise they could not have proved her the true Church at first This presupposed that the Catholick Roman Church is the only true Church I most evidently prove in short for this hath been often done in large volumns and that by a very few undoubted Signes and as it were most legible Characters of the Primitive Church in the time of the Apostles paralelling the one with the other Three things are chiefly remarkable in the Apostles and Church under them 1. Their Sanctity and Holiness of Life 2. The great conversion of Infidels wrought by them 3. Their manifold and wonderful Miracles These be the Marks of their mission by which they show themselves to be the servants of God to be sent by God and that God by his Vertue and Power concurreth and cooperateth with them Their Holy Humble Poor and Austere Life makes them like to their Master Christ and fit Instruments for the great Employment they are going about Miracles make their Credential Letters and witness the fulness of their power Conversions are the end of their Embassy which as it was to last till all the Nations of the earth were brought to the Unity of Faith and bosome of the Church according to that Promise of Christ There shall be one shepherd and one Fold so their true Successors are constantly known by the same Signs in all Ages as the undoubted Marks and Badge of the Apostles I begin at Miracles which I call the Apostles Credentials and make the chief infallible Mark of the true Church and all
2 Thes 2. says it is evident that the Apostles did not deliver all things by Writing but many things without and those be as worthy of credit as others Which he could not have said if Fundamentals were only the infallible Truths and they clearly revealed in Scripture S. Epiphanius Heres 61. we must use Traditions for the Scriptures have not all things yet no necessity of using Traditions if all Fundamentals were in Scripture they only being necessary according to Protestants S. Augustine l. 5. de Bapt. Contr. Donat Ch. 23. the custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is neither to be contemned or any wise thought superfluous yet not to be believed if it were not an Apostolical Tradition If this was not in his Judgment a Fundamental hear himself again l. 3. de Orig. Anim. C 9. if thou will be a Catholick believe not teach not say not that Infants prevented by death before they are baptized can come to the pardon of their Original sin Is it not a Fundamental to believe Scripture to be the Word of God which S. Augustine takes on Tradition What if a man should receive the New Testament as sufficiently containing Fundamentals and reject the Old with the Manichees admit of some of the Evangels but not others with the Ebionits What if one should deny the word Person the name and definition of a Sacrament the keeping of Sunday because not clear in Scripture and consequently no Fundamentals according to M. Menzeis Rule Marcion and with him the Anabaptists teach Baptism should be conferred more then once The Donatists that Baptisme of Hereticks at least should be reiterated Sabellius one only Person in the Godhead Nestorius two Persons in Christ and for this are accounted Hereticks yet no clear Scripture is brought condemning their Errours S. Augustine l. de unitate Eccl. says expresly of the Donatists Errour this neither you nor I read in express words 7. How many Scriptures are clear against Protestants in all controverted Tenets So that however it be clear in Fundamentals it clearly speaketh against them See for this the Touchstone of the Reformed Gospel with the Manual of Controversie and after you have pondered the places quoted in them judge whether the Protestant Religion be rightly defined by M. Menzeis The Christian Religion as contained in Scripture and their protestancy only their protesting against Popish Errours Which Definition if good having its Genus proximum differentiam ultimam should distinguish Protestants from all other Sectaries but this it doth not it being common to them with most Hereticks who have ever been all of them professing with you Sir to adhere to the written Word they received and as understood by themselves as the Arians Nestorians Pelagians Photinians c. and all protesting against the Churches Errours and Popes Authority For as the sole Roman Church did ever oppose all Hereticks as the only zealous Defender of the true Faith and Doctrine which S. Paul calls the Depositum entrusted to her So all generally how soon they turn Hereticks Protest prattle Preach chieflly against her turn over all the Writings of Authours who have made mention of Heresies and you shall find that all from the first to the last have opposed themselves to that company of Christians which was in communion with the Pope and Bishop of Rome for the time and that this company hath opposed it self to them all neither did they oppose themselves all to any other company whatsoever Yea this was ever the distinctive mark of Hereticks not to communicate with the Pope and Sea of Rome as may be seen in the Writings of the Fathers St. Irenaeus l. 3. C. 3. S. Hierome Ep. 57. S. Cyprian in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius S. Augustine in Ps Contr. part Don. and generally in all ages and by all so that you protesting with them against the Church and Pope take their very Badg and Livery and shamefully declare by this Charactaristick Mark of your Defection from the ever acknowledged true Church and high Bishop thereof by all the Fathers your Apostacy Heresie and Schism It is very plausible I must confess to poor Ignorants when Preachers make them believe they teach nothing save only the pure Scripture and written Word protesting against all unwritten Traditions as Popish Errours But if any man consider a little with himself your Tenets in particular he shall presently find it is openly against God and his written Word ye protest in all points of Controversie under the false pretence of protesting against Popery and that not so much as one Tenet peculiar to you is contained in Scripture This I evidence in most Articles of Popish Doctrine you protest against where all may see and judge how well your Religion is contained in Scripture Is it not to protest against the goodness of God to say with you he created some for Hell independently of their works and likewise against his Word 1 Tim. 2. where it is said he will have all to be saved and in the 2. Ep. of St. Peter 3. where he is declared not willing any should perish Is it not to protest against his Mercy and express word again to say he died not for all The Apostle S. Paul assuring he did die for all and as that in Adam all died so in Christ all be restored to life 1 Cor. 13. Is it not to protest against his Justice and Word to teach that he punisheth us for what we cannot do as for the want of good Works which Protestants will have not to be in our power Yet the Apostle says Heb. 6.10 God is not unjust that he should forget our work Is it not to protest against the Wisdom and Word of God to say he obliges us to perform things impossible as Protestants call the Commandements where as Saint John in 1 Ep. C. 5. says they are not so much as heavy Is it not to protest against his Veracity and Word to affirm that the Church can teach Errours and stand in need of Reformation Christ having commanded us to hear it in S. Matt. 18. and the Apostle S. Paul 1 Tim. 3. calling it the Pillar and Ground of Truth Is it not to protest against his Providence and Word to assert that he has given us the dead Letter of the Law without an Infallible Visible Judge leaving to every poor Ignorant to Interpret Scripture according to his fancy S. Peter having said no Scripture is of private interpretation and Christ having commanded us to hear his Church Is it not to protest against the Efficacy of Christs Mediation Sufferings Death and also his Word to hold that he hath freed us from the pain but not from the guilt of sin S. Joh. 1. Rev. 5. Saying he washed us from our sins in his own blood And S. Paul 1 Cor. 6. we are Washed justified Sanctified Is it not to protest against his Divine Order to tye our Sanctification to Faith only and his express word in S. James
Substantial Points partly in written partly unwritten Institutions In the same Age S. Ignatius apud Euseb l. 3. Hist C. 36. doth exhort all to stick to the Traditions of the Apostles In the second Age S. Irenaeus L. 3. C. 4. what if the Apostles had left no Scriptures at all ought we not to follow the Order of Tradition which they have delivered unto those to whom they did commit their Churches and to which assent many Barbarous Nations who believe in Christ without Character or Ink. In the same Age Origen Hom. 5. in lib. num there are many things in Ecclesiastical Traditions which all ought to do and on the 6. Ch. to the Romans he sayes to baptize Infants is one In the third Age Tertullian de praescr teacheth Hereticks are to be confuted rather by Tradition then Scripture and L. de Cor. mil. speaking of the Ceremonies of Baptism the Sign of the Cross Sacrifice for the Dead c. he addeth of these and such like things if thou require a ground in Scripture thou shalt find none Tradition did begin them Custome has confirmed their Practice and Faith doth observe them In the same Age S. Cyprian l. 1. Ep. 12. says he that is Baptized ought to be anointed but of this Unction there is no mention in Scripture and in his second B. Ep. 3. he admonisheth Water should be mixed with Wine in the Chalice at Mass upon a like Tradition from the Apostles See in what I have cited heretofore how the Fathers have received the Scriptures upon Tradition and many most substantial Points with it and upon due consideration of all this let any one judg whether the Fathers of the first three Ages in these their most Authentick Writings I know do make a ground for Protestant or Catholick Doctrine speaking so plainly the chiefest most Substantial Points of our Faith were delivered partly in Written and partly in Unwritten Institutions exhorting us to stick to Traditions conserved in the Church which serve for conversion of Infidels conviction of Hereticks and generally ought to be kept by all 3. Protestants deny the unbloody Sacrifice of Christs body and blood offered up to God in the Mass Yet in the first Age the very Liturgies of the Apostles are extant and in that of S. James we offer unto thee O Lord the unbloody Sacrifice for our sins And S. Andrew in the Book of his Passion written by his Disciples sayes unto the Tyrant I sacrifice daily the Immaculate Lamb to Almighty God And in the same Age S. Clement Ep. 3. It is not lawful to celebrate Masses in other places but in these wherein the proper Bishop shall appoint these things the Apostles receieved from our Lord and delivered to you S. Ignatius Ep. ad Smyrnens It is not lawful without a Bishop to offer or Sacrifice or Celebrate Mass In the second Age S. Irenaeus l. 4. ad u. heres C. 32. calls the Body and Blood of Christ the Oblation of the New Testament which the Church having received from the Apostles offereth to God through the whole world And Tertullian l. de Veland virg it is not permitted that women should teach or speak in the Church nor Baptize nor Offer Origen hom 13. in Exod. you think your selves guilty and unworthy if any part of the Consecrated Host be lost through your negligence S. Hippolitus Orat. de Antichr bringeth in Christ speaking thus Come you Bishops and Priests who have daily offered my precious Body and Blood How clear are the following Fathers S. Epiphanius S. Chrysostome S. Athanasius S. Basil c. with S. Augustine for this as even in the third Age S. Cyprian Serm. de coena dom the Eucharist is a Holocaust to purge our sins and in his Epistle ad Cyrill he calls it a Sacrifice seven times 4. Protestants deny the Real Presence and Transubstantion But in the first age S. Ignatius in his Epistle ad Smyrnenses often cited by Eusebius Athanasius S. Jerome Theodoret and other antients speaking of the Saturnian Hereticks says They admit not of Eucharists and Oblations because they do not confess the Eucharist to be our Saviours flesh which suffered for our sins and in his Epistle to the Romans I do not delight in any corruptible food nor in the pleasures of this life I desire the bread of God the heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ the Son of God S. Denis Areop l. de Eccl. Hierarch C. 3. O most Divine and holy Sacrament vouchsafe mercifully to open the Veils of those signifying Signs wherein thou hidest thy self and appear plainly unto us In the second Age S. Irenaeus l. 4. C. 34. disputing against the Hereticks who denyed Christ to be the Son of God asks how it shall be manifested unto them that bread upon which thanks are given is the body of our Lord and the Challice his Blood if they say he is not the Son of the Maker of the world S. Cyprian serm de coena dom The Bread which our Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the Omnipotency of the word is made flesh In the third Age Origen We eat the bread offered by Prayer made a certain holy Body And again hom 5. in div loca Evang. When thou receivest the holy Food thou Eatest and Drinkest the Body and Blood of our Lord then the Lord entreth under thy roof c. In the same Age Tertullian l. 4. contra Marcion C. 40. The Bread taken and distributed to his Disciples he made his body What can be said more clearly then all this either for the Real Presence or Transubstantiation which is nothing but the change of the Bread in Christs Body here so plainly asserted Add to this for communion under one kind denyed by Protestants it is said to have been so given to Infants by S. Denis l. Eccl. Hierach C. ult to both Infants and sick by S. Cyprian serm de lapsis n. 10. and by Tertullian l. ad Uxorem to have been carried to private houses yea and over Sea by Eusebius l. 5. hest which could not be done but under one kind 5. Protestants deny purgatory and prayers for the dead But in the first Age S. Denis Eccl. Hierarch part 3. C. 7. says the Venerable Prelate approaching powereth forth his holy Prayer upon the dead by that Prayer he doth beseech the Divine clemency to forgive all the sins of the dead committed trhough humane Infirmities and to place him in light and in the Region of the living In the same Age S. Clement l. 8. Const C. 48. has a long Prayer accustomed to be said for the dead Again the same S. Clem. Ep. 1. de S. Petro tells us S. Peter taught them among other works of mercy to pray and give alms for the dead And in the Liturgy of S. James Apostle we have Prayers also for them Tertullian l. de Corona militis numbreth prayer for the dead amongst the Traditions of the Apostles