the Pope is not universal Bishop which title the Doctor disclaims nor the Church of Rome universal Councels above the Pope as I already proved so neither may he be said to be above Councels which though not representive of the universal Church upon earth for that all particular Churches and provinces may not be there by suffragans represented yet for all that it is a collective Councel of distinct provincials which provincials are not subordinate nor subjugate to the See of Rome The Pope with his Cardinals the representative church of that particular society may not properly or of right be said above that Councel which is there for order sake and unity convened that those several provinces of which she is collective may concur in unity of Doctrine and conformity of Rules of Faith there decreed which decrees and Rules should by the approbation of the Civil Magistrate be put into execution within those respective provinces and distinct jurisdictions without any further allowance or approbation or controlment of the Pope of Rome who is thereunto equally obliged with any other provincial and to assert the contrary is novelty and the unjust usurpations of the proud pontifical prelates of Rome and those cursed Lordly parasites about him that thus have flattered the chair into this deceivable mischief and erroneous novelty which according to Tertullian's Rule adversus prax in princip Id esse verum quod primum esse adulterum quod posterius semper adjudicandum est Wherefore this new doctrine of the Popes supremacy above Councels representive of many provinces must not be received as true and justifiable doctrine for that it is cleerly opposite to the ancient faith of Rome insomuch that the former Popes of Rome did as Popes did at an Altar promise to hold the faith taught by the traditions of the first Councels of Nice and Constantinople c. Infra 84. which made Romes Bishop but equal with other Patriarks but now contrary to that sacred vow his holiness will be above Councels and utterly destroyes the constitutions of those Councels The Councel of Nice hemmed in the See of Rome into certaine limits The Pope inferior to Councels wherein being included she should not break forth yet such is the restless motions of her troublesome head the Pope that he has made corruptions beyond his bound and like as a violent Tide that has lately overwhelmed some parcel of ground not before made a prey to Neptunes wide swallowing jawes doth for joy of its new mastery tumble it self upon its new-acquired Lordship making new beds of ease whereon it intends the next high-springing flood shall lay his foamy head so doth his holiness having broke down this pale of the Church which kept her within a known and certaine Rule of Faith maners insult over the poor captive Lady having thus trod her down which formerly was a rampire to circumscribe his power and jurisdiction he recommends his lawless president to his successors imitation and proclaimes the See of Rome boundless save only as her will shall please to prescribe unto her self a limited confine And having Samson-like thus tore the Lions whelp of the tribe of Judah he expects to finde a nest of honey in her dead carcase and from his Papal chair puts forth such riddles that none that plows not with his Heifer can declare which riddles and Romane mysteries shall any interpret or put a sense upon them contrary to his will or displease him in abating any jot of his new-acquired Soveraignty he sends his Foxes with fire-brands to destroy the corn of the field and to spoil the vineyard which Christ with his own right hand hath planted Is this Pastor-like is this to follow Pauls rule to the Rom. chap. 11.8 Boast not thy self against the branches for if thou boast thy self thou bearest not the Root but the Root thee Surely no This is rather to pull up the tree of life by the roots because her branches wither and if other branches sprung of the same stock decay it may serve to put Rome in mind that the sap she has robbed from others will not long maintain life in her arms in respect she has thus lopped her self from the bulk of the Church She may for a time flourish like a green Palme-tree but if she do not play the good husband and inoculate her self againe into the old stock it is more then probable she will shortly become a dotard wherefore I heartily pray she would no longer exalt her self against that that gave her what she has I mean a Councel that made her equal with the chief Patriarks and the Princes that gave her honour lifting her head above her fellows Let her no longer triumph above measure knowing this that whilst she rejoyces in her boasting all such rejoycing is evil Now lest any may censure me for slandering the Church of Rome herein I will shew how she has changed by degrees from her primitive faith in point of her honor and confidence in a General Councel and at length quite destroy it by claiming to her self to be above it First Boniface by the edict of Phocas as you have heard claimed to be above a Bishop then in process of time Greg. 7. claimed a power above kings as shal appear in Chap. 14. after which the wings of the succeeding Popes being chipt by four Councels Worms Papia Brixis and Mentz grew again in his successors that at last they flew above Councils till the 3 General Councils of Pise Constance Basil did not onely displace Popes out of the Popedom but decreed that Councils were above the Pope Popes displaced by Councils The Pisen Councels did out two Greg. 12. Benedict and placed Alexander 5. and the Council of Constant deposed John 23. placed Martin 5 in his stead and decreed that the Pope himself for ever should be subject to their decrees The Councel of Basil deposed Eugen. 4. placed Nicholas 5. and declared the Councel of Constant in this point of the Councels supremacy to be a matter of faith so that the late Councels of Laterane and Trent do not only prove the fallibility of Romes Church but that Rome has changed her faith For such is the ambition and pomp of the possessors of the Romane chaire that they could not rest quiet as long as the edicts of the Councels of Constant and Basil were in force it bred heart-burings and struglings in the breasts of the succeeding Popes it being an undervaluing to their claimed Imperial dominion to be Tenants at will of their triple crown and that a Councel should at pleasure put an end to their state and Empire wherefore as a current kept back by some forced rampire if it shall once break down that dam runs head-long with more force and violence even so the Popes having pack't the Councels Laterane and Trent after their own humors did procure them to remove and batter down that bulwarke of Constant and
Urim and Thummim he is no Ark with the Tables of God the Rod of Aaron or the golden pot of Manna that the Papists should put such confidence in him take a view of him as he is decyphered to us by their own writers Peter de Alliaco a Cardinal in libde reform Eccl. grants that there were many things amiss in the Romane Church which had need of reformation both in faith and manners and Adrian the sixth confesseth that all the mischiefs in the Church proceeded from the Popes and promised reformation to the Germanes by his Legate Cheregalus Saint Bernard in sermone primo in conversione St. Pauli long since complained of the iniquity of Popes and of the dissoluteness of Priests and people The Bishop of Bitonto preaching in the first session of the councel of Trent acknowledgeth the Apostacy of the Church of Rome in the chief heads both of doctrine and of life Chrysostome 30. Hom. in 12 Mat. calls them dry men which have not the dew of Gods Word in their breasts which he plainly expresses of the Bishops of Rome Nicolas Lyra who writ three hundred yeers since says Ab Ecclesia Romana jam diu est quod recessit gratia and Johannes Episcopus Chemensis one of Romes Religion confesses in his book intituled Onus Ecclesiae chap. 9. Ecce Roma nunc est vorago mammon inferni ubi diabolus totius avaritiae Capitaneus Je. ch 12. residet Gerson a man of great esteem amongst the fathers of the councel of Constance and Chanceler of Paris in prima parte exam doctr consid 2. saith that the resolution of the Pope alone in things pertaining to faith doth not tye a man to believe it and infinite of other presidents of this nature might be produced all concurring to this point that the Church of Rome hath and may err For is this any more but what other Churches have done as for example Particular Churches have and may err the Church of Galatia is said to have erred not as the Church of Corinth which erred but in part some of her Church denying the resurrection 1 Cor. 15.12 but totally about the matters of justification Gal. 3.1 O foolish Galatians who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth and the Churches of Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira Sardis and Laodicea are blamed by Saint John in his Revelation for their erring from the truth and this is a truth so manifest that the Papists themselves cannot deny onely they would excuse the Church of Rome by the subtle sophistry of humane invention and salve the errors of Romes Church with distinction they confess to their own shame that Bishops per se may err which Bellarmine in his book de conc cap. 2. in fine Sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare possint aliquando errant inter se quandoque dissentiunt so that we may not know which of them to follow How the Pope may crr and if this be so I wonder he should elswhere contradict himself maintaining the Pope alone infallible of which contradiction he having been formerly taxed he was put to his trumps and plaid another distinction that he might err in matter of fact not of faith in matter of fact as concerning the condemnation of this or that Bishop c. but in matters of faith he cannot judicially err and thus the learned Cardinal being too busie in this point Meanders himself into contradictions without satisfactory conclusions to the principal point according to that saying of Solomon Eccl. 12.12 There is no end of making many books The stout maintainers of his Holiness infallibily being thus tript in their own devices and forced to wave the quarrel being overcome with the strength of Reason drawn from divine examples and the testimony of many learned Authors and being thorowly convinced yet notwithstanding out of a self-love and pertainacy to maintaine their pontificial patron having drawn from their education blind principles of his justification will not quite desist but scrue their wits to new inventions to deceive the world perswading the world that they are not overcome with dispute nor his Holiness right to infallibily though shaken quite blown up by the root and therefore they publish to the world that notwithstanding all gainesaying the Church of Rome is infallible with this distinction that her Bishop per se may err but not when the Bishops are met together then they cannot err To which I answer If the Bishop of Rome may err per se then the late councels of Laterane and Trent which have declared him above councels have thereby consented that the Church of Rome may err or else if it be to be understood that the Pope of Rome with his other Bishops of Rome cannot err they do hereby make the private Councel of Rome above the general Councel which is absurd and utterly against all principles of reason and divinity I will therefore proceed to shew that Councels have erred and therefore in no respect whatsoever is the Church of Rome infallible The Pope is declared above Councels General Councels have erred in matter of faith and yet he is confessed to be fallible per se And whereas he would force a distinction upon the world that he may err as a man not as a Pope judicially Ante ch 6. I have elswhere answered to that point it now remaines to look upon him in his chaire Infra with his Court of Cardinals about him to examine his judical proceedings and try if they be infallible I would fain know in what capacity the Pope claims this infallibility by the power of succession from Peter I have proved he cannot claime it and if he claime it as from the consent of the late councels then is this his politick capacity dirivative from thence and must not exalt it self above the Primitive or admit that those councels declared the then present Popes infallible for such certain notes of sanctity as was to them discovered it doth not follow that their successors should be so But that I may put all scruples out of mens hearts concerning this point I will prove that those Councels in themselves were not infallible and much less any substituted power of judicature which must have its rise from them The councel of Carthage decreed rebaptisation of those that were Baptised by Hereticks Councils erred in matter of faith this Saint Austine after opposed and the Councel of Trent Sess 7. can 4. repealed this and allowed of such baptisme to be sufficient if done in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost The second councel of Nice was diametrically against the councel of Constantinople in matters of Images the one approving the other condemning the use of them in the Church The councels of Constantinople and Basil decreed the councels to be above the Pope and the councels of Laterane and Trent decreed the Pope above councels Fox 132. Pope John the tenth called a
Council at Ravenna and sentenced the Acts of Pope Steph. which were in a Synod by him decreed to be burned The Council of Constantinople took away the cup which another Council restored and which decree of the Council of Constantinople and the now present practice of Rom's Church in that point is utterly against the doctrine of Christ and the practice of the Apostles and the Primitive Church as I shall shew in the sixteenth Chap. The Council of Nice declared Angels to be circumscriptible and the souls of men and that they have bodies and are visible and circumscriptible which is against the rules of our faith for we believe that God is the Creator of all things visible and invisible and if Angels and Spirits be visible then are there no invisible things as one argues upon this point But I do not much urge this in regard some hold that spirits may assume visible shapes nor doth my argument much rely upon this mistake in that Council I need not rifle much into Councels to pick out contradictory Canons sith the Councils themselves declare they are not infallible insomuch that the whole Council prayeth at the end of every Council in a set form of prayer that God would pardon their ignorance and errors quia conscientia remordente fabescimus c. and because our own conscience accusing us we do faint lest either ignorance hath drawn us into error and hasty will driven us to decline from thy will and pleasure of heavenly Father c. In which it appears that they confess the frailty of that Assembly that it may not onely err in matter of fact through ignorance but in faith also by declining from justice Lame and frivolous therefore are those distinctions Alledged that the contrary decrees of later are but the explications of former Councils by which the Papists would deceive the world that Councils do but declare and explain the meaning of former Councils but do never gainesay any by a contrary decree for the contrary is absolutely proved to you already in that they are diametrically opposite one to another and besides the four first Councils were reputed and taken to be so holy that Gregor the Gr. in regist primo libr. 24. and Masilius def pac dict 2. fol. 229. affirm they are to be believed sacred tanquam quatuor Evangelia and if a later council shall decree any thing contrary to them it shall not be received into the Church How then can the Church of Rome for shame claim universality to her self and supream jurisdiction the Church of Rome being but equal with Alexandria and declared to those Councils sicut Alexandria as I have proved in the second chapter But the Church of Rome by vertue of her new-acquired attributes of universality infallibility and supremacy may declare as she please and none to question her for it and she has her champions with Sophistry to make good whatsoever she proposes and therefore whereas those first councils were accounted sacred by the ancient Fathers even as the four Evangelists and therefore none might add to or diminish from them notwithstanding Rome may by her new prerogatives being declared above Councils do what she please and so upon the matter all Religion is by her made arbitrary we having neither Scripture Fathers nor Councels but must be interpreted by her after her own fancy and no other sence to be received of any thing though never so plaine but what she gives and whatsoever interpretation she makes through never so repugnant to the plaine text words and sense of Scripture Councils and Fathers must not be denyed but understood to be growings and explanations of the first faith spun out of the stock or depositum Ecclesiae with which delusive pretences of her strange contexture drawn from her own Spiders womb she entangles the lesser and small flies but the more sollid break the net of her artificial cunning and leave her in the snare she prepares for others and hereupon she has in the Council of Milan added a new Symbole of faith to the Nicene Creed which she cals new rules of faith which indeed are new articles of faith Explanations of Councils as common under one kind worshiping images supremacy c. which cannot be as they would have them understood explanations for explanations are declarative illustrations of a truth involved in some former article and not additions of a doctrine newly conceived for truth I allow that out of the depositum Ecclesiae Depositum Ecclesiae as the Doctor says fol. 123. there may be growings in faith and knowledge and new articles imposed upon the people by representatives in collective or Provincial Councels which upon new questions and disputes may resolve being the proper interpreter and reconciler of differences and by the authority of Scriptures frame new articles which before were not thought of as occasion to that purpose may be administred and having framed such articles by authority of the Church may deliver them to be received as matters of faith by which the people by the approbation of the civil magistrate of the respective jurisdictions are bound But if those be contrary to what former Councils have resolved it proves their decrees peccant as Romes supremacy by the Laterne and Trent Councils as against the first Councils of Nice and Constontinople or if those new rules or articles of faith be not warranted by Scripture they are not binding to absent provincials as I shall shew in the twelfth Chapter for it is cleer and evident that the Scripture is above the authority of any Council that ever was since the Apostles Council at Jerusalem and it self doth in matters of points necessary judge it self Infra 102.112 as is in that Chapter plainly proved though all those points were not at first digested into a Symbole of faith Scriptures above Councils For if by authority of explanation the Church represented in ordinary councils shall not be bound by Scripture so that she shall not frame new rules contrary to the plaine letter of those points of our salvation the Holy Ghost has set down in the Scriptures we do then submit the whole matter of our salvation unto the power of humane judgements and so make void the dictates of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures at the wils and discretions of mortal men which though they were Angels sent from heaven in that case are not to be believed shall they teach contrary to that the Apostles here delivered therefore I say because all points of salvation may not be methodized into a certaine Symbole and rule of faith the Church as occasion may require may out of the treasure of the Scriptures take new rules but those rules must not impugne the plain letter of Scripture which because such a Council is fallible must be made the square and rule to judge that Council by Now because God has promised his Spirit to his Church and Councils are the representation of
the Decrees of the Provincial he was to appeal to the General Council within a yeer And by the Council of Antioch can 13. if any thing of controversie did arise in any Province and the Metropolitane could not in his Provincial Synod decide the matter the Metropolitane might call upon his neighbour-Provinces for assistance in Council a shame therefore for the Church of Rome to affirm that no Council is of validity without the Pope which canon of the Popes to that purpose is contrary to the practice and doctrine of the Primitive Church Ante Chap. 10. and therefore to be rejected By the ninth canon of the Councel of Antioch the Metropolitane of every Province has the Government of that Province assigned to him By all and every of which canons it is plain that one Bishop should not intermeddle in the Diocess of another Ante Ch. 2 nor one Metropolitane in the Province of another for that every Metropolitane has the government of his own distinct Province committed to him that he may call a council within his own Province and if there the matter in question cannot be determined may desire the assistance of his neighbour-Provincials which makes by that means a general Council by calling in the neighbour-Provincials as the cause shall require and this is declared by these Councils for to be lawful so to do without any reservation to the See of Rome as if without her Provincial this might not be done who by the sixth canon of the first Council of Nice is but equal with Alexandria and Alexandria Antioch Rome and other Provinces have like priviledges reserved to them by the express words of that canon This was the practice of the primitive Churches England equal with Rome and when those constitutions were made and long before was England a province and had her Metropolitane who after King Lucius conversion did publikely exercise the Jurisdiction of a Metropolitane which was 120 yeers before that Council of Nice and by the words of that canon the several Provincials then in being having equal Jurisdiction reserved to them England may by vertue hereof claim equality with the Church of Rome the same Authority making them equal in power and jurisdiction nor had she so much as primacie of Order till the ensuing Council of Constantinople can 2. gave it her onely for honour to the city of Rome and no other respect Nor doth it appear that England had any Suffragan in that Council so that had it not in after-times been confirmed by other Councils England had not been hereunto bound Which council of Constantinople was not called till 26 yeers after the council of Nice So that for the Doctor to alleadge against us as he doth positively in his book fol. 221. that we cannot call a Council seems something strange to me to proceed from a Doctor for it is an argument that he is ignorant of those canons or else if he have read them those copies he has perused are of Rhemish print and much vary from the Originals However I must needs wonder at his harsh censure against his native country and his quondam-mother-Church that he should deny her that priviledge and jurisdiction which is not due to her alone but common to all Provincials which by the authority of Councels and by the practice of the Primitive and by the ensamples of later ages have and do call Provincial Councils within their respective territories and precincts and do there decree Rules of faith to be observed of all within the Province as may appear by these ensuing presidents There was a Provincial Council called at Ancyra in Galitia of eighteen Bishops Provincials called of old and that other of Neocaesaria of fourteen Bishops before any General Council and after the General Council of Nice were held several Provincial Councils in the East as that Council of Grangene of sixteen Bishops that of Antioch of thirty Bishops of several Provinces in the East in which respect it rather deserves the name of a General Council then a Provincial Synod Likewise the Council of Laodicea of several Provinces of Asia Councils held without the Bishop of Rome and this without the Bishop of Rome for he was not to govern the Asian churches but the Bishops of Asia and Alexandria the Churches in Egypt and the Bishop of Pontus them in Pontus according to the Council of Constant can 2. Hereupon likewise the African Province held several Councils under Theodosius the third without any dependencie upon Rome which upon the authority of the Primitive Churches and Councils hath been continued down to these days not onely in those of the Eastern Asian and African Provinces but in other of the Western European Provinces it being a Right equally due to every Province and therefore I need not travel so far for Presidents I might have saved labour and answered the Doctor with presidents neerer home and have instanced in France those of Arles Tours Tholouse c. which Genebrard in his Chronicle lib. 4. anno 814. calls Concilia reformatoria and in Germany those of Worms Mentz Brixia Frankfort Noremberg and Ratisbone And in Spain those of Toledo and one of Sardis called by Osius Bishop of Corduba a little afore the Council of Nice And in England the Councils of London Winchester Gloucester and many and several even to this day the Pope never intermedling in any of them but in most of the afore-mentioned Provincial Councils was opposed and declared upon several questions started that he ought not to intermeddle Provincial Councels not to appeal to the Bishop of Rome nor any Appeals ought from those Provincials to be made unto him it being against the priviledges of the several Provincials to allow of Appeals to him And as it was their ancient Right Ante Ch. 2. so was it maintained by the Princes of later times who like careful nursing fathers would not suffer their Provincial Rights to be invaded by the ambitious and covetous incroaching Popes of Rome Hereupon Ludovicus Pius the Emperour did by publike Edict prohibit all exactions of the Popes which Ludovicus perceiving they began to grow proud upon the freedom and donation his predecessor Charles the Great had bestowed upon them did hereby shew unto the world that the clemencie and indulgencie of the Imperial Crown should not be an occasion to make other Princes suffer in their Ecclesiastical Rights by the Popes of Rome under colour of shelter from the Emperour to invade them in their said Ecclesiastical priviledges belonging to any Provinces within their proper dominions and therefore by publike Edict did the said Emperour prohibit all exactions of the Popes Court within his Realm The like was done in France by Philip the fair prohibiting all Appeals to Rome 1246. and that was confirmed by Charles the 5 and 6. punishing some as traitors for appealing And in the Reign of Charles the 7. was set forth a Decree against the annates reservations
the dispensation of our salvation by whom onely the Gospel came to our hands which Gospel they first preached but afterwards by Gods appointment they delivered the same to us in writing that it might be the foundation and pillar of our faith Wherefore seeing that this is the Magazine of our salvation let us onely repair hither to be spiritually furnished against all temptations of Satan and let us cast off all other traditions of humane invention which shall declare any other thing then what is contained in these Evangelical truths Now sith the ground of our faith is contained in these Scriptures All people to read the Scripture and laid open unto us by the blessed authors of these sacred and holy testimonies of our salvation why should not any one be permitted to read and to peruse these glad tidings of his eternal Redemption from the bondage of sin and Satan sith we are not onely allured by its worth and efficacie it being of so high a consequence as the eternal redemption and salvation of our souls and being profitable to teach to improve to instruct in righteousness 2 Tim. 3. but likewise are commanded to search them Joh. 5.39 Till I come saith Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 4.13 give attendance to reading to exhortation and to doctrine And Coloss 3. the Saints of Colossus are commanded to let the Word dwell in them pleteously in all wisdom admonishing themselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs And not onely the Saints of Colossus and Timothy are enjoyned to this diligence but all in general by S. John in the place afore-cited And Acts 18.24 A certain Jew named Apollos was great in Scripture and taught diligently And Acts 17. the Noble-men at Thessalonica received the Word with all readiness and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so which Paul and Silas taught at Berea and many of them and honest women and men not a few believed S. Chrysostom the golden-mouth'd Doctor discourseth at large upon this subject in several places of his Works I shall shew you two or three In his Proeme in the Epistle to the Romanes he saith If therefore you will read the Scripture with alacrity of minde ye need no other help at all for Christ's Word is true Seek and ye shall finde c. because many of you are charged with wives children and domestick affairs and so cannot wholly addict your selves to this study yet be ready to hear what others have gathered and bestow as much diligence in hearing as you do in scraping worldly goods together for the cause of your infinite evils is your ignorance in Scripture So that by his Rule 1. We need no other help to our salvation 2. All sorts should study it 3. Evil manners dissolute life and all other mischiefs proceed of ignorance of the Scriptures and by not reading of them Again the same Chrysostom in his 29 Hom. upon Gen. 9. I beseech you saith he that you now and then come hither and attend diligently the reading of the holy Scripture neither that onely when you come hither sed domi divina Biblia in manus sumite utilitatem in illis positam magno studio suscipite Again the same godly and zealous Father in his 9. Hom. upon the Colossians saith Hearken all ye that are encumbered with worldly affairs and have wives and children how ye are especially commanded to read the Scriptures Comparate vobis Biblia animae Pharmaca If ye will have no other thing at least provide ye the new Testament c. S. Austin de tempore serm 55. Nec solum vob is sufficiat quod in Ecclesiis divinas lectiones auditis sed etiam in domibus vestris aut ipsi legite aut alios legentes requirite libenter audite And herewith accords S. Hierome upon the 133 Psalm affirming that in his time both Monks men and women did contend which should learn most Scripture without book in co putant esse meliores si plures edicerint The Council of Laodicea can 59. positively decrees Licet plebeis legere sola sacra volumina veteris novi Testamenti Thus you see the invitation by way of perswasion as it is for advantage it being the means of our salvation and a charge and command by the Apostles to search those Scriptures lest we fall into evils and mischiefs and holy Fathers instructing all to follow those Evangelical precepts whereby it is not pressed unto us as a thing of conveniency onely but likewise of necessity for every one to perform this duty every one being concerned to read and learn the Scriptures How much then is the Church of Rome to be blamed that debarreth men of this means of salvation she excommunicating every one that shall read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue And so much are the Papists bewitched with the terrours of the Popes curses and the flattery of his blessings that they will not read any thing that is opposite to Popery not having license so to do and so they make Ignorance the mother of their devotion and that contrary to the practice of the Primitive Church as appears by the Council As touching this Point Who are to judge of the Scriptures Who shall be Judge of the Scripture the Doctor is pleased to accuse our Church of universal errour because of some Protestants that hold strange opinions concerning this matter and yet he cites but an opinion or two of private Ministers in our Church So I may justifie our Church from the imputations he herein lays to her charge as he has elsewhere done in the like case That it is not the opinion and judgement of the Church but onely the conceptions of those private men Certainly the Doctor could not be ignorant of our Churches Tenent in this particular and truely this gives me occasion to suspect the Doctor is not the Author of that Book called The Lost Sheep but it was composed by some one that was less knowing of the Doctrines and Tenents of our Church However for satisfaction of others I will here set down what our Church has prescribed de fide in relation to this point The Church of England teaches that the Scripture is the onely Judge of Traditions and Rule of salvation and that it contains all things necessary to salvation and whatsoever is not contained therein or may not be proved thereby is not to be received as an Article of faith or thought requisite to salvation But she doth not determine that this Scripture shall be interpreted by every mans private fancy for The things necessary to salvation are plain and easie to be understood to charge her with that is a known untruth and contrary to the 6 and 20 Articles of the Church I confess that we generally maintain that those things which are necessary to salvation are clear and manifest the whole Scripture being termed a light unto our feet and a lanthorn to our steps Psal 139. And
and reflecting upon the curiosity of some who would be over-scrutinous to examine the points of this Commission by the rule of the holy Writ at last they concluded upon this result That it must be de fide received that his holiness is the only exposito◠and by the same rule of gradation an Evangelist to deliver new Scripture of the old and new Testaments The Pope abuses the Scriptures and having perswaded some and forced others into this opinion without care for the souls upon earth without respect of Saints and Angels in Glory and without all fear of the Almighty God of heaven he commands the holy writ which was the dictates of the holy Spirit of God to be blotted wrested mangled and tortured at his will and pleasure making no more account thereof then if it were but the Embryo of a Bear which by the licking of its dam were to receive shape and perfection And if there be any text which doth impugne this his usurped unlimited power it must not be suffered to pass the Press before first it be either rubbed over with his holiness index expurgatorius or else brushed with his Ghostly interpretation As for example Josh 1.18 the people professing an unlimited power to Joshua in all things to obey him The words in all things are expunged in the Rhemish translations for it stood not with his holiness interest and prerogative to let them be for a president For if the people of God were in all things to be obedient to their Prince this spoiles his holiness claime to command in temporalibus wherefore it was thought fit to send these words to the index expurgatorius Object The Doctor in his book fol. 59. argues the truth of Romes doctrine for that she has not corrupted or extinguished the text that being easier to do then to change her doctrine To which I answer Resp The Scriptures which Rome hath she received from other churches and those Churches from whom Rome received them sending aswell to other places as to Rome copies of those holy writs it would much ashame her to alter them in respect that true original Copies would be produced against her to her condemnation but the Bishop of Rome being to teach these Scriptures within his own precincts and territories he as times served to advantage himself might and has in many places strained courtesie to wrest the sense delivering to the people doctrines not warranted by this holy writ which he might with more confidence do in respect that no other Bishop was to meddle in his diocess and he by the favour of Princes being accounted summus pontifex wherefore reason tels that his doctrine and traditions are more questionable then his translations of the Scriptures for he needed not much to alter the Scriptures in respect it matters not what they say being but dead letters without the spirit of his holiness interpretation Yet so much did they dote upon the pomp and vainty of this world and upon that lordly height they have aspired to here upon earth that the divel did bewitch them to alter that text of Joshua which did directly gainesay such their dominion and power though by reason of their new preheminence they being above councels and the onely infallible expositors of the divine oracles they needed not so to have done or rather thus that corruption of Joshua was before the late councels of Lateran and Trent which made the Pope above councels and it behoved them to blot out such words as did impugne their other power of lording it over Kings and Princes but since these councels they may now put them in againe For it is no matter what the Scripture says for his holiness will give such an exposition as shall not destroy his own interest and since those councels such exposition though it be never so contradictory to the word of God it must de fide be received O tempora O mores Saint Basil saith they which have been brought up in Gods word will not suffer one syllable of her doctrine to be betrayed what then shall we think of the fathers of Rome's Church that practice as time serves these tricks upon those sacred letters These divine writs the dictates of Gods holy Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no marvel if they make bold with the fathers mis-translating and altering their writings and crying up their own traditions making their own mole-hills mountaines and making the fathers like unto Moles whose nature as Aristotle saith is never to open her eyes till she be dead and so they make the fathers being dead to witness things they never dreamed on or saw being living as I have shewed in the tenth Chapter If these divine oracles of God must not escape the venom of their claws if these must not be delivered to the people without corruption I know not how we may give faith or credit to her traditions the vanity of which I will briefly discover in this ensuing Chapter CHAP. XIII That because all things were not written the Church may deliver traditions such as she derives from the doctrine of the Apostles or ancient fathers That the Scriptures are to judge of those traditions That Rome is to be blamed for her traditions because they are against Scripture THe Jews say That when Moses was with God on the Mount and received the written law that he had unwritten law likewise delivered him by word of mouth for certainly say they God staid not fourty dayes and fourty nights on the mount to keep Geese nor needed he stay so long to interpret the law of the tables wherefore they conclude that Moses received traditional law which he taught Joshua Joshua the elders the elders the Prophets the Prophets taught the people Now because those their traditions were uncertaine the sects of the Pharisees sprung up and Essenes obtruding new traditions as simply necessary and a more perfect Rule of Sanctity then that that was writ whereupon our Saviour in the seventh of Mark reproves them saying They worship me in vaine teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and yet in the 23 of Mat. he hath commanded us saying All that they bid you observe that observe and do but after their works do not for they say and do not These two texts seem to impugne each other but the fathers of the premitive Church have resolved this knot and reconciled these texts by this exposition that all traditions agreeable and consonant to the holy word are to be observed but such traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees as were not agreeable to the holy word of God were to be rejected We confess that all things which Christ and his Apostles did No traditions but such as are agree able to the word of God are to be embraced were not written according as is expressed Joh. 21. vers ult And that the Apostles had order to teach the people whatsoever Christ had commanded them but as we allow this so by no meanes
skill in Appelles Art that he drew that exquisite picture of Christ which Rome has representing unto us his posture whilst the Jews whipt him I must confess that for these matters of importance we must submit to the traditions of Rome But all things touching God and the means to attaine faith in him are plentifully therein to be found Chrysostome sayes in his 41 Hom. upon the 22 of Matth. Quicquid queritur ad salutem totum eam ademptum est in Scripturis and upon the 95 Psalm Si quid dicatus absque Scriptura c. If any thing be spoken without the Scripture the cogitation of the Auditors faile but so soon as the Testimony of Gods voice is heard out of the Scripture it confirmeth both the word of the speaker and the mind of the hearer Saint Hierom upon the 9 of Jeremy Nec parentum ne majorum error sequendus est sed author it as Scripturarum Dei docenti imperium Saint Cyprian who writ almost 1400 yeers ago would not yeeld to Stephanus Bishop of Rome but reproved him for leaning to tradition and demanded of him by what Scripture he could prove his tradition Cyprian Epist ad Pompeium 74. So then if in his time it was not enough to alleadge tradition for the proof of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome much less is it lawful to follow the Popes definitive sentence in matters of faith and doctrine When the Arrians would not admit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it could not be found in Scripture Athanasius did not plead tradition for it but said Although the express words be not found in the Scripture yet have the Scriptures that meaning and sense in them as every one that readeth the Scriptures may plainly understand and therefore by warrant thâ—eof that word might be maintained Saint Austine de unitat Eccl. cap. 10. Nemo mihi dicat quid dixit Donatus quid dixit Parmenianus quid Paulus aut quillibet illorum quid nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est sicubi forte falluntur ut contra canonicas Dei Scriptures aliquid sentiant Methinks the very word Canonical which the Church of Rome having approved Canonical Scripture disprove â—raditiods what Scriptures shall be Canonical what not is sufficient of it self to prove this point for signifies a rule and thereupon those books are called Canonical because they are the rules of our faith and consequently whatsoever is not consonant to the Scripture ought to be rejected as pernicious and swerving from the rules of our faith For as whatsoever is not of faith is sin and as faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God therefore whatsoever is extra Scripturam cum ex fide non sit peccatum est This was the saying of Basil one of the Church of Rome's Saints in his Ethicks difinit ult prope finem And for my part I shall not be so harsh with her as this St. was I should be willing to allow of her traditions if they do not impugne the Scriptures and not to be so rigid against her traditional power as upon Basil's rule utterly to reject all if not expresly contained in Scripture I say for my part I should allow of such and approve of them as to be cerdited for the matter of fact but if she enjoyn them as doctrinal and to be rules of faith then â—ith Cyprian I desire to examine them by this Touchstone of truth the Scriptures For if once she propound traditions to be rules of faith then with Hierome Cyprian and Austin I must examine the truth of them by the rule of Scripture and with Saint Chrysostome in his 13 Hom. upon the 2 Cor. 7. do pray and beseech the Church of Rome to reject what this or that man says and search the truth out of the Scriptâ—re that learning true riches we may follow them and so attain life everlasting neither let any Church be wedded with her own traditions or give her self to believe the traditions of other Churches unless saith he she can bring authority from these truths to a warrant her doctrine and not to receive for doctrine the commandments of men and with Saint Cyprian examine from whence such tradition came whether it descended from authority of our Lord Jesus Christ or his Gospel or whether it came from the Mandates of the Apostles or their Epistles If so saith he let such divine and holy tradition be observed if no let it be rejected especially any tradition that shall contradict the written verities of God for such certainly proceed from spirits of error Here is a cloud of witnesses all agreeing in one that no traditions are to be embraced that have not warrant from the word of God so that for the Church of Rome to put her traditions upon the people for rules of faith upon that score that it is the power and authority of the Church that awarrants those traditions is vain and not binding to the conscience of men unless she can justifie and maintaine them warrantable by the word according to Saint Pauls saying to the Galat. 1.9 Though an Angel from heaven come and teach any other doctrine then what we have preached let him be accursed For the Testimony of no Church whatsoever is to be received if it be contrary to the Scripture Sâ—riptures above the Church Ante 73. Chapter 9. according to that of Saint Austin upon that text The Scriptures are not true because the Church sayes they are the word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the word of God and should Rome or any other Church teach contrary to the holy Scripture it is to be rejected as that which hath nothing of verity in it Now sith the Scriptures are the onely rules of our faith The vanity and falseness of the traditions of the Church of Rome and do containe in themselves the necessary points of our faith what shall we think of the traditions of the Church of Rome which have no warrant from the holy Scriptures but many of them being repugnant and utterly contrary to those Scriptures which therefore by the rule of Christ himself in the 7 of Matthew and by the general consent of the fathers of the primitive Church are to be rejected yet notwithstanding are by her enjoyned upon her pretended authority of universality and infallibility to be rules of faith unto others And lest any should think me injurious to the Church of Rome in this particular I wiâ—l give you a smal taste for I delight not to lay open her infirmities thereby to draw a scandal upon her of such of her traditions as are not warranted by the holy word of God only maintained out of self interest and to warrant her claim of universal power Spiritual and Temporal by these ensuing examples and further refer you to the 7 Chapter The Church of Rome that she might perswade the world of Peters being Bishop of Rome by
in that service as it is made manifest in the ensuing Chapter The humble confession of all penitent hearts their acknowledging of Christs benefits their thanksgiving for the same their faith and consolation in Christ their humble submission to his will is a sacrifice of laud and prayse acceptable unto God no less then the sacrifice of the Priest Christ did not ordain this Sacrament that any one might receive it for another but that every one for himself is to be made partaker of this mystery of his salvation For as one may not be baptized for another for the Godfathers answering for the child say he hath faith because he hath the Sacrament of faith by the outward element of water which as it self cleanseth so the childe thereby is born again of water and of the Spirit to newness of life Baptism the infant spiritually receiving regeneration by the outward element of the water according to the effectual working of the holy Spirit unto newness of life the infant being thereby made a member of Christ by faith in Jesus given unto him in that Sacrament of Baptism So may not one receive this holy Sacrament for another Let every man be baptized Act. 2. here is spiritual regeneration to every man by himself And Mat. 26. Christ said to the multitude Take and eat and drink ye all of this and here is spiritual growth and living in Christ every man by himself and by this means we that are many branches become one Vine being baptized into one Spirit and all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 Whereas the Doctor urges that those words Drink ye all of this were spoken to the Apostles and that therefore the cup is not to be given to the people He might as well conclude they shall not have the bread because Christ gave that to his Apostles whereas all Divines agree that what was spoken to them was thereby meant of the whole Church upon earth which are all the Saints of God upon earth of particular Churches whensoever assembled into a Society which is manifest by S. Paul who delivered to the Corinthians that which he had received formerly of the Lord Jesus to wit both the bread and the cup enjoyning every one to examine himself and so let him eat and so let him drink By which it is plain that it was to be delivered to the people in both kindes And if one kinde had been sufficiently significant of Christs flesh and blood offered by himself upon the Cross for our redemption sure Christ would never have added the cup as part of that Sacrament thereby to signifie his blood if already it had been sufficiently signified in the bread Wherefore unless the Papists will charge Christ to be superfluous in his institution of this Sacrament they must allow the cup unto the people as well as bread and both as well as one Lastly the Doctor would justifie the change of the Church of Rome in this particular upon the authority of the Church given by Christ to his Apostles so to do And for this he urges S. Austin who was dead five hundred and fifty yeers before ever this doctrine of Rome was heard of S. Austin stood much for the significancie of the bread and wine that this Sacrifice was but a representation of Christs Sacrifice and that which you see on the Altar or Table is the bread and the cup which your eyes shew you is the wine but saith he faith sheweth that that bread is the body and that cup is the blood of Jesus Christ It was the practice of the Church in his time to administer in both kindes he when he lived taught the necessity of wine against those that mingled water and so did Cyprian and others and now that they are dead the Doctor will have them teach another doctrine S. Austin might say that Christ left authority to his Apostles to make such appointments in what order this Sacrament should be received as whether sitting kneeling how often or the like but not that they should institute a new Sacrament Christ gave both Elements Saint Paul delivered both according as he had received and it was to be done in remembrance of Christ and they were commanded to be imitators of him Ephes 5.1 Christ left this as a Legacy to his Church and he made the Apostles Executors of this his last Will and Testament which they were to discharge by dispensing that Legacy to Christs faithful Saints and People Wherefore for them to withhold part of the thing bequeathed to wit the participation of the cup which is by S. Paul called The Communion of his blood is to forfeit that trust Christ has reposed in them and to forget his precept he enjoyned them commanding to teach all Nations whatsoever he had commanded them We are bound to hold fast the traditions we have learned If then the Scripture tell us that Christ with his Apostles did communicate in both kinds and Saint Paul administring to the Corinthians said Traditi vobis quod accepi a Domini how comes the Church of Rome to forsake this tradition which Christ himself taught and practised and the Primitive Church for a thousand yeers held for faith if it ought to be reduced to one kind how came it to pass to be let alone so long and by what Authority doth Rome claim this power sith the ancient Fathers and the Primitive Church did not onely use to administer to the people in both kinds but maintained and defended the necessity of Bread and Wine the outward elements of this Sacrament as may appear by the Testimony of the afore-cited Fathers and particularly it was the profession of the Church of Rome as Gelasius Bishop thereof witnesseth Shall but the Church of Rome prescribe any new rule of faith or manmers and shall any disobey he is straightwaies anathematized for casting off the Tradition of the Church and the Catholick Church upon earth communicated in both k nds and shall the late Popes of Rome alter this and escape the censures Were there nothing for it but the bare usage of the Primitive Churches it were enough to convince the Church of Rome but whenas there is Christs precept and institution for it how doth the Church of Rome justly incur the condemnation of the Pharisees teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and laying aside the commandments of God follow their own traditions Mark 7. But such was the transcendent wickedness of the Church of Rome in these dayes that scarce any Apostolick Rule but has suffered some alteration by his Holiness and his Legislative conclave of Cardinals who being soared to a height above Councels Princes and all other Powers on earth stick not to wrestle against these commandments of the God of Heaven witness their additions to the Baptisme as if the Baptisme wherewith Christ was Baptized were not sufficient without the Romish spittle and salt and as if this Sacrament of Bread and Wine were
and therefore I have adventured to lay open the Eâ—ors of his choyce which if he please to consider seriously I may win him again to his proper Sheepfold from whence he is gone astray how ever I hope I shall by the blessing of God hinder others from wandering after him and shall be a means to make up that gap which the Doctor hath made in the pale of our Church which whilest it lay open administred occasion for some to escape into the Wilderness Wherefore I will not hold the Reader longer in suspence with a dilatory Introduction but will briefly shew that the Doctor is not gone to the Catholique Church which is the main thing he perswades though it be obscurely wrapt in general terms in his first Chapter but that he has forsaken the faith once given to the Saints he has gone away from the puâ—e Fountain of Verity to the puddle of Error he has forsaken the living water and chosen the Romish cisterns digged by mens hands which hold no water CHAP. II. That the Roman Church is not the Catholique Church either in respect of the Vniversality of her Doctrine or any Jurisdiction she can claim from Peter or by the consent of the Primitive Churches and that the Pope is not the governing Head of the Catholique Church THe Church is called Catholique in several respects 1. In respect of places as being spread universally through the whole world and is not tyed to any place or Kingdom 2. In respect of Times because but one Church of all Times it having ever been from the beginning of the World and shall continue on Earth till the end thereof Isai 59.21 and Matth. 28. the Church of both Testaments being one and the same 3. In respect of the Collective Body thereof the Catholique Church being gathered of men of both Testaments and the Communion of Saints being the union and coherence of all the Saints in Christ their Head according to that of Paul Ephes 1.10 That he might gather together in one all things both which are in Heaven and which are in Earth even into Christ who is and ever shall be King and Head thereof And generally when we speak of the Catholique Church this Collective Church is to be understood which appellation Catholique was used by the Apostles before ever Rome was a Church So that neither in respect of Place Time or Catholiqueness may Rome justly challenge the onely Title of Catholique she being but a particular part or member of this Catholique Church we the Saints being the Body and Members for our part Eph. 1.22 But for the better illustration of this Point I will examine the Doctors Arguments in particular concerning Romes Catholiqueship and I shall in so doing more plainly disprove her Title thereunto The word Catholique as it is defined by the Doctor is not a word of Belief onely but of Communion also So that that Church which holds the same Belief with the ancient Church and yet doth not communicate with her may not rightly be called Catholique I shall retort this Argument which he intended against the Protestants and prove it to be their Justification and the Church of Romes own Condemnation Catholique as I said in a general sence comprehendeth all the Elect and is the full Body of Christ that filleth all things in all things Eph. 4. And when we in our Creed say We beleeve in the Holy Catholique Church it is understood of all the Elect of God which have been are or shall be of which the Church-Militant on Earth is but part But because I suppose the Doctor means onely of a Church upon Earth I will therefore insist upon his own definition and treat of the Church upon Earth which as it is universally spred over the Earth by the Apostles who had equal commission to teach all Nations no one particular Church can or ought to claim to be the Catholique or Universal Church upon Earth As for the Distinction which the Doctor makes betwixt Doctrine and Discipline thereby to excuse the unproper stile of Roman Catholique That is says he Catholique in respect of Doctrine Roman in respect of Discipline That will no ways strengthen her claim or clear her incongruous Title He doth but thereby shew the World how distinct her Discipline is from her Doctrine and thereby give occasion to the world to suspect both And upon this score may the Presbyterian Church of Geneva be called the Geneva Catholique Church that is Geneva for Discipline Catholique for Doctrine she professing the Catholique Faith of the holy and blessed Trinity and yet the Church of Rome I perswade my self would think much that such a glorious appellation should be given to such an upstart Youngling that wind-egg of a Tumult Geneva Church which being braddened under a Toad of France is become a staring Cockatrice and thinks to center the World within the compass of his contagious Den darting poyson upon whom he first espies as experience tells us how he glancing upon the poor Scot has given him such a deadly wound that he will scarce ever recover it teaching those that have escaped that plague with the Wesel each morning to bite on Rue which says Avicen secures her against the toxicating of that venomous Basilisk I say if the Church of Rome think much that the Geneva Church should arrogate such a glorious stile let her never stand upon her own Title which is equally weak to challenge the same The Doctor proceeds further upon Romes Tiâ—le to her Catholiqueship and gives a further explication of the same Catholique says the Doctor imports both the vast extention of Doctrine to Persons and Places and the union of all these places in communion It cannot be denyed but that there were other Churches of ancienter and more reverend setlement then the Church of Rome as the Churches in the East as Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus c. and in after-times the Gospel was to be carryed before Kings and to the Gentiles by S. Paul being by Jesus ordained a Minister and an Apostle of the Gentiles amongst whom Rome was then a chief City which as she received the Faith by S. Paul or S. Peter cannot properly be called a Mother Church but as a babe and suckling received the sincere milk of the Word She was one of the places to which the Doctrine of the Catholique Church of Christ was extended but no extender of that Doctrine So that by the Doctors own definition she cannot properly be called the Catholique Church she being in her Institution but a private particular Member of the Catholique Church as Englands or any other Church planted by the Embassadors of Christ And if since by the indulgent favors of her nursing Fathers the Christian Princes she has grown to that maturity that she has many Daughter Churches of her own plantation in the dark corners of the old known and the new discovered parts of the World yet she cannot by reason thereof assume to her self any
Supremacy over the rest of the Apostles and yet it would not at all help the Popes case to claim that power over the rest of the Churches for if Peter had any such power it was to him as an Apostle neither was he the surviver of the Apostles so that this superiority in him as an Apostle either died with him or els survived in John who was an Apostle and survived Peter and Christ had promised to be with them unto the end of the world so that as long as any of them were living they were to be preferred before any that succeeded the deceased Apostles in their severall Sees and Plantations in respect that S. Paul reckoning the degrees of orders in the Church 1 Cor. 12.28 God ordained some in the Church first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers c. Baronius writes that Peter died the 69. year after Christ and that Iohn the Bishop of Ephesus survived him long Rome uncertain in her succession Now if Linus succeeded Peter in the See of Rome or Anacletus or Clemens of which their own stories differ I hope they will not deny that S. John whilest he lived was Superiour to Linus or Clemens otherwise they give the world occasion to laugh at them to think that the Successors of Peter should be above John who was an Apostle that the subordinate should be set above the Superiour the derivative above the Primitive I wonder that the Papists should think the world so stupid and void of Christianity that they should preferre one of her pretended Bishops and if a Bishop there it was by humane Institution before John who was an Apostle by divine right and called by Jesus Christ the only Son of the living God and one on whom the Holy Ghost had vouchsafed to descend and sit upon his head and therefore certainly was to be preferred before any Linus or Anacletus of humane ordination and if at any time after Peter any other was to be preferred before the Bishop of Rome then her succession from Peter by which she claimed her Universall Jurisdiction is quite destroyed Bellarmine lib. 2. de Pontif. cap. 12. and Caâ—â—tan de Jnstitut Pontif. cap. 13. to evade this Argument will have their succession from the fact of Peter inasmuch as Peter was Bishop there and not from the Institution of Christ and so they make their Catholique Church matter of fact not Faith And the better to colour this their assertion they stick not to add that it was by the speciall appointment of Christ that Peter placed his See at Rome and died there and for this they fly to their never failing starting hole the Magazine of Romish Traditions and from thence borrow a story how Christ met Peter as he was flying out of Rome for fear of persecution and admonisht him to return that he might die at Rome and that the very print of their feet as they two talked together is at this day to be seen without the Gates of Rome The first founder of this story is Linus a foolish counterfeit writer as Baronius termes him and should any Christian give up himself to believe this story it were to forfeit his faith he hath in S. Peter and the Catholique Church which believed the profession of Peter to be the Dictates of the Holy Ghost by which is expressely declared that the heavens shall contain him till he come Acts 3.21 Now that he should be so corporeally there as to leave the print of his feet behind him is so much against the Scripture and the tenents of the Primitive Church as I shall shew in the sixteenth chapter that for my part I dare not admit it into my belief Yet suppose that Peter was at Rome and by a Vision was warned to go back to Rome I know not what this can make for the late Successors of Popes in that See to claim their Universall Jurisdiction they have no rule by divine Writ nor Revelation or vision to confirm it to them any further then by humane consent as by consent of Councells grant of Princes and by election of Cardinalls therefore whatsoever is of late acquisition if it be contrary to the rules of Christ given to his Apostles it is not for other Churches to believe and follow it nor to give their obedience to it as matter of Faith for they are built upon Christ the chief Corner-stone and have Apostolicall Foundations as S. John calls the Doctrine of the Apostles and if Christ by Vision warned Peter to go to Rome it cannot be construed that that Vision shall be a warrant for the succeeding Popes to claim the same Prerogatives Peter had in that it appeared to Peter it was to teach him to follow Christ to lay down his life for the profession of the faith in him who spared not his own bloud for the redemption of mankind and is from heaven but these succeeding Bishops are elected by men claim more then ever Peter had giving rules of obedience to others and lording it over Gods Heritage do thereby manifest their calling to be earthly and not true Successors of Peter Peter if he planted his See there it was by Vision from heaven but the late Bishops of Rome they consult with flesh and bloud and by sinister means by strivings contentions and plottings of aspiring and covetous men is the Chair continually furnished with a Patron in so much that a Cicilian Cardinall coming to the Election of a new Pope and finding such a change from the old way which was wont to be with supplications to God for the directions and assistance of his holy Spirit in so great a work and not by the then present practises to wit menaces promises of rewards perfas aut nefas to climbe the Chair ad hunc modum saith he fiunt Romani Pontifices and so departed and retired himself from that Scarlet tribe for ever after And here by the way I beg leave of the Reader to speak a word or two concerning the Cardinalls of Rome though I must confesse it be a little digression from the point but I will be brief and return to the subject matter of this chapter again I could wish to be satisfied by what Authority Paschalls did create the Parish Priests of Rome Cardinalls Of the Order of Cardinals for it is no spirituall order as is confessed in sum Sacrament Rom. Eccles Sect. 154. Cardidalis non est Sacerdos nec habet de jure potestatem absolvendi and it is no honor temporall because not derived from any King or Prince from whom all true titles of honor are derived 'T is true Carolus Magnus had then lately endowed the See of Rome with a Donation of the Exarchate of Ravenna and the Dukedome of Spoletto with some other territories which he annexed to the See for the support of hospitality and to promote the charity of the succeeding Popes of Rome not giving them thereby any Iura regalia as I shall shew anon in the
them and to flie away from them in their sight to fetch down vengeance from Heaven upon them and the day being appointed he began to take his flight in mount Capitolinus into the air and that Peter by the power of the Lord Jesus brought him down and broke his bones which act of Peters occasioned his persecution for that Simon Magus was beloved of Cesar this Story is in the Roman Legends I could wish the Pope to make this moral use of this story to wit to beware how he exalts Rome above the heavenly Hierusalem for if he continue to cuff the Heavens with his towring waxen pinions he must expect the divine majestick rayes of the heavenly Sun to melt his proud supporters into nothing he must not think to exalt himself against God and prosper Is it not enough for him to be primus Episcoporum ordine but he will contrary to Gods Word be Supremus Potestate c. God gives wings to the Ant. that she may destroy her self the sooner let Romes Bishop be content with his own Province for it is a rule that that State that goes beyond the lists of mediocrity passes the bounds of safety all Churches of Europe would honour her as a sister but 't is unnaturall to love a stepmother we are all fellow members of Christ let not Rome therefore despise her sister England Let us strive together in love and let the Church that is at Rome salute the Church that is in England and let us greet each other with an holy kisse she must not rob England of her name of a Church if she think not to bastard her self for we are all ingrafted in the same stock and baptized into one faith by the spirit of Jesus it is not for her to be busy in anothers diocess to judge of our matters of discipline or doctrin in that wherein we differ from her any further then that if she conceive we erre to give admonishment to those of her own Province they fall not into the like cōdemnation she must not upon this score deny the society of Christian believers the name of a church Admit the unfriendly appellations of Schismaticks and hereticks which they bestow upon us were deserved Haereticus est pars ecclesiae because we do not in all points agree and communicate w th Rome yet we must not therefore be denyed to be a church for this assertion I have the authority of the Councell of Trent I say which was wholly gathered of men against the reformed churches and men totally for the Popes supremacy yet they did not deny but that Schismatichs and Hereticks were in the Catholike Church and might confer orders administer and baptize and the councel of Florens agrees herewith sum Sacrament Rom. Ecclesiae Sect. 136.28 and therefore it is very harsh dealing in the Doctor to deny us this which their own Councels allow so that Saint Pauls saying is verified in him Heb. 12.15 when one falls away from the faith a root of bitternesse springs up in him and that 's the reason the Doctor is so harsh against the English Church The name Protestant The name Protestant and English Protestant which the Dr. so much spurns at doth not at all speak us members cut off from the old stock the Catholick Church for as the Doctor maintains that the name Romane Catholick is proper and significant language and sense so may we as well say English Protestant and with more reason for we will note by the Doctors distinction thereby the difference between our discipline doctrine only for our particular selv s assert the Catholick faith thereby to manifest the readinesse of us a particular member of the Catholick Church to give the head thereof our Master Christ for the word Protestant is comprehensive of Catholick and is no more but to assert the faith which faith is Catholick so that an English Protestant may be said truly to be he that will hold stick to and to his power maintain the Catholick faith taught and maintained in the English Church For the word Protestant though of a new addition proves not the Religion new or profession not agreeable to the Old Faith and profession of the Primitive Churches but being added with reference to their profession is an evidence of their zeal and affection to maintain and professe that ancient and Catholike truth For we do not professe our selves to have left the Catholike faith once preached and professed at Rome but that Rome has left of to be a Catholick Church bringing in strange delusions and perswading people to believe lies which especially since her pretence to universality has been much studied to make her new claims good whereas we desire only to impugne her late errors and to protest against them to maintain the ancient faith and though in this we may to some seem to set our selves against the Church of Rome to forfeit our interest in the Catholike Church because as they suppose we claimed our Religion from her yet there is nothing lesse for we are a Province and had a Metropolitane of our own and might call a Councell and reform things amisse by the authority Ecclesiasticall without appealing to Rome nor do we hereby forfeit the title of a Church But rather justifie the same in respect we differ in nothing but we would submit it to a free Generall Councel and though we were hereticall in some points yet having a society of believers in Jesus and having Apostolicall orders amongst us we still may without offence to any retain the name and appellation of a Church CHAP. IV. Of the right of Collation to Bishopricks and of the Ordination of Bishops of succession of Pastors and particularly of the Succession in England that the Pope ought not to intermedle in the appointing of Bishops in England THe Doctor has a great spleen towards our succession of Bishops in our Church and would fain perswade the world we are not of the Catholick Church for our defect therein It rests therefore that I clear our Church from that new devised scandall Ecclesia non consistit in hominibus ratione potestatis vel dignitatis Ecclesiasticae vel secularis quia multi Principes summi Pontifices inventi sunt qui à fide apostatasse propter quod ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera confessio fidei veritatis Could we not prove one line of succession it much matters not for we may notwithstanding lay claim to be of the Catholick Church and having a society of believers in Christ do notwithstanding make a Church If we agree with the Apostles and Fathers of the Primitive Church it is sufficient saith Tertullian to give us the name of Catholike Church Ecclesia quae licet nullum ex Apostolis authorem suum praeferant tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minus Apostolicae reputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae Though our first planter
was consecrated by the Imposition of Hands of Barlow Coverdale and Korey three of Queen Maries Bishops and two suffragan Bishops more as appears by the act of Consecration for that our succession was not totally interrupted or if it had I hold that succession of Bishops is no inseparable mark of a true Church for if so then where was the Church before Christ for he was not of Aarons succession Succession no inseparable mark of a true Church but after the order of Mesehisedeck and Peter was designed of Christ having none to go before him so that succession is no absolute mark of a true Church And whereas the Doctor objects that we are beholding to the Romish Bishops if our succession was not interrupted I have already proved that we had Sacramentall Orders at least if not governing Bishops before ever Eleutherius sent any Priests into England Ante 24.32 2 4 chap. our English writers say these two which were sent to Rome by Lucius were Bishops however they were in Holy Orders though I rather incline to think that none excercised any Episcopall Jurisdictions till by the Prince Christianity was publickly professed and being in Orders did consecrate others and there were others which had given to them the imposition of Hands from whom and not meerly from Rome we claim a succession of Pastors yet I might admit we had it from Rome and though all of the Romish Institution were extinct yet we continue a succession for that still we are pars ecclesiae though Hereticks But that 's but their begging of the question we appeal to the Scriptures primitive Councells and Fathers to Judge who are of us two the Scismaticks or Hereticks and I submit to the Judicious reader to censure or condemn us in the points here controverted whether Rome or we be in the Errour Thus briefly I have answered the Doctors condemning of us for want of Succession and have in some sort proved that the Church of Rome cannot properly be said a true Church in respect of her Succession Ante 9. Rome uncertain in her succession chap. 2 of which more in the next chapters for that she is uncertain in it and many of the Bishops of Rome usurpers in it so I will now proceed to examine the rest of his marks by which he hath distinguished her Truth and Catholickship and shall prove that she may not ascribe to her self the Title of the Catholick Church for and by reason of any of them CHAP. V. That the Church of Rome hath been and any particular Church may be Invisible THe first marks by which the Doctor hath laboured to prove Rome the true Church to wit Universality and Antiquity are already answered in that I have Proved others equall and some ancienter then the Church of Rome it now followes to look a little further after her whilst she may be found for shortly she shall be Invisible The Church Visible is a Company professing the Doctrine of the Law and the Gospell Visibility using the Sacraments according to Christs Institution in which company are many unregenerate as Hypothules as by the Parable of the seed and tares is manifest The Church Invisible is a company of those onely which are elect to Eternall life of whom it is said No man shall pluck my sheep out of my hands Joh. 10.28 is Universal or comprehensive of all the Elect which both now have heretofore living had one Faith The Church visible is Universall in respect of the dispersed Companies of those that professe one faith in Christ which must continue till the end of the world And the Visible Church is particular in respect of place and habitation and of diversity of Rites and Ceremonies as England Rome c. which particular Churches may becoming Invisible and particularly Rome hath been Invisible in respect of her Assemblies and is invisible in relation to the true Faith and Doctrine for though at present she hath companies of men which assemble to worship God and serve him in the Sacrament yet shee therein followes not Christs institution she is now invisible in respect of Faith and Doctrine and in respect of Men she cannot boast of this mark of Visibility but Tares grow as well as Wheat and as Rome hath been invisible in these respects so may any other particular Church be Invisible Elijah complained that he was left alone A particular Church may be Invisible and that the Prophets were slain that complaint of his saith the Doctor doth not prove that the true Church may be Invisible for saith he that complaint was uttered with relation to the Kingdome of Israel onely wherein Elijah then was and not with reference to the Kingdome of Judah where Elijah was not persecuted by Ahab and where the Church of God doth flourish This his Argument in my opinion proves what is objected against the Church of Rome It is true it is an Argument that the Church shall not be Universally Invisible but if by the true Church he mean the Church of Rome and I think he would not otherwise be understood it is no Argument but that it may be Invisible it is true at one instant of time the Church shall not be universally invisible God having promised his Spirit to be with the Apostles in their teaching of Nations to the worlds end but yet in any particular place it hath been and may be Invisible as he confesses himself he saith it was invisible in relation to the Kingdome of Israel and in Judah they knew not whether to resort when the Temple it self was defiled neither was there Place nor Sacrifice nor High Priest the Priest was wicked the Temple was defiled 2 King 19.2 and when the Doctor is charged with its being invisible in Judea he pleads it invisible in Ethiopia the Eunuch having received the Faith by Philip and so by these landskips he makes intervalls of darknesse proving that in particular places it was Invisible and if so then may not Rome being a particular Church boast of absolute truth by reason of this mark of Visibility we doe not go about to prove the Church universally invisible at one instant of time whilst we say that any particular Church as Rome may be Invisible but that no one particular Church but at some time may be Invisible Time was when both Rome and we agreed in the same Principles of Religion conform to the Rules of Scriptures Councels and Fathers but of later years Rome being grown above Apostolicall Orders abusing the indulgence of Christian Princes and other Churches towards her She hath turned the grace of God into wantonnesse converting Premacy into Supremacy and that Supremacy into Infallibility and so having acquired that uncontrolable Prerogative by the dull consent of some lame Princes and blind servile slavish People she became the onely evangellicall cradle accounting the Scriptures dead Letters and to receive articulate sense from her dictates and so for her own
her Church be like the Temple of Venus in which there was a Lanthorn made of the stone A Beston whose nature as Isidore lib. 15. de Genuus saith is such that being once set on fire no wind nor rain can extinguish it which made the Heathen people Idolize it but she must not think so to delude us we know her Virgin Lamp is sunk in its sockets and that fuliginous liâ—â—k composed of adulterate combustibles which she hath set up in its room is but a thing of exhalation the heavenly Sun from whom she formerly borrowed light having withdrawn his shining beams from her terrestriall Orb and so she 's left in both internall and external darknesse her understanding being darkned in that whilst the truth is removed froÌ„ her she thinks others see it with her and that she neither hath been nor can be invisible the contrary whereof is plain by what I have already proved Romes Church hath been Invisible and by this that followes As the Church of Rome hath been and may be Invisible in respect of persecution so hath she been by reason of the vacation of her Head The Doctor in his 22 Chapter fol. 360. sayes the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church because her Bishop is the Head thereof and hath been so accounted through all Ages That he hath not been so reputed through all Ages appears by the testimony of the first Councels and if Rome be the Chatholick Church in respect that the Pope is the Head then it followes that the Catholick Church hath been Invisible because of the vacation of that Head for cessante causâ cessat effectus The light of the body is the Eye which is placed in the head and if the body be without the eye the whole body is in darknesse If then this Mark of Visibility be such an incident and inseparable token of her truth I would fain know where the Universall Head of the Church was whilst Rome had no Bishop for either they must confesse that the Univensall Church must be in darknesse for want of a Head and so they make Gods promise of none effect if the Church be universally hid or else they must confesse that Romes Church is but a particular Member of the Church and that then like the Church of the Israelites or the Church of Ephesus she is subject to be made invisible for a time and that she hath been invisible may appear by these enfuing proofs Two yeers together after Pope Nicholas the fourth no Pope was chosen and when after much dissention amongst the Cardinâ—ls Celestine was chosen Boniface the 8th murdering him was made Bishop in his stead where was the visible Head whilst Benedict the tenth and Nicholas the second both stand Popes at once The Clergy who then had the Election of the Popes not daring to proceed to a new Election to crosse Benedict who was very much beloved of the Citizens of Rome withdrew themselves to Sene and there elected Gerrardus Bishop of Florence by the name of Nicholus 2d who was the onely favouâ—â—ite of Hildebrand whom Hildebrand caused to be made Pope that he as then not ripe for the Seat might under him rule all for Pope Nicholas was but a dull fellow though proud and ambitious of Honour and be sure when he saw his own time to out him that he might succeed in the Chair and so it happened accordingly for Hildebrand succeeded Nicholas 2d two fit to go together the one bringing in at the Councel of Lateran the new Doctrine of Transubstantiation the other maintaining the then never heard of sin of the Popes power to depose Kings Where was the triple Crown when at once there was 3 Popes as Innocent 7th Gregory 12th and at the Councell of Pise Alexander 5th chosen I might adde more of this nature but I will reserve the rest of my arrows to shoot at his other Markes and shut up this point and conclude that the Church of Rome in respect of Persecution and vacancy of her Bishops cannot be the onely Chatholick Church and distinguished to be so by any certain Infallible rule of a constant Visibility CHAP. VI. That the Church of Rome cannot be reputed and taken for a true Church in respect of her Unity in Doctrine or Sanctity of Life onely CHrists Coat was seamlesse and the Souldiers cast Lots for it that Coat was to teach the Apostles unity and concord The Ministers of the old Temple were clad in White thereby to betoken their Innocency Let us look upon Romes present Church and see if her Pastors be not worse then the Souldiers in rending in pieces the one and like Baals Priests not having any right to the other And who please to examine their private practices how they agree with their publique Professions will find such a disproportion and dissonancy that it will be hard to judg whether his Holiness's Decrees as compendiums and true abstracts of the Cannons of Councels or his Pontificall Robe as the Conusance of Peters successour then with them lesse of agreeablenesse and representation the one privately thwarting the publick edicts of General Councels and the other publickly unsuitable and dissonant to a Minister of the Gospell so that a man cannot at any time judge by his outside what his inside should be nor prove by his inner closet that ever he was in the publick Halls so that I may return the Doctors saying against Beza Luther and others more properly and fitly to the Pope Vide uiram tunica filii tui sit vel non The Church of Rome would fain have us to believe that she is free from the blood of this and that Prince basely by her practices and instruments assassinated and barbarously despoiled of their Crownes and Scepters and if any question arise about such businesse she is ready to disavow all privity to the act though the scene was studied in her Cardinals Conclave and acted abroad by her own emissaries as who please to peruse the Anatomy of Popish Tyranny will find presidents enough of this nature but it makes not much to my present purpose I will forbear to trouble the Reader with them I will proceed to shew her discords and variances in point of Doctrine She professes to maintain the Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon and Carthage and the Councell of Constant hath appointed an Oath to be taken by the Pope at his installing to that purpose But how little he performes that Oath or observes the Rules of those Councels let what I have said in the 2d Chapter serve to witnesse The Church of Rome in this respect I mean the Pope enchathedrated who judicially declaring any thing as Pope is confessed by all to represent the Church may be compared to a Water-man who looks one way and rowes another She may have some land marks tokens to steer by but she quickly layes those observations and wanders into unknown latitudes one Pope this way another that the
it was then the time when such a brutish Leo who was the head and reputed Oracle of the Church should belch forth such bold blasphemies thereby to bring in the doctrine of Divels and to obtrude upon the Consciences of men a new profession of a Stygian Creed Nor was this Leo the onely Blasphemour of the God of Heaven Wicked Popes of those that possessed the Romane Chair but to manifest to the world that these anti-christian aberrations from the Divine rules of Truth are common I much fear they are incident to the Popes of that See He hath both before him and after him Popes after his own heart Sixtus the 4th and Alexander the 6th his Predecessours the one denying there was a God Riserat ut vivens caelestia numina Sixtus sic Morceus nullos credidit esse Deos and the other saith Sanazer dissolved both Gods Lawes and mans Lawes and believed not that there was a God And Clement the seventh and Julius the third his Successours the one in heart doubting whether there was a Heaven though outwardly he taught both that Hell and Purgatory insomuch that when he drew towards his end he said to those that stood about him that he hoped shortly to be resolved of that he had so long doubted to wit whether there was a Heaven or Hell or no of whom this was said Contemptor divum scaelerum vir publicus hostis The other not inferiour to him in this height of wickednesse insomuch that the Papists themselves report divers speeches proceeding from him which savoured of Atheisme I might if I would have been very inquisitive have made a large muster-Role of these wicked Prelates but I rather weep then rejoyce that I should meet with any Records of this nature to refute the Doctour in this point of their pretended Sanctity nor is this their case onely I suspect that in most Churches have been many Ministers bad men according as our Saviour saith There must Tares grow up in the Corn till the end of the World According to the Proverb Christ cannot have his Church but the Devill will have his Chappell Satan is busie to cast his evill seed into the field and scarce any field so well manured and tilled having their stony hearts melted and their clods of flesh mollified with the beams of the Heavenly light that in some corner thereof hath not this Zizania growing and sprung up as high as the tops of the Corn thereby to teach us that in our best estate and condition we have not whereof to boast The Angels which are the Reapers and the labourers to be sent into the Harvest will find both Tares and Corn growing in the field they are called Labourers to gather the Elect and Reapers to throw the Tares into the fire but both must grow together till the end of the world but I hast to an end of this point The Doctor nor any other must not boast of the Truth of the Church of Rome in this respect for if they make this an absolute Signe then in respect their Popes the Head of that Church and declared it to be above Councels have been wicked it followes that she is not the true Church I must confesse that where this Mark is to be found it is demonstrative of a true Church it is a perswasive argument but no positive signe of a true Church In the twelve Apostles one was a Devil yet God made him the Instrument to bring to passe our Salvation the Devill confessed Christ we must not therefore deny him So then as the wicked practices of Pastors is no absolute condemnation of the truths they shall deliver to others so their uprightnesse of morall conversation is no positive rule to demonstrate the purity of their Faith For upon this Rule Christians Turks Jewes and Pagans may be all of a true Church which is absurd to hold therefore we must not absolutely conclude Rome the true Church upon the score of sanctity of life CHAP. VII That the Church of Rome cannot be reputed and taken for a true Church in respect of Miracles and of her abuse in maintaining Images in the Church THe Doctor is pleased to argue the truth of Romes Church from her miracles and he shewes that he has not travelled beyond Seas for nothing est natura hominum novitatis avida he has been peeping into her Legendary-stories that he might be furnished upon the authority of a traveller to send news to England For my own part I dare not give up my self to such delusions as it is wel known the Church of Rome uses towards the people to gaine their faith to believe in his Holiness the Pope as to credite the most scarce any of her miracles and that the rather for that it has been by experience found out especially in England that most of them were feigned and invented only to cheat the people into a blind obedience and I perswade my self if the Doctor had known as much as I do by the reading of histories in this point which histories may as well chalenge belief as the humane tradions of Rome he would never have insisted upon this mark but as it fares with men that are groping in the dark sometimes to run their heads against posts so the Doctor having forsook the light he was in and as yet being not well acquainted with the windings and stranges mazes that are in the dark cloisters to which he has betaken himself at unawares he dashes his head against the door of miracles which makes him recule with affront but I 'll so much be his friend that I 'll help him to revenge his quarrel I 'll pick the lock and furnish him out of her stores with miraculous knick-knacks It were to make this book swell with impossible trumperies Miracles to report the thousand part of her legendary stories as that Saint Dennis carryed his head in his hand after it was strucken off and of Saint Clement the first who being cast into the Sea with a milstone about his neck the sea forsook the shore three miles and there was found a Chappel ready built where his body was bestowed and many such like stories are to be found in Bozius de Saguius These fictious wonders fill the ears not the hearts of many therefore the Doctor might have done well to have followed Bozius example who finding his grand inventions meet with smal belief in these coasts he runs adrift till he came to Congo Colachina and Japonia and in his return tels of wonders done there and so gaines of some an opinion of belief who will rather seem for satisfaction to the reporter to lead credulous ears to history then upon an unknown score to censure him of falsity wherefore he goes on with their patience to tell them that in these forrain Indies he did but lay the Gospel upon a womans breast and the devil flew from her as if he had been shot out of a gun he but set up
incorporeal and infinite Isai 40.18 To whom shall we liken God or what similitude shall we set up unto him It is true that God of old represented himself in mans shape but we must not therefore think to make semblances of him it is lawful for him to do as he pleases but not for us to make such representations of him as are not commanded Besides those visible shapes by which he vouchsafed to appear had God after a special manner with them and in them present to command and hear them to whom he so manifested himself which cannot be ascribed to mens representations of him which are against Gods order he forbidding us to turn the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of a corruptible man Rom. 1.13 And though some urge that such semblances serve as Lay-mens books to teach them to know Christ yet that is no excuse for the use of such sith God hath ordained his Church to be taught by his Word and Sacraments and not by these And whereas the Doctor urges that they serve to stir up men to give honour to the thing signified by the signe that must be understood of a true signe ordained by him who hath authority to ordain it and the will of him that is honoured prescribing the honour to be given to the signe which neither he nor any else can prove that Christ should be honoured by such signes And as it is not lawful to make such representations of Him so neither of any creature to the end to give worship to the signes as significations of what they represent And yet I allow that the curious Draughts and Paintings of Ecclesiastical Stories and of other Portraictures set forth with art and skill may be used to adorn our Churches so that no adoration be given to any such signes Wisely therefore did the Council of Constantinople called by Constantinus Images are dangerous to the people in forbidding the use of Images in the Church and pernicious was the Decree of the second Council of Nice declaring the contrary which hereby gives occasion of idolatry to the weak And there being no ground for them in the Scriptures but rather against them it were more safe although to the more learned they be no occasion of offence to abolish them then to retain the use of them in the Church But I doubt his Holiness will not easily be induced hereunto in respect they are much instrumental by Oblations made to them to increase his book for he with the people of Zachan in China feeds the Idols onely with the smoak of the Offering himself faring deliciously by such libations And although these golden pieces which those wooden gods procure him be the offerings of sins and sacrificed to Idols yet by vertue of his holiness he can easily wash that iniquity from them and teach it for a truth that when once they are laid up in his Holiness Chests the squallid nature of their inquination is changed and by a wonderful metamorphosis they become pure Peter-pence and therefore he will not willingly part with such gainful and profitable instruments They are of double use to him for they do not onely serve for the ends of gain but likewise to win the people to obedience by the seeming-miraculous apparitions of them and therefore by no means must the use of them be laid aside Though of themselves they are but manimate blocks yet as Toys and Rattles please Babies these delude the ignorant vulgar striking them into admiration of them which is none of the least occasions of the Papists being trained up in ignorance And whilst his Holiness can by their means be enriched who can blame him for retaining them in the Church of Rome But I return to the other Point concerning Miracles and will shut up this Chapter touching both with this advertisement to those that believe the Miracles of Romes Church as done by the power of God Not to give themselves to such delusion The Doctor confesses fol. 253. that by the power of Antichrist wonders may be done and most of Romes Miracles are known to be Mountebank-juglings and the Doctor confesses some may not be true and yet she proclaims all for true Miracles as proceeding from the Spirit of God She doth not declare out of her Legends which are true and which are false But her Legends being filled with several bundles of them she delivers all for true miracles and therefore is credit to be given to none of them as done by the power of the Spirit of God for did they work by that Spirit they would not lye in any one of them CHAP. VIII That the Church of Rome is not the true Church because of her pretended marks of conversion of Kingdomes and Monarchs or because of her not having been separate from any Societies of Christians more ancient then her self IF the church of Rome have converted any Church since her declining the Apostles doctrine it is no more then what the Arrians did unto the Goths and so by the Doctors own rule fol. 256. she hath not whereof to boast and if other Nations have the Apostles doctrine the pure and primitive faith they now differing in material points from Rome it serves rather to condemn her Apostacie then to record her charity towards them in that if she gave them faith it was but such an one as she her self condemnes or if they have the pure faith the present Church of Rome having faln away from the the faith of those first plants may not properly be called their mother-Church But however I will argue de facto that this mark is not only proper to Rome Conversion of kingdoms may as well be applyed to the Church of England which hath planted the Gospel in several Northern parts of the late discovered world and although not in so large a measure as the Spaniards Westward and the Portugals Eastward yet it manifests that other Churches have a title to that mark and that Rome must not soley monopolize that to her self Besides I do not think that many of the Plantations in the West were by immediate Mission from Rome but that the Bishops of Spaine and Portugal sent Priests thither to Preach Christ unto them and they and not the Bishops which his holiness sent to rule and govern the Churches so planted are to be called the converters of the Nations and People and â—bough the Priests so sent by the Spaniards and Portugals be of the same faith with the Church of Rome yet they coming from distinct provinces and not from the peculiar See of Rome and those Bishops having power to ordaine those Ministers and they by the command of their Prince being recommended to his new Plantations I wonder why Rome should for this bragg and vainely arrogate to her self that she is the sole converter of these Nations and Monarchs The Spaniard and Portugal had the faith of Christ first preached to them by Saint Paul who was himself amonst
them and the Church of Rome claimes from Peter who had not commission to carry the light to the Gentiles and to Kings For that as I said in the second Chapter the general commission given to go and teach all Nations Ante 13. 2 Chap. was afterwards restrained as â—o the Gentiles Paul being a chosen vessel thereunto ordained by God himself Besides Spain as I said before is a distinct Province from Rome and has held several councels without the Bishop of Rome as the several councels of Toledo Cardubia c. Wherefore if his priests have planted the Gospel how comes this to denote the truth of Rome But so it is that the Pope has got such a hank upon the Spaniards that he as Superintendent lords it over all his provincial Sees and whatsoever is done or acted which may bring glory or honour to the Church or if any profit may redound from thence his holiness is ready to patrize the action not allowing a jot to any Spanish provincials it not being consistent with his universality and headship to have a partner or sharer in any his exploits But if any thing amiss or enormious arise in these planted Churches his holiness then disclaimes to own them as his and declares them to be members of the Spanish Sees so that it fares with the Spanish Plantation as once it did to the Temple in Rome dedicated to Castor and Pollux which presently after the building obtained a sole name of Castors Temple whereupon Bubulus who was fellow-Conful with Câ—sar and did expend more in the publique Trophies of the City and in that contributed more fâ—â—ely to grace the City then Cesar during his Consulship did and seeing for all that that Cesar had the name and carryed all the honor of those and other actions wherein Bubulus was equally concerned merrily said it fared with him as it did with Pollux who had lost his name in the Temple And thus may the Spaniard and Portugal say of their Westerne and Easterne Plantations that it is with them as with Pollux they must not so much as be named the planters of the Cospel in those parts but his holiness alone must be said the sole converter of those kingdoms as if his painted Sepulcher were not sufficiently notorious without the varnish of the counterfeit Plaister And I wonder the Spaniard and Portugals should suffer themselves to be despoiled of these glorious works of their and thus to suffer the Pope like Venus transformed waiting-maid to minks it and pride himself in this disguise unless it be that the grave Dons have a designe upon the Papacy and for some private ends forbear at present but purpose cre long to shew a mouse before the counterfeit that he may discover his false habit and prove himself not the only Catholique father in respect of his converting of those kingdomes and thereby at once to manifest the depth of their policy and the Popes foolishness and vaine glory Rome has separated from the Churches more ancient then her self And as the Church of Rome cannot alone be said a true Church in respect of her converting of Nations so may she in no sort lay any just claime to that denomination in respect of the other mark by which she desires to be distinguished viz. her non-separation from Churches more ancient then her self The Doctor confesses that Jerusalem Antioch and other Churches are of more antiquity But Rome cannot be said to have separated from them in respect they were of Romes faith To which I answer it were more proper to say that Rome is of their faith because he confesses her puisnee to them and they to have the faith when Rome had not and they may lay claime to the former mark of conversion in respect they extended the faith to Rome and if Rome have converted any the first foundation coming from the Easterne Churches Rome ought not to chalenge that attribute which belongs to them in that particular And as these Churches were more ancient and had the true faith it is manifest that Romes title to this mark is as improper as her claime to be sole owner of the other for that she has made a separation in forsaking the Primitive faith and publique Decrees of the ancient holy and Catholique Church on earth as may appear by every particular point in question in this Troatise and by some others of which the Doctor not having started the question and I not minding to make her gap of separation wider then the Doctor himself has done do forbear to mention them I do keep my self only to answer those points upon which the Doctor doth insist It is manifest that Rome has in fundamental points changed her faith and though as she inclined or declined she drew these parts being too much addicted to imitate her upon a bare score of the antiquity of Romes having the pure faith to pin their faith upon her sleeve yet all other parts of Apostolical Plantations did not forsake their first faith and turn after the Lateran weather-cock There was a remaining part of the Greeks Church which the black wings of Mahomatisme and Judaisme had not overspread and in Aethiopia the light of the Gospel did still continue to shine neither were all the Indies of Portugal Plantation and so Rome to be their founder in that she claims to convert Portugal Demetrius Bishop of Alexandria sent Pantenus to Preach to the Indies not long after Christ The East Indies not totally converted by the Potugal and when he came thither he found Saint Matthews Gospel writ in Hebrew and left there by Saint Bartholomew which the said Pâ—ntenus brought to Alexandria by which it appears that some part of the Indies received the faith not from Rome with the Westerne Churches Fox Mar. 48. Therefore may we not conclude Rome to be the true Church or else the true Church has been utterly extinguished nor that because it was not of late any where else but where she planted therefore she cannot err or the like We must not with the Doct. upon this score argue that Rome hath not forsaken her first faith he himself confesses fol. Ante 192. that the faith was in Aethiopia by the Plantation of Philip And by this it appears some part of the Indies retaine the faith from the Plantation of Bartholomew nor can the Church of Rome deny this in regard that then she makes the Church universally invisible which is absurd and contrary to Christs promise For in that she in many points maintaines contrary to the Apostles Doctrine contrary to the first councels and contray to her own modern constitutions as shall appear in this next Chapter she may not properly be said the true Catholique Church in respect of her non-separation from a society of Christians more ancient then her self CHAP. IX That any particular Church may err that the Church of Rome is not Infallible that she hath erred in matters of faith as
laid before the holy Fathers Est firmamentum columna Ecclesiae Evangelium It onely is infallible in it self all other Councils and Traditions may erre saith Tom. lib. 2. contra Donatistos cap. 3. And though an Angel from heaven teach another doctrine no faith is to be given thereunto Tertullian contra Hermogen pag. 373. I reverence saith he the fulness plenitude and perfection of Scriptures as that which shews to me both the Maker and the things which are made Austin confesseth the authority of Scripture to be above the authority of the Church in his Epistles contra Manich. tom 6. cap. 4. The consent of people and nations the authority of the Church begun by miracles nourished with hope increased with charity established with antiquity succession of Priests and the name of Catholike saith he are great motives to keep me in the unity of the Church but above these he prefers the truth of Scripture in regard whereof he promiseth Manicheus to give more credit to his doctrine then to the Church if he be able to prove it out of Scripture These and many more authorities in this point might be produced to manifest what credit and reverence the Fathers of the Primitive Church did attribute to the sacred Oracles of God Now what may we think of those that count them a bare letter Inkie Divinity a matter of strife and ground of Heresies And by the Doctor fol. 255 the light of the Gospel is termed Ignis fatuus because not borrowed from Rome's dark lanthorn Others affirming that if any contemn the authority of the Romane Church that he shall not be able to assure himself of Scripture any more then of a Robinhood-tale To which I answer The Council of Laodicea can 59. which Council was held long before ever Rome's Bishop claimed a Supremacie over other Churches hath declared which shall be taken and accepted for Canonical Scripture and hath decreed that none else should be read in the Churches besides them we according to that Canon accept and embrace them and according to the ancient copies doth our Clergie retain them in the Church nor are we altogether beholding to Rome for the Translations 'T is true she hath a glorious Library as many witness the onely ornament of her Vatican Hill And in some competent measure is our Oxford replenished with the ancient Manuscripts of the Primitive Fathers and of old approved Translations of the Scriptures both after the Hebrew Syriack Rome not the onely dispenser of the Scripture Chaldee Greek and Latine Translations which the Fathers and the Reverend Governours of the Primitive Churches have permitted to be transmitted to other parts and in these later days we have been beholding to Rome for some Translations But she was not the first that sent the Gospel hither as may appear by Eleutherius his Epistle to Lucius You have heretofore saith he received the law and faith of Christ ye have within your Realm both the parts of Scripture out of which by the counsel of your Realm take a law and by that law rule your kingdom for you be Gods Vicar within your own kingdom c. And in this particular I think Rome as well as we is beholding to other Churches why then should she boast that we know not what is Scripture but that which she has delivered Had not the Apostles equal authority to teach all nations Doth not Peter direct his Epistle to the Saints which are dwelling about Cappadocia Galatia Asia and Bithynia and S. James to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad and S. Jude to all which are sanctified and called of God And S. Paul writes as well to the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians and Thessalonians as to the Romans wherefore how comes it that the Church of Rome should be the onely Monopolizer of Scripture Was not the holy Ghost given to them which Philip Paul and Barnabas did ordain as well as those Peter did ordain And admit that Peter was Bishop of Rome had not the rest of the Apostles received the holy Ghost as well as Peter did it not sit upon each of them like cloven tongues of fire And why should the Church of Rome boast her self to be onely and alone endowed with an onely spirit of interpretation Let none understand more then is meet to understand was S. Paul's instructions to the Romanes But such is the uncharitableness and presumption of the present Church of Rome that she accounts her self the onely wise interpreter and no other Church to have the spirit of discerning the Truth unless she have received that spirit mediately from her I must needs tell her that she has no warrant to arrogate this transcendency and super-excellencie in this point of wisdom from any divine precept it is but her own humane institution no other Church approving of it and so it is but the wisdom of this world which as S. Paul says 1 Cor. 1.20 is found foolishness before God and according to that saying of Solomon Prov. 12.15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes The treasure of the holy Writ is no common or ordinary bank That the Scripture contains things necessary to salvation but a precious store of eternal happiness in them is laid up life everlasting according to that of S. Paul Rom. 1.16 It is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth to the Jew first and also to the Greek and 2 Tim. 3.14 Timothy had known the Scriptures from a childe which were able to make him wise unto salvation It is profitable to teach to improve to correct to instruct in righteousness that a man of God may be absolute being made perfect to all good works Therefore are we bidden Joh. 4.39 to search the Scriptures for in them is eternal life and they are they which testifie of Christ It is true All things that Jesus did are not written saith S. John but saith he these things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and believing ye might have life through his Name Joh. 20.31 Cyril lib. 2. upon that place of S. John saith Non omnia quae Dominus facit transcripta sunt sed quae Scriptores tam ad mores quam ad dogmata sufficere putarunt ut recta fide operibus ad regnum coelorum perveniamus And Saint Austin likewise says that all things were not written but onely so much was written as was thought to be sufficient to the salvation of the faithful And whereas in the 20 of the Acts ver 27. it is said I have not spared to shew unto you the whole counsel of God Lyranus and Carthusianus expound it onely to be understood of things pertaining to our salvation which S. Austin lib. de doctr Christian 2. cap. 6. plainly affirms that all things necessary to our salvation are plainly contained in the written Word And Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 1. We know saith he
if it be hid it is hid unto them that are lost whom the God of this world hath blinded â—hat the light of the Gospel of the glory of Jesus Christ should not shine unto them 2 Cor. 4. For it is plain by the Scripture that Jesus was the Christ Acts 18.28 And Joh. 5. The Father hath sent the Son and his works bear witness of him and the Scriptures testifie of him God the Father God the Son and God the holy Ghost the Comforter his Passion Resurrection Ascension and the coming of the holy Ghost being so plainly preached and set down that a man may read them running and this Word endureth for ever and this Word is preached unto us 1 Pet. 1.25 And Joh. 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life and what need we any more This is eternal life to know the Father and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 17.3 He is the Way the Truth and the Life We believe that thou art Christ the Son of the ever-living God and thou hast the words of eeternal life Joh. 5.68 Hence S. Austin lib. de doctr Christianae cap. 9. did affirm that all things pertaining to mans salvation are plain and easie to be understood And Chrysostome upon 2 Thessal 2. Hom. 3. Omnia plana sunt sunt eÌ„x divinis Scripturis quaecunque necessaria sunt manifesta sunt It is not therefore an idle and presumptuous doctrine in the Church of England to maintain this since we have both authority of Scripture and the Fathers for the same Nor do we hereby rob the Church of her authority to judge of and determine controversies and those things that are doubtful in the Scriptures There are some things of Discipline and pertaining to Manners in which the Scriptures may be doubtful or not easie for every capacity to understand and for those it is fit the Church should determine them and having determined them to impose them by the Princes authority as Rules of faith upon the people and so teaches the Church of England in the twentieth Article Lay-men to read Scripture But the main things necessary to our salvation concerning our faith to be grounded upon Jesus the Son of the ever-living God the author and finisher of our faith those as I said before are clear and manifest and though Angels from heaven should teach any other doctrine they are to be accursed Gal. 1. Wherefore sith this is plain and manifest in Scripture that Jesus gave himself for our sins and whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life and for that this faith is given by the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 12. Phil. 1.29 2 Pet. 1.3 and Matth. 16.17 and is the gift of God and no man hath it of himself for flesh and blood doth not reveal it and for that Christ has prescribed the way how and by what means we shall obtain this gift even by searching the Scriptures Rom. 10 It must needs be a grievous and intolerable sin in the Church of Rome to debar the people of this means to attain this precious jewel the salvation of their souls Upon these grounds do we allow the Laytie to read the Scripture but we do not hereby give them liberty to interpret it according to their will and humour They may in them finde Jesus to be the life everlasting the Spirit giving them faith and therefore must not be debarred the means But they are not allowed in points of difficulties to be their own interpreter but to repair to the Fathers of the Church to declare the meaning of those Oracles of God to whom it is given by the power of the holy Ghost to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God Matth. 13.11 For which end Christ has commended the Scriptures to the Church that she may discern keep and publish them Christ opened the Scriptures to his disciples Luke 24. and they preached it to all nations The Apostle Paul 1 Tim. 3. calls the Truth the fountain of the Church and the Church the pillar of Truth as Solomon made his Chariots to have a golden axletree and pillars of silver understanding by the axletree says one sound doctrine by the pillars the faithful teachers of the same The Scripture is the truth of God and the Church the house of God the Scripture the foundation the Church the pillar and the foundation is not sustained by the pillar but the pillar supported of the foundation Truth makes the Church not the Church the Truth We are to observe the Scripture as it were the Candle the Church as the Candlestick according as S. Austin upon Gal. 1. says Church how to interpret The Scriptures are not true because the Church says they are the Word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the Word of God Now as we ascribe to our Church this priviledge of interpretation of difficult and obscure places Scriptures above Councels â—nte Chap. 9. we do not either deprive Rome of her right or too much extol our own Church Nor do we hereby make void the Laytie's reading of Scripture The Laytie may read it because the main points are easie and it is the means to obtain faith as well as by hearing the Church in those points that are easie and it is the way enjoyned by God to attain faith as well as by preaching and he has promised his Spirit to those that seek him earnestly and with unfeigned lips And when it shall please God by their reading to give them of his holy Spirit that Spirit will guide them to come to the Church to be informed in those things they understand not or shall the Church understand that through weakness they misunderstand any point in those Scriptures and she shall reprove them the same Spirit guiding them into the way of Truth will lead them to hearken to the dispensers of the sacred Oracles And if the Church shall deliver any thing which to other Churches may seem strange and not satisfactory she as I said before in the precedent Chapter will call a Synod and if there the business receive not an absolute and satisfactory resolution to submit the business to a General Council rightly constituted and free in it self And in the mean time if our Church offend the Church of Rome for that she differs from her in any particular let her make her self capable to reform by a General Councel by taking off the slavery that lies upon it by the Popes Canonical Law and we shall submit our Church to the free debate in a perfect Council to decide the points wherein we differ otherwise the Church of Rome might seem to have just cause to accuse us for that we cast off the discipline of the Primitive Churches as to that particular but in the mean time upon the former recited texts of Scripture upon the authority of
must we admit that they taught any thing contrary to what they writ they had the Holy Ghost that never-erring Spirit that did lead them into all truth and could not at one time write one thing and after teach another We allow that they did deliver traditions to the people but Saint Peter in his 1 Epist 1.25 tells us it was the word of the Lord that was preached amongst them for nothing contrary to that was preached and delivered and that the people were bound to observe all things they did teach by the commandment of God Mat. 28.20 and therefore Saint Paul enjoynes the Thessalonians 2 Thess 2.15 to hold fast the traditions they had learned whether by word or Epistle The old Testament was delivered by the Jews and confirmed by Christ and his Apostles and therefore the Church of Rome did embrace that and reject the other traditional books of the Jews which were not by Moses written or by Christ approved of Now we make bold in this to follow her example if the Church of Rome have any traditions which are not repugnant to the written word we shall not disallow of them but if they make against that with the Evangelists and the Apostles have delivered to us in writing which writing we approve in our Judgement as the infallible oracles of God we by her own eâ—ample as rejecting those traditions of the Jews which were not consonant to the written law of Moses or approved of by Christ and likewise by warrant of Christ not to leane to the traditions of men and to cast off the commandments of God desire to be excused for not embracing every tradition the Church of Rome would obtrude upon us and we perswade our selves that sith she hath rejected the traditions of the Jews because not warranted by the written word she cannot be so impartial to deny us the same liberty to reject her traditions upon the same score and that the rather because she hath not so good a ground for her traditions as the Jews had in respect Moses talked with God face to face Exod. 33. Besides the Jews traditions were certaine and reduced into writing by the late Rabbins and therefore the Church of Rome might better have embraced them then think that we shall follow hers which are daily of new invention After the destruction of Jerusalem and scattering of the Jews Papist traditions uncertaine one Rabbi Juda Hannasi got leave of Antoninus to assemble the people and because the books of their old traditions were utterly lost and perished they then being met writ all that they could remember The Jews Talmud calling it Mischna that is Deuteronomy or a Law reiterated which was a memorial of their Cabala or traditional law which collections of theirs were afterward Anno Christi 219. by Rabbi Jochanan enlarged and called the Talmud which Talmud was after Anno Christi 500. perfected and received as a Rule in all cases Ecclesiastical and civil So that the Jews having thus reduced their traditions into certainty it were more reasonable for the Church of Rome to embrace them then to think that we shall hand over head accept of her ever-growing traditional rules which are not held forth in any certainty to us but every day upon colour of Church-traditions she plays an Affrican trick and brings out new monsters so that I may say it is as easie to make a gown for the Moon as for any man to think he can keep and observe her traditional rules The variety of her strange production in this particular might serve to cloy the appetite of any that should desire to render himself obedient to her rules but the vanity of them and their contrariety to Gods word doth more especially and justly detaine every good Christian for being her superstitions proselyte to embrace them and eâ—pecially those Christians which are not within her jurisdictions nor belonging unto his charge Amongst whom I may rank our English Church which being of Apostolical foundation and in power and Church-authority equal with the Church of Rome and for that the Law of God was as well extended to other Churches and particularly to her as to Rome as I have proved in the second and fourth Chapters may in that respect as well prescribe traditional law to the Church of Rome as she should send forth her historical edicts to England Yet lest some may think that if uppon this score we cast off her traditions we do but thereby evade the question of validity and authority of her traditions in themselves as they are by her held forth unto the world I will therefore make it evident that neither those of her own Church and province nor the Romane Catholicks of other Kingdomes are bound or ought to receive and embrace whatsoever traditions the Church of Rome shall hold forth to them as being so imposed upon them to be received for matter of faith I have in some measure in the former Chapter treated upon the authoâ—ity and excellency of Scriptures wherein I have shewed that she is the ground and foundation of the Church and if so then it follows that whatsoever tradition the Church shall deliver as matter of Doctrine must either stand upon this ground-work or else â—t is a paper-building an airey peece a black cloud of humane condensing hurried to and fro by contrary winds â—ill the loosly-contracted vapour dash â—t self upon this rock of Christ and â—â—ke smoak vanish into nothing She â—s the touchstone must distinguish the gold from the drossy and courser peeces of Rom's treasure she is the Fan must winnow and purge the floor of the Churches granary from all chaff and light corn and from those Tares which being cast into her field by Satan sprung together with her better graine And hereupon the good Emperor Constantine as it is recorded in the Ecclesiastical History lib. 1. cap. 7. did say That seeing the Evangelical and Apostolical books and the Oracles of the Old Testament do plainly teach us any thing that we ought to know or learn concerning God whether concerning his Divine Nature as Saint Luke useth the words Acts 17.25 Or his attributes and qualities as Saint Peter applies it 2 Pet. 1.5 Or his Law and Religion as the penner of Maccabees takes it 2 Mac. 4.7 Away therefore with all strife and seek for the solution of these matters out of the Scriptures inspired by God himself And herewith agreeth Bellarmine Tom. 1. Col. 2. saying That the books of the Prophets and Apostles are the true word of God and the sure and true rule of our faith And as I said before in the precedent Chapter All things necessary to our salvation are contained in the Scriptures It is true indeed that in the Scriptures we do not finde any mention of Peter being Bishop of Rome or of the Assumption of Mary the mother of Jesus nor can we finde by Scriptures that Saint Luke was a Painter or that Nicodemus had so much
which she would derive all her power and jurisdictions doth therefore teach the people this tradition under paine of Anathema That Jesus met Peter as he was going out of Rome and the steps of their feet as they two stood talking have left an impression in the place which remaines to this day Now let a man examine the Scriptures and he shall find Saint Peter himself witness against this tradition in the third of the Act. 21. where he says That Christ ascended and the heavens shall containe him till he come which coming is called his second coming to Judgement according to the Article of the Apostles Creed and therefore that he should be bodily there with Peter so bodily as to leave the impression of his footsteeps is against Saint Peters own saying against the whole current of the Scriptures and against the Apostles Creed So I referr this to the Reader whether to believe Saint Peter himself or his pretended successor in this point It may be that Peter might see Christ in a vision as Stephen did Act. 7. but not bodily for that he is there in heaven whom the heavens must containe till all things be dissolved Another tradition the church of Rome teaches How that in the Church of the Fryers minors at Rome is a picture of the Virgin Mary drawn by Saint Luke which Gregory carrying in procession in the time of a Plague the Plague ceased and they taught the people that it was by our Ladyes meanes for the honor done to her Image and so ascribe that to her which is due unto the Lord God he correcting by Judgements and out of his goodness extending his mercy as seems best to his divine wisdome and hereby they neglect that duty God has enjoyned them in that they did flye to the Lady Mary for succor in that day of their visitation whenas God has commanded them to call upon him in the day of trouble and he will hear them The Papists likewise teach that in the Church of Sebastian in Rome an Angel appeared to Saint Gregory as he was saying Mass at the Altar of Saint Sebastian and said to him these words In this place there is true remission of all sins brightness and light everlasting joy and gladness without end And this favours of Atheisme to affirme that on earth there can be light everlasting as if the world should never have an end which is contrary to Scripture for that they plainly affirm an utter dissolution of all things 2 Pet. 3. And Saint Matthew witnesses How that at the end of the world the Sun shall be turned into darkness and the Moon and the Stars shall lose their light the Stars shall fall from Heaven and the powers of the Heavens shall be shaken They likewise teach that in the Church of Calixius is the Altar whereon Saint Peter said Mass which is not probable in respect he never mentions it in Scripture nor Saint Luke that ever he used any such thing besides the sacrifice of the Altar is against the Scripture as may appear in the sixteenth Chapter The Church of Rome likewise teaches that in the Church of Saint Johns the Lateran in Rome is a Chappel called the Sacrists wherein is remission of all sins both à poena culpa and that not far from the same Chappel is an ascent of thirty two steps which were the same Christ went up when he went before Pilate and were brought from Hierusalem thither and that whosoever ascends those steps for every step he hath a hundred yeers of pardon which is contrary to the Scriptures Matth. 1.21 It is Jesus that must save his people from their sins and the whole Scriptures witness that by his stripes we are healed it is his blood that is shed for many for the remission of their 〈◊〉 It is the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world Joh. 1.29 Neither is there salvation in any other Act. 4.12 and through his name all that believe shall receive remission of sins Act. 10.43 he being for that end sent into the world 1 Tim. 1.29 which gave himself for our sins that he might redeem us out of this present evil woâ—ld Gal. 1. and is a reconciliation for our 〈◊〉 1 Joh. 4. without which we are not cleansed his blood onely being our remission Hebr. 9. Wherefore how â—bominable is this Romish tradition which is for no other end but to cozen people out of their money who for the pardon to be received by going up those steps must liberally disâ—urse to his holiness use who more thinks upon that private advantage then Christian-like considers how by â—hat tradition he makes the death of Christ in vaine With many such like traditional stories doth the Church of Rome delude her blind votaries which I blush to repeate and will rather send the Reader to her own Legends where he shall finde great store of these Papal knocks then that I should be the â—uthor to discover these her fopperies which I rather wish were not at all then to her shame to be remembered For my part I honour Rome as the metropolis of Europe and her Church as being at first of Apostolical faith and doctrine and do heartily wish that these late gross absurdities I finde repeated of her were not true that so we might embrace her as one sister and might together serve the true and everliving God who is a Spirit and will be worshiped in Spirit and in Truth and that we might together keep the unity of Spirit in the bond of Peace for GOD is not the Author of confusion but of Peace as we see in all the Churches of the Saints Thus Reader I have briefly run through most part of the Doctors book and though I have not observed the very same method the Doctor has followed yet many of his Chapters being to one and the same purpose as who please to peruse his book will finde it true I have couched an answer to most material parts thereof in what I have formerly writ and now I am come to his twentieth Chapter which is concerning the Popes headship Now for that I have given answer to this in the second Chapter in relation to his universality it may be thought by some needless to treat any further thereof in relation to his spiritual jurisdiction and for that the Doctor hath not at all treated of his Temporal power it may be others be thought extravagant in me to add a Chapter concerning that particular Yet because that the Pope is bolstered up in this point by vertue of his Spiritual headship by many who extend it generally as well over temporalties as spiritualties And for that the Doctor having formerly treated of Romes Catholickship and of her universality and of her being the onely Catholick Church yet notwithstanding adds this twenteth Chapter of the Popes headship and for that as I said this headship is by same extended unto Temporalties I crave pardon to add this ensuing Chapter
I have partly shewed was beyond their compass to take from them The Jesuites being beaten from this hold of the Keys they betake themselves to the treble Pasce which after Christs resurrection was said unto Peter Joh. 21. and would fain deduce this power from thence and so perswade the world that the Shepherds Crook is the Arms of all other Sees not of Rome the Bishop thereof being no ordinary Pastor but one that is known by more Nable bearing viz. Mars a Papal Mitre ensigned with a triple Crown and a Cross Pater Sol which in my opinion stands for no good denotement of Episcopal dignity in respect it doth not sympathize with the Successor of Peter and therefore serves rather to denote him sprung of another tribe But this by the way They would fain perswade the world The treble Pasce doth not extend to depose Kings that this power was given to Peter by vertue of the treble Pasce and by his being Bishop of Rome is devolved upon the Pope which I have already touched in the second Chapter That nothing doth belong to Rome any more then anyother See Apostolique by any power thereby given I will onely for better illustration of the present point add this viz. That Peter and Paul both submitted unto Domitius Nero a cruel Heathen and persecutour neither did they thunder out any Excommunication against him thereby denouncing him uncapable to rule which if they had thought to have been so certainly they would not have concealed it at their sufferings when they saw they must die and all hopes of their natural lives debarr'd from them If Peter suffered at Rome he left no such Testimony behind him nor Paul neither so that for the Pope to aspire to this prerogative upon Peters score is an injury to that blessed Apostle he having received rules from his Master Christ to the contrary of which both he and the rest of the Apostles were faithful witnesses in their sufferings The Papists beaten from all Scripture there being neither from thence nor any practice Apostolical the least warrant for this their presumptuous claim they then begin to strive with flesh blood and forsaking the rules of Christ and the exmples of Peter and the rest of the Apostles notwithstanding they would have Peter to be the Rock of the Catholike Church they quit the harbor adjoyning to that Rock and rove themselves upon the billows of strange contests And as when the Fish Meron perceiving a storm lays hold upon a chance pimple stone thinks to save it self from the tossing of the waves by sticking to that whenas both it and its stone are tumbled to and fro at the will of the sea so these men think by a new-found invention of their own to make good this their bold assertion against all opposition whenas any reasonable Christian may easily refute the same and if with reason they will not be driven off it dash their brains against Peters Rock Wherfore they blush not to affirm that God was not provident enough to his Church if he should leave her without a head to rule and govern her and as a widow to be despoiled by any Heather or persecuting Prince and therefore of necessity the Pope must have this power they are the principal wards in S. Peters Keys to depose Princes and excite subjects to oppose them if occasion be otherwise the Church should want the Pope her Head that Pillar to support and that Eye to direct her as Cardinal Allen in his Apology observes Allen for deposing of Princes This Doctrine of Allen is gross and Heathenish tending to Blasphemy and infidelity infidelity in Gods promise he having promised his Spirit to his Church to the end of the world and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it she shall not be totally extirpated from off the earth till Shilo come though she may be invisible in this or that Country as I have shewed in the fifth Chapter and therefore Christ bids his Apostles suffer for righteousness sake for Sanguis martyrum shall be semen Ecclesiae Wherfore for Allen to affirme that the Pope must have this power or the Church will be lost argues his distrust in Gods promise to his Church And it likewise savours of Blasphemy to tye Gods providence to the Papal Chair and so denying him a power or will to remove the Candlestick from Rome and to give it to another Providence as Aquinas defines it Aquinas summa contr Gentiles is said to be invisible and remain in Gods secret councel Nondum rebus impressa for after it appears and showes it self in effects sensible then it is called Fate not Providence Now for him to tax God of improvidence unless the Pope should have this visible power of deposing Kings is neither Scholar nor Divine like he might as a Sooth-sayer of Egypt experimentally upon the coincidence of the effect of some inspection or Heathenish observation as that when the black Eagle shall preach upon Laterane Steeple the top of Saint Angelo shall be lifted up as was at the time of Otho 3. and Gregory the 5. c. Or have foretold that it was the Fate of Rome that if any Prince withstood the Pope he should be deposed as was in Henry 4. and Gregory 7. dayes but not to conclude this upon Gods Providence which no man by the reach of humane reason is able to pry into it is more transcendent then the consult of flesh and blood can apprehend Saint Paul cries out How unsearchable are his Iudgements and his waies past finding out who hath knowne the minde of the Lord or who was his Counsellor Rom. 11.34 And will Allen take upon him to circumscribe Gods Providence To know the secrets of mans heart is Gods attribute but such is the gross impiety of this blasphemous man that rather then the Pope should want excuse to depose Kings he will take upon him to know Gods heart and prove this prerogative by Gods Providence whereby he runs himself upon these absurdities He doth hereby spoyle the honour and credit of the glorious Martyrs by accusing them of error or ignorance of error for tamely suffering whenas they should have resisted of ignorance if they suffered because they knew not the will of God herein And he doth likewise give God the lye for if it was God's providence to his Church to resist in case Religion be opposed by the Prince sure he would not have bid Peter go back into Rome as the Papists pretend nor would he have prescribed the forementioned rules of obedience which are diametrically opposite to Allens pretended knowne Providence It is not the revealed will of God that the Crosier should resist the Scepter and the Mitre the Crown none of the Fathers of Romes Church ever practised or published that Doctrine before Hildebrands daies and if it was Gods Providence first known to Allen then Allen proves the Church of Rome to have been invisible for 1074 yeares
Popes Law This is that which every one must swear to maintain before he be admitted into the General Councel and whose blinde obedience is to be pitied as much as the Popes presumptuous ruling by this counterfeit Record is to be lamented And I much wonder the Christian Princes will suffer the Pope upon such groundless and unjust terms to be Lord Paramount over them whenas the warrant by which he claims this power is meerly void in it self for that it wants their concurrence Nor is it credited as authentick as many of the Romane Bishops and Popes practising the contrary have been honest witnesses Pliny says It is the nobleness of the Eagle to leave part of her prey for other birds Whence it is that other birds of prey still follow after the Eagle to feed upon her scraps But if the Crow presume to come too neer the Eagle she lets her feel her talons and in stead of being fed the Crow becomes a prey her self And will the Germane Eagle suffer himself to be out-towred and cuffed with an Italian Rook It argues a degenerating spirit from the true Eagle to suffer it and gives occasion to the world to suspect that he is that bird the Eagle throws out of her nest and not one of those which the Eagle ciscovering Majestick rays in their eyes nâ—urishes up and carries on her wings above the common region here belowe The ancient Bishops of Rome never tasted of this sowre grape and I wonder how the later Popes came to set their teeth on edge Resist not evil was Christs precept Matth. 5.39 But the Pope is so far from this Rule that he will not do good to them that have been benefactors to him Kings have been kinde nursing fathers to the Church of Rome and will she be so unnatural to cast them off now that by their indulgence she is grown to a riper state Kings granted heâ— precedency above her sister-Churches Kings have endowed her above them and in necessity have relieved her Popes and will the Pope now likâ— the Wolf in the Fable devour the Crane that took the bone out of her throat Will the arrogant Hop having overtopped the Pole by which it grew think to bear up its weak head above its first supporter Sure these are practices which do little become a Spiritual Father an Universal Head of Christs Church who by how much his head is lifted on high should be more given to good works to piety to humility to charity and to patience and that the rather because on such an one in so eminent a place all eyes are fixed and should there finde examples of Godliness which might be as a heavenly light to guide them unto their Lord and Master Christ Jesus But I should wrong Romes Church should I for some mens faults condemn all All are not Tares that grow in that field In these last days Satan is more busie to throw in his seed because his time is short But heretofore she had Bishops which never laid claim to these unjust demands Wherefore that I may make the present Pope ashamed of this his unjust claim I will produce the godly practices of his predecessors to his own condemnation Notwithstanding all the shifts and tricks the Jesuites use The ancient Bishops of Rome modern Popes have obeyed the Emperour Ante ch 10 and cha 4. to maintain this strange power they ascribe unto his Holiness they fall short to give satisfaction to any reasonable man that hath not given himself up to a stupid sense to believe all they say be it right or wrong And who please to reflect upon the practices of former Ages will finde this to be a meer Innovation and inâ—roachment upon the Temporal power Melciades Bishop of Rome acknowledged Constantine the Great to be Supreme even in things Spiritual The same Constantine called a Councel at Aralatensis excluding Melciades out of it Where was then his Supremacie either in Spiritual or Temporal affairs Did not Damasus Siritius and Anastasius acknowledge Theodosius the elder their Supreme Lord and submitted unto him whenas Flavianus was accused before the Emperour for intruding into the See of Antioch who was by the Emperour freed against their wills as Theodor witnesses Lib. 5. cap. 23. Innocent the first obeyed Arcadius when he bid him call a Councel for the examination of Chrysostomes cause Gregory the Great being commanded to publish a Law made by Mauritius desired to be excused and shewed his reasons against it but those not prevailing he submitted and did publish the Law as appears by his Epist 61. lib. 2. cap. 100. S. Ambrose ante ch 10 S. Ambrose being commanded by Valentinian to allot a Church in Millain for the Arrians his answer was He would not willingly but being compelled he had learned not to resist And this is by some much pressed How that he did utterly withstand it How that he did excommunicate Theodosius the elder and made him do Penance For my part I do not credit the story for it is not likely that there was any such ruffling betwixt them whenas it appears by the testimony of all Writers that whenas Theodosius had freed the Empire from all troubles he retired himself to Mallain where S. Ambrose was Bishop and leaving off the charge of the Empire to his two sons Arcadius and Honorius he died in peace at Millain And certainly if there had been any such clashing betwixt them he would have made choice of some other place for his retirement Besides it doth not stand with S. Ambrose doctrine for he affirms Preces lachrymae sunt arma Ecclesiae He never taught that it was lawful to take vengeance upon the Supreme Magistrate as his Epist contr Auxentius doth witness He freeth Kings from all Laws made by man as appears in his book Apolog. David cap. 10. pag. 386. Rex nullis legibus tenetur humanis homini non peccavit David cui non tenetur abnoxius Now if he should inflict Penance upon the Emperour it was against this doctrine and so the Papists wrong S. Ambrose in fathering a practice upon him which was contrary to his profession Wherefore I suspect this tradition of the Church of Rome in this point that S. Ambrose should make Theodosius the Emperour do penance It may be he enjoyned Penance to Theodosius after he was become a private man during his retirement at Millain and after he had left off the Regiment of the Empire to his sons but that is no warrant for the Pope to do the like to the Emperour or any other King for that if he did so it was a punishment inflicted not upon the Emperour but upon Theodosius being a private man And as this makes nothing for the Pope in this particular point so may he not arrogate this by reason of his Universality granted by Phocas for that his predecessors never claimed or was it allowed or intended by the Emperour that he should have this power by vertue
his One and twentieth Chapter fol. 323. calls the Protestants startling at the Romish doctrine concerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper a Prodigie of Opinions And he musters up several Tenents concerning the same which being various in themselves and contradictory each to other I wonder he should offer them against any particular Church especially the Church of England against whom I suppose his darts are by this intended for that elsewhere fol. 259. he speaking of Protestants offers grounds of converting to them again which must needs be intended to the Church of England from whence he is gone which he in this particular goes about to tax her of Error Wherefore I made bold to recapitulate these ensuing Truths professed by her and which she assumes to maintain against the Errours and Innovations of Rome touching this Sacrament wherein my desire is rather to clear her from all malicious dirt by Satans instruments thrown upon her then that I should by this means lay open the failings of the Doctor or his ingratitude to his mother-Mother-Church The Church of England doth maintain That Christs body is given received and eaten after an heavenly and spiritual not after a carnal and corporal manner and doth utterly disallow of the new doctrine of Romes Transubstantiation not condemning it as new in respect of the Word but as it is a doctrine and practice in it self varying from what Christ his Apostles or the Primitive Churches taught and contrary to what the Church of Rome has formerly maintained for that it is a meer novelty through the corruption of later times and by covetous and ambitious Popes for self-interest obtruded upon the people making them believe a real transubstantiated presence by the Priests consecration and by him offered up for the sins of the people that so the people giving money to the Clergie they may buy Masses and Sacrifices for their sins and for the sins of others as well quick as dead Against which impious practice and vain assertions I will for the satisfying of some doubting and others deluded in opinion offer these professions of the English Church to their serious consideration The Church of England teacheth 1. Christ is spiritually eaten That Christ is not in the bread and wine but onely to such as worthily eat drink them That as Christ is a spiritual meat so he is spiritually eaten and digested with the spiritual part of us by faith And for this her doctrine she has warrant from Christ himself who speaking of the bread of life which came down from heaven and the bread which he would give them which was his flesh Joh. 6.51 the Jews and many of his disciples were offended saying How can he give us his flesh to eat and his blood to drink Christ perceiving their murmuring that they should not remain in ignorance explains it to them saying What if you see the Son of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that giveth life and flesh availeth nothing The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life Which is a manifest clearing how the flesh is to be eaten and how the blood to be drunk that is after a spiritual manner and so Abraham and many others did eat him many yeers before he was born of the Virgin according as S. Paul witnesses 1 Cor. 10. They did eat the same spiritual meat and drank the same spiritual drink that is to say Christ For to eat that meat and drink that drink is to have Christ dwelling in us The wicked do not eat the body and we in Christ which must needs be understood of worthy receivers and not of the ungodly in whom Christ cannot be said to dwell it must needs be understood of one that truly believing feeds upon Christ in his heart and the wicked unbelieving sinner he receiveth onely the bread and wine not discerning the Lords body Saint Paul witnesseth this truth 1 Cor. 11. He that eateth of this bread and drinketh of this cup unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ He saith not He that eateth and drinketh the body and blood for none but a worthy receiver doth that Nor doth this doctrine deny any to receive unworthily as the Doctor fol. 328. would perswade us because saith he such onely receive bread and wine and not the Lords body But it rather serveth to condemn their errours who would perswade that the wicked receive very Christ and so none should be guilty because whoso verily eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath everlasting life Therefore the Church of England is careful to avoid this error and maintains according to Christ his explanation that Christ is onely spiritually given received and eaten and that those onely that believe in Christ eat him and live by him and that every one eating that bread according to Christs institution and Ordinance is assured by Christs own promise and testament that he is a member of his body and receives the benefit of his passion and likewise be that drinks of that cup according to Christs institution is certified that he is made partaker of Christ his legacie his blood which was shed for remission of sins Whereas the unworthy receiver coming to this divine Ordinance without due reverence and a lively faith eateth and drinketh his own damnation for that he receiveth that bread and that wine unworthily which ought with faith to have been received believing that as that bread and wine nourish the outward man so Christ is thereby conveyed to the nourishment of the inner man and so Christ is in him and he in Christ And by thus receiving is the saying of Christ in Joh. 6. My flesh is very meat and my blood is very drink to be understood for none but the faithful are partakers of this heavenly banquet Christ is the bread of life he that eateth that bread shall live for ever which must be by faith in the Son of God Gal. 2. It must needs be understood of a mystical and not a real eating that even as the bread and wine which we receive is turned into our flesh and blood and is so joyned and mixed together with our flesh and blood that they be made one body together so be all faithful Christians spiritually turned into the body of Christ and be so joyned unto Christ and also together amongst themselves that they do but make one mystical body of Christ as S. Paul 1 Cor. 10. We be one bread and one body as many as be partakers of one bread and one cup. The wicked are not partakers of this banquet but onely the members of Christ therefore none verily eat the flesh and drink the blood but the believers It is not like the eating of Manna both good and bad ate that saith our Saviour Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are dead but he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever which must be by faith and in heart believing unto
wine we do signifie the flesh and blood which he offered for us And the Old Testament saith he was instituted in blood because that blood was a witness of Gods benefits in signification and figure whereof we take the mystical cup of his blood for the tuition of our body and soul he and many more concurring in judgement in this point that the Sacramental bread and wine are not corporally and really the natural substance of the flesh and blood of Christ but that they are similitudes significations figures and sâ—gnes of his body and blood and therefore be called and have the name of his flesh and blood and were but indeed tokens thereof and meant of a spiritual grace as Christ witnesses The words which he spake were spirit and life Joh. 6. It was bread which he took it was wine which he gave saying I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine till I drink it with you in my Fathers kingdom They were the elementary parts of the Sacrament signifying the spiritual substance of his body and blood And when he took the bread and the cup and said This is my body this is my blood it is manifest by what I have already spoken that that saying was a figurative speech To maintain that it was very flesh and very blood Christ gave to his disciples Bread and wide are the outward elements of the invisible grace doth utterly destroy the nature of a Sacrament both according to the Tenents of the Church of Rome and all other Churches concerning the nature of a Sacrament The Church of England holds that the bread and wine are but the outward visible signes of the inward spiritual grace And herewith agrees S. Austin in his definition of a Sacrament lib. 2. de doctr Christian Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum sensibile sanctificans nos S. Tho. part 3. quaest 60. art 3. says Tria significantur primuÌ„ causa effectiva nostrae sanctificationis scilicet Passionem Christi Hoc facite in mei commemorationem 1 Cor. 11. secundum causam formalem nostrae sanctificationis scil gratiam tertium cansam finalem quae est gloria Whereupon the Church hath this heavenly Song Oh sacred banquet in which Christ is received and the memory of his Passion recollected by which our mindes are filled with grace receiving a blessed pledge of future glory Hugo de Sancta Victoria part 1. cap. 1. Sacramentum è materiale elementum foris sensibus praepositum ex similitudine representans ex institutione significans ex sanctificatione continens aliquam invisibilem spiritualem gratiam And herewith agreeth S. Austin saying Sacramentum signum est quod praeter speciem quam ingerit sensibus facit quicquid in cognitionem venire The Councel of Florens treating upon the Sacrament of Confirmation have resolved that all Sacraments must consist of matter and form there must be an outward signe to signifie the inward grace Wherefore I wonder that the Papists can for shame deny that the matter of bread and wine should remain in the Eucharist for by this means they deny it to be a Sacrament destroying the end of Christs holy institution which was That it should be had in remembrance of him And they generally gainsay the publike profession of their Church by the contradictory practices in private and particular Masses and Altar-Sacrifices And they likewise go against Christ who says This bread is my body He did not say This is no bread but my body And certainly if Christ would have had us to think the substance of the elements were changed he would not have called them bread and the fruit of the vine Nay he would not when he explained the words of giving his flesh to eat and his blood to drink have said his words were spirit and life And S. Paul therefore to witness this truth with the Church of England says The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ He thereby explaining Christs saying Hoc est corpus meum to be meant of a spiritual eating and of a communion of his body we being hereby made one with Christ he dwelling in us and we in him Besides when Christ bade them drink all of the Cup it was wine he bade them drink for the words of consecration follow And therefore if the Apostles drank any thing else they did not fulfil the precept or else Christ commanded them to drink that that was not there which were impious to imagine And as for the bread it is called bread after consecration for S. Paul calls bread the communion of Christs body which must needs be understood of bread consecrate otherwise it is not the communion of his body So that it is evident that the elements of bread and wine remain in the Sacrament and are not materially changed And this the Monks which administred to King John of England and to Henry the seventh the Emperour knew well enough which Princes the better to further the holy designes of the Pope were dispatched hence out of this world by the poysoned elements of the Eucharist which elements Christ ordained Sacramentally to be received for our nourishment thereby signifying our communion with Christ by the bread and wine made of many ears and many grapes and our growing up by faith in Jesus even as those elements turn into our flesh and blood by natural digestion so Christ is spiritually conveyed unto our souls which are fed by his flesh and blood which every faithful and worthy receiver is by the receiving of this Sacrament made partaker of The Doctor would perswade us fol. 327. that if by denying the bodily presence we mean onely not with accidents of his body as quantity figure and the like and that Christ is â—ot so bodily in the Sacrament but spiritually Then we agree with the Catholikes But then in the same leaf â—e would again perswade us that Christ cannot be really there unless his body be there and that it must be as well corporally as spiritually there or else we deny Christs being there To which I answer The errour of Transubstantiation We by maintaining a spiritual eating and drinking of the body and blood do not divide the spirit from the body as the Church of Rome doth by maintaining a bodily presence because according to their doctrine the wicked receive the body and not the Spirit as I have already proved we by taking the bread and wine which tend to the nourishment of our outward bodies the thing signified by them to wit Christ Jesus is hereby conveyed unto us to be the food of our souls and becomes spirit and life to us he living in us and we in him and this is onely to the worthy receiver who by faith feeds upon him and lays hold of the benefits of his Passion The ungodly they onely receive the bread wine not discerning the Lords body And if the Church of Rome mean that his body is
significantly there present then they agree with us but if really in the bread then we do not concur in opinion with them for the reasons afore in pare rehearsed and for other reasons hereafter following I might instance many particular reasons against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation as that 1. Nothing was broken eaten drunken and chawed but the accidents of the body because they deny the bread and wine to be the visible elements which is against Reason and all authority or else if they will have a body there That it is without accidents and so they must either make accidents without substances or substances without accidents 2. When the bread mouldeth and turneth into worms or the wine sowreth or turneth into vinegar it is the bread mouldeth and the wine that sowreth Christ is the same yesterday to day and for ever Therefore are the bread and wine substantially there and if they were but accidents then no body could be made thereof as worms or material vinegar 3. Let a dog or cat c. eat of that bread and he is nourished thereby which could not be if the substance remained not 4. The Scripture calleth them bread and wine after consecration which are names of substance not of accidents which if substance remained not it were a meer illusion of our senses and so we with the Jews make Christ a Jugler making things appear to our outward senses which are not 5. The Sacrament had a beginning and hath an end put to it it is to be received in remembrance of Christs death till he come and then to cease Wherefore there can be no real transubstantiated presence of Christ for he is from eternity to eternity 6. If there be a transubstantiated body of Christ then is Christ every day new made and as many Wafers as many Christs which is impossible for his substantial body to be in several places either in the several Wafers or the several places of consecration at one and the same instant of time 7. This doctrine doth impugn the consent of the ancient Catholike Church which de fide professeth and believeth Christ to be made of the nature and substance of his blessed mother and therefore not every day to be made anew of the substance of bread and wine for if it were so then the same body that was crucified is not eaten or else that body which was crucified was made of bread and wine which is flat blasphemy against the holy Ghost by whose operation Christ was made and born of the flesh of his mother and suffered upon the Cross for the salvation of all believers Which Christ is no otherwise joyned to the elements in this Sacrament but Sacramentally as the holy Ghost in Baptism is joyned to the water not that the holy Spirit is made of the substance of the water or the water turned into the holy Ghost 8. It is against the express Scripture and Symbole of Faith grounded upon that Scripture which teaches that Christ concerning his body and humane nature is in heaven We believe that he was conceived of the holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead buried that he descended into hell the third day he rose again from the dead and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead Christ said to his disciples I leave the world Joh. 16. and Mat. 26. Ye shall ever have poor folks with you but me ye shall not have always Mark 16. He was taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of his Father Col. 1.3 Heb. 8. and Heb. 10. He sits continually at the right hand of God And Saint Peter Act. 3. faith that the heavens shall contain him until the time that all things shall be restored And Christ himself gave warning of this errour aforehand in Matth. 24. saying The time will come when there shall be many deceivers in the world which shall say Here is Christ and there is Christ but believe them not Thus the whole current of the Scripture makes against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation And because the Papists may not object against us that it is a novel interpretation or our mis-understanding of Scripture in this point I will make it manifest that the Primitive Church never taught this doctrine of Transubstantiation but were utterly against it as may appear by the testimony of these ancient Fathers Origen upon Matthew Tract 33. The Fathers against Transubstantiation saith Christ hath two natures God and Man as God he is with us always unto the end of the world as man he is not He is gone hence and absent in his Humanity but is always present in his Divinity S. Austin in his Epist 55. ad Dardanium Christ as concerning his Manhood is now there from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead and as he ascended so shall he come in the self-same form and substance to the which he gave immortality but thereby did not change the nature Now saith he after this form we must not say that he is everywhere for we must take heed saith he that we do not so stablish his Divinity that we take away the verity of his body Cyril upon S. John lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ took away from hence the presence of his body but in the majesty of his Godhead he is everywhere he according to his promise is with his disciples even unto the end of the world S. Ambrose upon Luke lib. 10. cap. 24. We must not seek Christ upon earth but in heaven where he sits at the right hand of God And S. Gregory in Hom. Pasch saith Christ is not here in the presence of his flesh and yet as he is God he is absent nowhere by the presence of his majestie all unanimously and Apostolike being of one consent in this that Christ as touching his humanity is onely in heaven at the right hand of God And particularly these Fathers following are absolutely against this very point of Transubstantiation Justinus The Fathers against Transubstantiation an ancient Writer and holy Martyr who wrote about an hundred yeers after Christ in his second Apologie saith that the bread and wine in the Sacrament are not to be taken as other meats and drinks be they being purposely ordained to give thanks to God in and therefore be called Eucharistia and be called the body and blood of Christ and yet the same meat and drink be changed into our flesh and blood and nourish our bodies By which it is plain that the substance of the elements remain because saith he they are changed into flesh and blood and nourish our bodies Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 1. c. 4. who wrote about 150 yeers after Christ and was a disciple of Polycarpus who was a disciple of John the Evangelist says The bread wherein we give thanks to God hath two things
in it one earthly another heavenly by the heavenly understanding the sanctification which cometh by the invocation of the name of God and by the earthly the substance of bread which doth nourish our bodies Shortly after Irenaeus was Origen about 200 yeers after Christ who affirms in Matth. cap. 15. that the material bread remains whose matter availeth nothing but goeth down into the belly and is voided downward but the Word spoke upon the bread is it that availeth Eusebius Emissaenus who wrote about 300 yeers after Christ de consecrat dist 2. says that outwardly was nothing changed all the change was inwardly As man made new in Baptism doth visibly remain in the same measure receiving a new inward without making any change in the outward man not seen not felt but believed so likewise when thou dost go up to the altar to receive the spiritual meat in thy faith look upon the body and blood of Christ and feed upon him with thy inward man By which it is plain that it is onely a spiritual change by faith not an outward and corporal change Epiphanius contra Haereses lib. 3. tom 2. The bread saith he is meat but the vertue that is in it giveth life Chrysostome who wrote about 420 yeers after Christ ad Caesarium Monachum The bread saith he before it is consecrate is called bread but after it is consecrate it is delivered from the name of bread and exalted to the name of the Lords body although the nature of the bread doth still remain S. Austin who lived about the same time in Sermone ad Infantes That which you see on the Altar is the bread and the cup which your eyes shew you is the wine but faith sheweth you that that bread is the body and that cup the blood of Christ Gelasius Bishop of Rome contra Eutichem Nestorium proving the Godhead and Humanity of Christ he enforceth it with two reasons the one drawn from the example of Man who being but one is made of two parts and hath two natures the Body and the Soul the other drawn from the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ which saith he is a godly thing and yet the nature of the bread and wine do not cease to be there still This was the opinion of the Fathers of those days and thus Transubstantiation is a new doctrine and no otherwise held the Church of Rome for a thousand yeers after Christ there being never so much as question made about this point for a thousand yeers compleat the time of Satans being let at large Apoc. 20. at which time by reason of some pretended miracles this doctrine was by the private opinion of some men set abroach which being once published it being the nature of evil weeds to spread and grow fast if once they get rooting in any garden it presently got abettors and champions to justifie it against all opposers some out of curiosity of Wit striving to blinde Truth with subtil reasons others out of dulness of apprehension God having withdrawn his Spirit from them were given up to this delusion so that in 60 yeers this new bantling wanted not foster-fathers to nourish it up to a greater and fuller growth A mongst the rest one Paschasius was one that first publikely maintained it and after him the Popes enclined to this opinion insomuch that Berengarius a French-man and Arch-deacon of Anjou opposing this Heresie was himself censured of that he urged against the then Pope of Rome and was the first that ever was questioned for maintaining against this doctrine of Transubstantiation and the Pope adhering to the adverse party which was for Transubstantiation Berengarius was forced to recant the Councel of Vorcellense held 1051. swaying against him which opinion of his he again resumed and did recognize the Truth again after that the then-Pope was dead which when Pope Nicolas 2. heard of he sent his busie agent and Cardinal-Chaplain Hildebrand into France to bring Berengerius under coram nobis who being sore troubled and molested and seeing by the faction of the Pope and Hildebrand that the current was against him through the treachery of a base timorous nature he suffered his noble parts his intellects to be clouded with the mists of the times errour and tamely did recant his former tenents and did therefore take an Oath never to oppose that doctrine of his Holiliness in this point of Transubstantiation And thus this doctrine began And although Pope Nicolas did avouch this doctrine in a Councel at Laterane held anno 1059. Ante chap. 14. and there framed the term of Transubstantiation yet notwithstanding this pretty Papal babe of Heresie was Christned and put forth to nurse yet nevertheless it grew not to be free and to bear rule till 1215. when Pope Innocent the third manumitted the stripling and by another Lateran-Councel did decree this doctrine as a point of Catholike Faith enjoyning all to the obedience thereof upon pain of Hetesie Johannes Scotus who was called Duns lib. 4. writing of this matter saith that the words of the Scripture might be expounded more easily and plainly without Transubstantiation but it pleased the Church to chuse this sense which is more hard being moved thereunto most chiefly because that of the Sacraments men ought to hold as the holy Church of Rome doth hold Which kinde of blinde obedience Blinde obedience makes the Popish Religion in no better condition then the State of Athens was whilst it was governed by the arbitrary power of a standing Legislative Councel which daily gave new Laws unto the people so that the people could not by any known Rule say their clothes were their own all the Law by which they derived any property being under an arbitrary power insomuch that as they were not secure by walking after any known Law so neither was it safe for them to rely upon such new Laws as the Councel it self proposed the Councel altering every day her own Laws as time administred occasion for self-advantage so that Athens was in a miserable condition during this slavery of her Legislative power not dissolvable by any Authority the people not having liberty to dissolve it and to call as occasion shall require a Councel to redress grievances and not otherwise to continue but to be dissolved that so in the intervals they might know what Law stood good and unalterable amongst them Even so stands the Religion of the Papists Now that the Pope is declared above Councels and that he may continually prescribe Rules of Faith by vertue thereof their Religion is a meer nose of wax alterable at his will and pleasure who has a faithful tribe of Ignations which will blandish his new doctrines and make the people believe they are but growings in faith whenas they are diametrically opposite to the Catholike Faith of the Primitive Church but if it stand for conveniency or advantage to the Pope and his creatures it must be believed
as a matter of faith and that upon pain of damnation as witness this novel point and some others which are of later times crept into that Church And when any thing of Papal will and interest must be held forth to the other Churches then is the Lateran at Rome pitched upon Ante chap. 14. as I have formerly said as the onely convenient place to have the matter debated it being there likely to receive the least opposition by reason his Holiness is at hand to take notice of his enemies and to punish them and to flatter and promote such as stand for his Papal pleasure In this Councel of Laterane The Councel of Laterane chap. 17. likewise was hatched that other Cockatrice that strange brazen-fac'd and staring opinion of deposing Kings from which root of bitterness springs many tart branches of dangerous and poysonful Errours the nauseating juyce of whose sowre grapes being given to some other Churches to drink it hath intoxicated them making their Vertigious heads turn after the Laterane Weather-cock and in their brain-sick fit conceit that her high-reared Spire is the onely supporter of the heavenly Pole whilst the sober and discreet Christian knows that her proud top being exalted to that height is but so much the neereâ— the pattern of Babels Tower And whilst they think she is dignified before others her head being lifted above them others know she hath not whereof to boast unless in this That shee has the upper room in Satan 's airy principality which how much the higher she is lifted she is but thereby rendered more subject to be muffled with the black contractions of the Devil's Cimerian clouds of Errours And though the top thereof be forged out of that material Sword as is by the Romish Legends maintained which cut off Saint John Baptist's head it should not therefore arrogate to be the onely decolling instrument of Principality and Temporal power But I return to the subject matter of this Chapter That I may the further lay open the errours of the Church of Rome in this particular Miracles the cause of Transubstantiation and that the Papists shall not have whereof to boast in that I said they were induced by Miracles to maintain this doctrine should I pass those Miracles by in silence I will let the Reader know what they were It is reported that a Bishop of Canterbury about the time of this change did shew unto some for their conversion the Host turned into flesh and blood in outward appearance dropping into the Chalice and that thereupon they believed Transubstantiation Another is reported by Paschasius of one Plegildus a Priest of Almain who did see and handle visibly the shape of a childe upon the Altar and after it turned into bread and he was to receive it Another is reported of a Jew-boy who coming into the Church with another boy which was a Christian he saw upon the Altar a little childe torn in pieces and afterwards by portions distributed which he reporting was condemned to be burned but was after rescued from the flame by the Christians These Miracles were the onely arguments used against Berengarius and the convincing perswasions of the facile consciences of those days which how it stands with the doctrine of Christ Joh. 6.63 the practice of the Apostles the profession of the Primitive times and the faith and doctrine of the ancient Fathers let any judge S. Paul says 1 Cor. 11. That which he had received of the Lord Jesus that he delivered That as often as they did eat the bread and drink the cup they shewed the Lords death till he came Saint Paul calls it bread and the Evangelist wine and that after consecration and the Fathers of the Church taught that doctrine with them and Christ himself calls them bread and fruit of the vine and S. Paul The communion of the body And this being the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles though an Angel from heaven should come and teach any other doctrine let him be accursed Gal. 1. Wherefore these miraculous apparitions were no ground for Rome to change her faith in this point If these stories be true they ought to be considered as extraordinary apparitions like the light from heaven which shone about S. Paul These external miraculous apparitions were but to perswade the consciences of Infidels and Heathens to turn to the faith of Christ and to be perswaded of the truth of that Sacrament and not to make the true and already-grounded Christians to change the nature of their faith which is the ground of things hoped for and the evidence of things which are not seen Heb. 11.1 This was to perswade the mis-believing Jew of Christ and of the truth of this blessed Sacrament whereby he was to be made partaker of the benefits of his precious death and passion not to teach the Christian any new doctrine concerning the same These miracles should rather confirm him in his faith received that it was a spiritual banquet in respect that after the apparition as the story runs at the receiving that which was received was become bread again and not to ensnare him into this novel errour which was contrary to Christs doctrine the Apostles preaching and the practice of the Primitive Church But I will no longer insist upon this point I submit to any good Christian whether it be safer to follow Christs explanation of this mystery to be spiritual with which S. Paul and the ancient Fathers do concur then to humour the times and to be observant to the late Popes which about the time of this change were grown great and since have by cunning practices enlarged that power insomuch that now they are declared above Councels and whatsoever they propound must de fide be received upon the score of their infallibility be it never so contrary to the truth of Gods Word And they by this doctrine receiving advantage by their Altar-Sacrifices will not easily be induced to renounce the errour thereof and though never so palpably against the Truth of God yet the Jesuites will maintain it for their Masters advantage this doctrine tending more to his avail then any good to the souls of his flock Wherefore the Church of England having a right to reform errours in her own Province has chosen to cast off this blinde tenent of the Pope and his Parasites and she having the warrant of Christ the rules of the Apostles the practice of the Primitive Church and the consent of the ancient Fathers for her doctrine in this point hath therefore made choice with them in unity of Spirit firmly to hold and maintain that Christ in his humanity is not really and corporally in the Sacrament but figuratively in the outward elements being thereby signified and is spiritually eaten and drunken of the worthy receiver CHAP. XVI Against Communion in one kinde That the Church of Rome's withholding the Cup from the Layty is a novelty against Christs precept and the ancient
practice of the Church That the Sacrifice upon the Altar is superstitious and The authority of the Church no excuse to change the administration of the Lords Supper into one kinde THe Church of Rome having thus gained a general consent though at first forced upon many by the power and domineering of the Popes to her doctrine of Transubstantiation she stuck not long in this station but partly to make good what she had introduced into the Church and partly to shew to the world the divine Legislative power of her Head she soared a pitch higher whereas before this she but maintained an opinion which but to some weak capacities did convince all not being satisfied with the sincerity of her doctrine concerning the nature and quality of this Sacrament of the Lords Supper which Christ himself instituted and by his last Will and Testament left it as a Legacie to his faithful servants her Popes now take upon them after their former opinion was confirmed by Councel and generally received and believed as an Article of Faith to dispense with that Sacrament of Christ Jesus and have in stead thereof instituted one of their own making administring in one kinde and denying the Cup to the Lay-people which is a novel trick of Papal invention and never practised in the Churches upon earth till they forced it upon some over which the Popes did without controul rule at will and pleasure Christ Jesus did institute this Sacrament in both kindes Paul enjoyns both the whole Church did administer in both and the Fathers teach that as well the wine as the bread is to be received and did think wine so necessary that it could not be administred in water much less in the cake alone in which there is no liquid element to represent the shedding of Christs blood for which end it was ordained Cyprian who wrote 260 yeers after Christ in his 3 Epist ad Cecilium lib. 2. Forasmuch saith he as Christ said I am the true vine and the Cup is his blood it cannot be thought that his blood is in the cup if wine be not in the cup whereby the blood is signified unto us Chrysost in Matth. cap. 26. Hom. 83. Christ used wine as well before his Resurrection as after S. Hierome in Sophon cap. 3. doth witness that in his time the Priest did administer the Eucharist and divide the blood unto the people In the Canon of Pope Gelasius and in the Popes Decrees de Consecrat a strict Injunction is laid that all receive in both kindes for that the dividing of that Sacrament is sacriledge I need not instance in this any more particulars in respect that none can deny but that anciently it was in both kindes administred I will therefore examine the reasons the Church of Rome gives for her alteration from this antient way and for administring in one kind and in so doing I shall plainly lay open her errors in this point The Councel of Constance held 1414. Councel of Constance Ses 13. decreed Quod nullus Presbyter sub conditione excommunicationis communicet populo sub utroque specie Panis Vini Which notwithstanding the Councel of Basil did after restore to the people again Anno 1431. So that in this new doctrine of hers Rome has met with much controversie even in her self Gelasius the Pope decreeing it to be sacrilegious to omit either kind by which it is evident that the Church of Rome has erred de fide For Gelasius taught that judicially as Pope and the Council of Constance was approved by Pope John 23. and this Councel of Basil by Eugenius the 4. Which proceedings wound the infallibility of the Church of Rome and spoiles her unity one Pope being against another and one Council against another To decide which strivings the late Prerogative Royal of the Popes being above Councels was therefore decreed which notwithstanding by that means the Church of Rome is made infallible yet it spoiles her of her marks of antiquity and constant visibility and therefore absolutely spoiles her for being taken to be the onely Catholick Church for if so then the Catholick Church was once utterly extinguished from off the earth which is against Gods promise and impious to imagine The Pope being thus grown above Councels he now as he pleases declares this Councel void the other to be of force and by vertue of this his Prerogative he has approved the Councel of Constance and yet but in part for he onely takes as much out of that Councel as makes for his turn he onely confirmes their Decree prohibiting the Cup to the Laity but their other Decree of the power of Councels to be above the Pope that 's abominable and his Holiness commands that Decree to be believed to be Heretical By this is to be noted that the Popish Religion is a nose of wax as pleaseth his Holiness to set it forth it must be received upon the score of his infallibility though it be never so destructive to former Christian principles to the ruine of Councels and overthrowing of the true antient Catholick Faith yet such is the condition of the Pope that his will can guide him into no tenent though never so contrary to truth but his faithful Papal servants the Jesuites will dawb over his rotten Doctrine with the smooth plaisters of humane reason and think with subtile Sophistry to beguile the simple the deluding of whom doth not in their uneven hands counterpoise the pleasing of their Master the Pope and therefore did they strive to varnish over this new point of Communion in one kind with some counterfeit Paint Will you please to take a view thereof and I hope I shall so far convince their reasons that the case will meerly stand upon the Popes will and if so I presume none will be so irreverent to their Master Christ to forsake his institution and to adhere to the Popes institution lest they may be said with the Jewes to reject Christ and chuse Barabbas The Doctor would perswade that it was no precept to receive in both kindes but onely being of institution and not precept the Church has power to alter it as occasion may serve To which I answer 2. It was christs precept to receive in both kinds It was injoyned us by way of command to receive in both kinds for Christ in the 6 of John v. 53 sayes Except ye eat the flesh 〈◊〉 â—rink the blood of the Son of man ye have no life in you Christ took the Bread and said Take eat And also he took the Cup and said Drink ye all of it Matth. 26. This is an absolute precept as well for the Cup as the Bread and Saint Paul delivered it so to the Corinthians according as he had received of the Lord he likewise enjoyning it to them as a precept probet seipsum let a man examine himself let him eat let him drink the Commandment extending to the one as well as to the other which
the Evangelists who witness with one consent that Christ took the Bread and also or after the same manner he took the Cup we must not say that he took the Bread or the Cup for so we destroy the Sacrament as being of incertainty and having no certain ground either for its institution or the precept for the administring thereof Wherefore for the Doctor here to construe and or is to multiply contradictions and so his reason is become invalid in respect that the general scope of the Scripture is that this Sacrament is to be administred under both kinds therefore it is more safe to construe those few places where Sacramental Bread alone is mentioned without the Cup to be understood of the whole Sacrament rather then in many places to wrest and into or For the mentioning of Bread onely doth not exclude the Cup negatively but rather according to Cyprians speech by the naming of part of the action the whole is to be understood and herewith agreeth Saint Paul 1 Cor. 10.17 And we that are many are one bread and one body because we are all partakers of one bread We must not think that because here Saint Paul names bread onely that therefore the Corinthians did not communicate in the cup for that is against the precedent verse where he saies The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ and the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ Besides in the ensuing Chapter he enjoyns both to be received and that to the people so that where the breaking of Sacramental bread is onely mentioned we are not thereby to exclude the cup for the Hebrew phrase is under the breaking of bread to signifie the whole feast as in the Prophet Esay Frangere esurientis panem is as well to give drink as bread Besides should we admit of any other construction as that when bread is mentioned alone thereby to understand communion in one kind we should in that change Saint Luke in Act. 2. to teach contrary to the practice of Christ and the rest of the Apostles which did both receive and deliver to the people under both kinds which were an impious and presumptuous charge Wherefore let the Church of Rome for shame confess her errors herein and let her not longer wrest mangle and misconstrue Scripture contrary to Christs rules herein contrary to the sense of the Primitive Church and contrary to the judgement and practice of the antient Fathers and her own antient Bishops and that but for self-interest to maintain a new doctrine of her own framing taken up upon a light score and never heard of or believed in the Church for a thousand years after Christ and let her confess the truth with us herein by which means she shall neither alter the sense nor wrest any particular word to maintain her doctrine herein and if she will not for unitie sake and for communion with us yet for avoiding an absurdity against her own principles let her never construe that place of Luke to signifie an entire Sacrament for then she makes the whole Sacrament onely breaking of bread and destroyes Transubstantiation As for the Doctor if he be not herewith satisfied but that he will persist notwithstanding that it must be understood of communion in one kind and furthermore to maintain that opinion will here construe and for or I must tell him that he has hereby wiped off one error which he elswhere fol. 337. taxed our Translators with 1 Cor. 11.27 which if it be mis-translated it makes nothing for communion in one kind but whether we receive the one or the other that we should take heed to receive with due reverence so Heavenly a banquet and it doth further illustrate to us that though we receive the bread worthily yet if we receive the cup unworthily we are guilty of the body and blood which is an argument and indeed an absolute proof that they both make but a perfect Sacrament of the body and blood therefore I encline to think with the Doctor that it is a corruption in our printed Bibles rendring and for or I find it various from the old copies and I will not presume upon the Doctors rule to justifie it however it is something excusable for that in the very same Chapter 26 28 and 29. verses eating the bread and drinking the cup is expressed and not eating the bread or drinking the cup which upon the Doctors rule for avoiding contradiction should be construed or but whether it be taken or or and yet notwithstanding it makes nothing for the Popish communion in one kind The Doctor layes down for the Priests receiving in both kinds Of the sacrifice offered upon the Altar by the Priest because he offers up a sacrifice I will therefore a little consider of that I hope I shall give satisfaction to any reasonable soul that the Priest and the people offer up one and the same sacrifice and if so then by the Doctors rule they are to receive in both kinds because saith he Christs sacrifice upon the Cross is not perfectly represented but by both kinds as it was prefigured in Melchizedek's sacrifice of bread and wine For the better explaining of this point it is to be understood that there are two kinds of sacrifices one is a perpetual sacrifice pacifying Gods wrath whereby mercy and forgiveness of sins is obtained which is onely the death of Christ prefigured by the sacrifices under the Law The other is a sacrifice of laud and thanksgiving which doth not reconcile us unto God but is offered up of such as be already reconciled unto him by faith in him which is the reconciliation for our sins even Christ Jesus By the first Christ offered us unto the Father by the second we offer our selves and all that we have unto him and his Father according as David sayes Psal 50. A sacrifice to God is a contrite heart and Hebr. 13. Alwaies we offer up to God a sacrifice of laud and praise by Jesus Christ and Saint Peter saith of all people that they are A holy Priest-hood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ The Papists object that saying of Saint Paul Heb. 9. Every High-priest is ordained to offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins To prove thereby their sacrifice of the Altar offered up in their Mass which who please to read may plainly discover that that saying is meant of the Priests under the Law who did offer Bullocks and Goats for the sins of the people and therefore in the old Testament such sacrifices are sometimes called Propitiatory sacrifices being indeed but shaddows and types of Christs sacrifice which was to come which was the true and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the whole world wherefore in the very same Chapter S. Paul saith it were impossible our sins should be taken away by the blood of Oxen and Goats verse 1â— By
superfluous as to the cup the Church of Rome administers in one kind as if nothing were perfect and to be received in the Catholick Church but what his Holiness please to teach and allow And their reasons are so weak they offer for such their alterations that any one may plainly discern it is Will not Reason brings her into such changes Who but knows that Christ as he was man and the Apostles likewise were obnoxious to the same inconveniences of spilling the Wine as the Doctor alledges or part sticking upon their beards as the people of these dayes are But they knowing that it was Christs order to separate the cup from the bread and give it to be divided amongst them thereby denoting to them how his blood should be separated from his flesh and by Christ left as a pattern for them to follow and to have continuance till his comming again they by eating the bread and drinking the cup shew the Lords death till he come and for that the same was to be continued in remembrance thereof and they being commanded likewise hereunto Drink ye all of this Let a man examine himself and let him eat and let him drink They would not and we dare not admit of Romes alteration but desire of God to hold fast this truth we have received and that it would please him to confirm us herein that we may be blameless in the day of the Lord Jesus praying that all other Churches as in this so in all other points of faith and doctrine may be of one consent and firmly united together in one mind and one judgement that we may all proceed in one Rule and walk together as followers of Christ and his Apostles having them for an ensample to us that we may with one mind and one mouth praise God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. XVII That the Lyturgie and private Prayers ought not to be in an unknown Language which the Congregation doth not understand WHereas Saint Paul in the 1 Cor. 14. is against giving of thanks or praying without understanding because the hearer is not edified nor can say Amen to he knows not what the Doctor to help the lame Dogg over the style and to clear his new step-mother the Church of Rome from the errors which other Churches lay to her charge for that she restrains her Prayers and her Lyturgy universally to the Latine tongue would needs have us to understand that S. Paul doth not hereby impugne the Lyturgie of the Church of Rome which sayes he was for the service and praise of God and he to whom it is directed understands any tongue but it is meant sayes he of Church-meetings which were onely for instruction and edification of the Auditors and not at all to be understood to gainsay the Lyturgie of Romes Church To which I answer 1. S. Paul's meaning is as well meant of the one as of the other for vers 26. When ye come says he together according as every one hath a tongue or hath interpretation let it be done to edifying By which it is plain that both praises and prayers Psalms as well as doctrine ought to be with understanding For vers 28. If any man hath an unknown tongue let him keep silence in the Church and speak to himself and to God That man that hath the spirit of Tongues may speak to God and himself but he must be silent to others unless they can understand him for how shall they say Amen to they know not what God requires from us the heart Give me thine heart David desired to praise the Lord in soul and spirit Praise the Lord O my soul and all that is within me praise his holy Name We must not think that a little lip-labour to say Amen to we know not what can be acceptable unto God 1 Sam. 1. Hannah prayed in her heart to the Lord. Not every one that saith Lord Lord shall be saved Matth. 7. God doth not require lip-service he condemned the Scribes and Pharisees who drew neer unto him with their lips but their hearts were far off Matth. 15. We are commanded to serve God with all our heart and soul Josh 24. We must sing and make melody to the Lord in our hearts Ephes 5. We must approve that which is pleasing to the Lord vers 10. God is King of all the earth sing ye praises therefore with understanding By all which and many more places of Scripture it is plain that the service of the Congregation it must be with the heart that is with the understanding We must not think that God is well pleased with the peoples devotion that proceeds not from the heart I will for the better satisfaction of those that seem to be satisfied with the Doctor 's exposition of S. Paul offer these reasons to his consideration against those he has propounded to justifie the Romane Lyturgie universally Platina writes Laâ—ne service first set up that the first Latine Service that ever was at Constantinople was anno 687. whenas the sixth Councel there held was assembled for before that it was never had in the Latine but in the Greek or Hebrew Tongue But now was the Pope grown to be universal by the late donation of Phocas for countenancing his murder of Mauritius and it did not stand with his new-acquired honour and dignity that the Language of any other Church should be preferred before that of Rome and therefore at a General Councel the representative of the several Churches must the Language of the Romane See be preferred before any other For as the Pope was universal Head he must needs have an Universal Tongue otherwise his Universality were dumb And this was the true ground of composing the Latine Lyturgie and not as the Doctor would perswade us because it was the most general Tongue for whenas this was consented unto by many other Bishops to please the Lordly Pope the Emperours great favourite it gave occasion for the spreading of that Language because the Service began to be in many places in it not that it was so copious or known a Tongue before Nor doth the reason the Doctor brings justifie but rather condemn the Latine Lyturgie for saith he the Lyturgie of the Eastern Churches was used in Greek though all the Eastern parts spoke not that Language therefore why may not Rome prescribe a Lyturgie in Latine to the Western Churches To which I answer It was thought fit by the Fathers of the Primitive Church to have one uniform Lyturgie in all the Churches upon earth and â—o that end did those then-visible Churches use the Greek Tongue Why has the Church of Rome set up another form By this the Doctor contradicts her Antiquity and the other mark that she should never have separated from a Society more ancient then her self or else denâ—es her Universality in that she is but to prescribe a Latine Lyturgie to the Western Churcbes and so he makes those marks
of her spots and deforâ—mity whereas if any please to seaken them both he shall finde that Englands Church which is thus presented to him is black but comely and like the curtains of Salomon is set all with precious Stones and Jewels on her inner side Cant. 1.4 I am black but comly as the curtains of Salomon And if he please to make inquisition into the Church of Rome he will finde that she has onely a glorious outside she is a painted Jezebel that cares not to venter through a Sea of blood to take possession of her Neighbours Vineyards causing the Prophets of the Lord to be slain 1 Kin. 18. She is Harpy-like with a fair face and a foul heart and in that fair face were but the Ignatian paint taken off would rivelled browes and wan-worn cheeks appear How much therefore is the Doctors case to be lamented who hath joyned himself to the Heathen to open his mouth that he may praise the power of the Idols and to magnifie a fleshly King for ever Esth 5.10 Hence is it that in his second and third Chapters taking for granted that Rome is the onely Catholick Church and her Bishop Peter's Successor and absolute and sole possessioner of all Apostolical Power and Jurisdiction he doth hereupon conclude that the Protestant Churches are heretical Conventicles and that they know not the Scriptures without the Tradition of Rome nor can disperse and teach them without Commission from thence Now for that it is my desire not to multiply words I will forbear any particular answer to these Assertions and refer the Reader to my second Chapter where his Holiness Universality is fully refuted And as touching that Assertion of his concerning the Scriptures my 2.8.11 and 12. Chapters are sufficient answers where first I have proved equal Commission then that the Scriptures are to judge the truth of themselves Traditions and Councels and that other Churches had the Scriptures and not from Rome that the Provincials of Apostolical plantation have equal power having the same Spirit to guide them as by the outward means the visible sign of the invisible grace given in the Sacrament of order is in Christian charity to be presumed and therefore may as well judge of those points of Scripture which admit of explanation as the Church of Rome And the many arguments used by the Doctor in those Chapters are not onely grounded upon false suppositions but in themselves are injurious wrongfully accusing the Church of England laying opinions to her charge concerning the wayes and means to understand the meaning of those Scriptures which she doth not profess as Doctrinal And then in the 22. Chapter he would disprove our ground of separation from Rome as to this I have in part touched in the 2.4 and 6. Chapters and in the 11. Chapter I have proved aright in Provincials to reform Schismes and Heresies And whereas he saies we ought not to have separated from Rome hecase saith he we pretending the truth of our opinions ought to have demonstrated them to the world whereby to have reformed Rome and not to have separated our selves To this I answer The first occasion of the separation was about the difference of the Popes Supremacy and he having in a high way got the upper hand of many Churches which were vassallized under his power and the Councels being so abused and made invalid by the late Lateran Prerogative it was to no purpose to offer the difference to a general Councel which must either act for or not against his Holiness having no power to decree any thing against his Holiness as I have proved in the tenth Chapter This gave occasion to other Provinces which could get opportunity to back the right and priviledge proper to their own Sees to cast off any further appealing either thither or to Rome And they knowing this to be an usurpation in Popes it gave them occasion to suspect the truth of many other of her Doctrines and betaking themselves to the holy word of God delivered to them and approved through all ages for the verities of God himself and searching into the Primitive Churches and practices of the antient Fathers they found Rome to have changed her faith as those particulars I have already treated on make mention Vincentius adversus Hereticos sayes that Doctrine is to be accounted Catholick quod semper ab omnibus credendum est and if this must be the rule then are neither we Hereticks nor Rome Catholick Rome cannot be said Catholick in respect the faith of Christ was at other places professed when it was not at all at Rome nor may we be by her called Hereticks because she has changed The Doctor upon Saint Austin's rule fol. 120. sayes that Doctrines without known beginnings are not to be disputed against but those Doctrines of Rome of which I have treated I have fairly proved them to be innovations and therefore by that we are not to be censured for opposing them And whereas the Doctor sayes that Rome must either be the true Church or else there is none he hereby proves himself to be in darkness he has confessed it in Aethiopia without her planting and in several other places I have proved it to have been planted and not from Rome wherefore it is not necessarily to be concluded upon the score of her onely dispensing the Gospel that she is the visible Church if the Gospel be hid it is hid to those that are lost the lost sâ—eep's gone to Rome to idolize the pontifical Pope whom the God of this world hath blinded that the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ which is the Image of God should not shine unto him for saith Saint Paul We preach not our selves but Christ Jesus our Lord and our selves your servants for Jesus sake Which is neither the Jesuites Doctrine who teach nothing but the infallibility of his Holiness nor the Popes profession who would every where be a Master but no servant to the Saints and people of God We therefore because of his change from this Doctrine and because of his intolerable pride and usurpations and as the other Churches shake him off but do not change from the Primitive faith taught by the Apostles and formes maintained by the Church of Rome it self And though we lay long under Romes innovation yet this is no Argument for the Doctor to urge against us that we should not at all reform Christ has withdrawn his Spirit for a time from several Churches as I have proved in the 5. Chapter Magna est veritas praevalebit Truth is stronger than all the power of man as I have proved by Zerubbabel 1 Esdr 4. And though the Pope with the inventions and polices of his Cardinal conclave had so warded the several Churches of the West that he thought them absolutely mastered and under his command to be servants to do his drudgery he did as we say reckon without his Host he did consult with flesh and
after Christ and hereupon he has quite spoyled the Doctor for by this means he has hudwinkt his marks of Romes truth to wit Antiquity Universality Unity in Doctrine c. But my Cardinal thinks to salve up this errour by another trick and that almost as gross as this onely this reflects upon the Divinity that upon the Apostles personally He takes upon him to make known to us what was the secret opinion of Peter and Paul c. which have suffered for Religion to wit that they suffered because they wanted power to resist not that it was the will of God they should do so and so he makes the blessed Apostles and holy Martyrs dissemblers speaking one thing and thinking another For saith he as soon as a Prince begins to appear heretical ipso facto though Excommunication be not denounced he shall be put from his Kingdom for as Fame so Heresie gathers strength by going forward Which Axiome of his is verified in this for that since he wrote Bellarmine plows with his heifer and perswades the same Doctrine So that hereby S. Paul is accused of dissimulation That he should bid the Romanes obey for fashion-sake to please the times and so he makes the blessed Apostle an object of scorn not pity That he should be a time-server and yet play his cards so badly that he could not humour Domitius Nero better Is it likely that the Apostles would have commanded others to pray for them if they would have taken their blood if they could Unless these Cardinals would have them like the Presbyters of England who prayed for King Charles whilst their Armies kept him in prison or like Charles the fifth who commanded prayers to be made for Clement the seventh his deliverance and suffered his own Bands to confine him Is it likely S. Peter preaching the Word would bid them submit which Word he said should endure for ever 1 Pet. 1.25 even that Word which was preached amongst them if he knew that it was lawful for them to resist if they had power This were to ascribe want of faith to Peter that God would never deliver his Church out of the hands of Persecutors but suffer her to be always under Tyrants or else that Peter taught one thing and thought another And why should both Peter and Paul press this duty of obedience and submission and that not for wrath but for conscience sake were it lawful to resist This affertion of the Cardinal is therefore gross and impious It is plain by the Scripture that this duty of submission to the Civil power was a precept enjoyned by God not proceeding from any fear the production of a base nature And whenas Paul and Peter did practise and recommend this duty to others it was to give a testimony of their faith in Jesus who as he had laid down his life for them who wanted no power to have withstood the Jews he might have commanded legions of Angels to have come and rescued him out of their hands in obedience to the will of the Father so they as obedient sons of Christ Jesus whom he had in his blood adopted would according to his precepts and example lay down their lives for the testimony of the Gospel Solomon forbade that any should curse the King secretly in his conscience which sure he never would have done if it had been lawful having power to cast him off Saint Jude calls them filthy dreamers that speak evil of Government and despise such as be in Authority I wonder what he would think of those two Cardinals were he alive who would have the Pope drive Kings out of their Kingdomes if he can There are some Roman Catholicks who being with Agrippa half perswaded to be Christians and being touched in Conscience decline these gross absudities of Allen and Bellarmine as being pernitious and tending to the injury of Christ and his A postles and the holy Scripture and in that injurious to the holy Ghost Scripture being nothing else but the dictates of that holy Spirit But yet for all that they are so bewitched to the Roman Faith out of a blind conceit of its Antiquity and therefore of its truth that they will not leave her but strive to justifie her in all things and to excuse this point for that it is a point controverted by some of their owne Church and not yet decreed by any publique Councel nor ever must it be decided may the Pope chuse Besides should it be referred to a Councel there is no credit to be given to the result of that Councel for that none must sit there but such as first must swear to maintain the Pope in the very point to be controverted and so it would be coram non judice or if it should be decreed against his holiness yet by the prerogatives Spiritual of his late Laterane and Trent-assemblies he might notwithstanding repeal that Decree or chuse to obey it for that he is by them declared to be above Councels And till this be rectified this error can receive no reformation from a Councel nor can any satisfaction from thence redound to clear the scruples of any mans conscience in this particular In the mean time Popery is like the Religion of the Pharisees Councels declare one thing de fide the Pope is found contrary de facto so that as our Saviour said of the Pharisees Matth. 23.3 so say I of these Roman Catholicks All that such a Councel should so decree observe and keep but after their works do not for they say and do not The last shift that the Jesuites have to maintain this point of Papal prerogative is The Pope 〈◊〉 a temporal Prince that the Pope is more then the Apostles having acquired a Principality on earth and so by Jus belli he may pull downe one Prince and set up another for say they the Apostles had no charge but onely to preach the Gospel but his holiness the Pope has other fish to fry then what Saint Peter left him he is a temporal Prince he weares a triple Crown he disposes of Kingdomes Crowns Emperours Grants Dispensations sends Indulgences receives Appeals answers Ambassadours takes Homages releases Oaths dissolves Leagues interposes in the Election of Princes has an Emperour to hold his stirrop bring up his first dish a King to serve him at Dinner and many a glorious matter more which Saint Peter never dreamed on so that for him to depose Kings he being more then ever Peter was is no such a strange thing To which I answer 'T is strange so great a Potentate should be thrust up into so little a Corner of the Earth as the Territories of the Papacie are and yet that his Jurisdiction over other Princes should be of such vast latitude I perswade my self that as our Saviour said a Prophet is nothing worth in his owne Country so the Popes power is made more glorious afar off then it is in Italy taken to be whence it is that