Pen and Fancy will be such as to eat or penetrate into every cleft of it and not onely break it into shivers but multiply them into heapes of Sand which being washed away by the Spring-tyde of his ingenious approaches and irresistible force of his argumentative assaults their building must needs fall and be carryed into an Abyss or Ocean which they can never fathome or sound the depth of Archbishop Cranmer in his Answer to Smith's Preface speakes not home enough to their purpose where he sayth Truth it is indeed that the Church doth never wholly erre for ever in most darkness God shineth unto his elect and in the midst of all iniquity he governeth them so with his holy word and spirit that the gates of Hell prevaile not against them This Church is the piller of truth because it resteth upon God's word which is the true and sure foundation and will not suffer it to erre and fall Pag. 405. 406. It is the invisible Church his Grace meanes for of the outward and visible he absolutely denies it and this proves I confess rather the perpetuity then infallibility of the Church Bishop Field recollects several acceptions of the Church Book 4. Ch. 2. First as it comprehendeth the whole number of believers that are and have been since Christ appeared in the flesh which Church he sayes is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of Divine things that are to be known by revelation The second acception is as it comprehendeth only all those believers that are and have been since the Apostles time which in things that are of necessity to be expresly known by all that will be saved that it should erre is impossible And further thinkes it as impossible that any errour whatsoever should be found in all the Pastours and Guides of the Church thus generally taken Touching the Church as it comprehendeth onely the believers that now are in the world he sayes In things necessary to be known and believed expresly and distinctly it never is ignorant much less doth it erre yea in things that are not absolutely necessary to be known and believed expresly and distinctly it never is ignorant much less doth it erre yea in things that are not absolutely necessary to be so known and believed we constantly believe that this Church can never erre nor doubt pertinaciously c. But because I doubt whether our Princess made reflexion upon the Church in such a diffusive sense and supposing that she wanted such an Oracle of Infallibility as to which there could be access for imediate resolve of scruples and doubts upon all occasions which I fear had her H. lived longer to make triall would have been as much missing in the Roman Church as in ours I must lay aside many other excellent Writers upon this point I have before me or at hand and take up one so learned and Orthodox as the best and him the rather because he useth not to be so nice in uttering his mind freely and learnedly and yet making it consistent with the Article of our Church though in appearance point blanck contradictory to what he resolutely concludes it is Bishop Mountagu I mean who in his Appeal where he justifies what he had said in his answer to the Gagger his Position is this The Church Representative true and lawfull never yet erred in Fundamentals and therefore I see no cause but to vouch The Church Representative can not erre The Church Representative is a Generall Councel not titularly so as the Conventicle of Trent but plenarily true generall and lawfull Points Fundamentall be such as are immediate unto faith Let any man living shew me sayes he any historicall mistakings misreportings where when in what any Generall Councell according to true acception or Church Representative hath so erred in the resolution and decission of that Councell for in the debating of doubts questions propositions the case is otherwise and not the same I conceive and acknowledge but four Councells of this kind that of Nice of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedon The Church of England may seem to have been of a contrary mind in her determinations For Artic. 21. we read thus Generall Councels when they be gathered together forasmuch as they be an assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the spirit and word of God they may erre and sometime have erred even in things pertaining unto God Which decision of the Article is not home to this purpose as he particularly proves and hath the approbation of the Reverend Dr. Francis White afterward Bishop of Ely that he found nothing therein in that and his whole Book but what is agreeable to the Publick Faith Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England of whose Doctrine the said 21 Article is a noted part But because the Bishop leaves this Infallibility at above a thousand yeares distance viz the last Generall Councel of Chalcedon attributing no such thing to any the pretended Generall Councels since it is necessary I go seek a supplement somewhere else for the guidance of doubting persons who may be at loss what to think the state of the Church hath been in so long an intervall and if they take Posterity into their care what it may be in a much longer yet to come before such another Generall Councel meet now the Latine Church seemes to be finally settled upon the Lees of the Decisions in the Councel of Trent Among those many I have turned over I find not where to furnish my self better then from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that most glorious Martyr now a resplendent starr of magnitude among the Saints above in his famed Book commended by that Royall Martyr not long before he drank of the same Cup that bloudy Brook in the way to his celestiall Crown Archbishop Laud's Conference with Mr. Fisher the Iesuite where his Grace sayes Whether a Generall Councel may erre or not is a Question of great consequence in the Church of Christ To say It can not erre leaves the Church not onely without remedy against an errour once determined but also without sense that it may need a remedy and so without care to seek it To say It can erre seemes to expose the members of the Church to an uncertainty and wavering in the Faith to make unquiet spirits not onely to disrespect former Councels of the Church but also to slight and contemn whatsoever it may now determine I said the Determination of a Generall Councel erring was to stand in force and to have External Obedience at least yielded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary made the Errour appear and until thereupon another Councel of equal Authority did reverse it Pag. 146. 147. In the following Considerations is added with submission to our Mother the Church of England and to the Mother of us all the Universall Catholick Church of Christ That the Assistance of the H. Ghost is
by Holy Writt but it is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion unto many superstitions Appeal pag. 297. Yet allthough we deny the change so called to be reasonable or intelligible I remember not that we deny it to be possible by God's omnipotence which is not limited by rules of reason and naturall Philosophy in extraordinary transmutations But to say God does it because he can do it is no logicall argument nor holds it any more in this then in a thousand other things within the infinitude of his power which we be sure are not nor do we believe shall be ever actually accomplished And why her H. should be troubled in conscience about that she knew or might have known many learned honest and industrious men on both sides for that is truth had her H. taken time to look about her could never attain to beyond the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I confess is my wonder yea and so much the more because she had in her own power which was enough to quiet her own Conscience what she alledg'd she wanted for I positively demand who hindred her from believing Transubstantiation if by Revelation or self-perswasion or submission to the opinion of some admired or endeared person she was prevailed with to believe it true or intrinsecally to adhaere to it as if it were Who from paying divine worship after such mis-perswasion or submission to the body and blood of our Saviour when tender'd to her upon her knees The Church directed her R. H. among others what she would have her do according to the Doctrine published in the Confession of it but the Church enquired not after what she thought or with what intention she acted her part in that holy duty and I hope her Conscience was not troubled because others did not upon like principles or in kind compliance what she would have them and tell her H. so at their hazard Our Bishop Iewell quotes D. Tonstall and seemes not to dislike it saying thus Of the manner and meane how this might be whether by Transubstantiation or otherwise perhaps it had been better to leave every man that would be Curious to his own Conjecture as before the Councel of Laterane it was left at liberty Pef. of Apol. pag. 237. And in generall upon like occasion wherein this may be suppos'd included sayes that H. Martyr Archbishop Laud how far that Belief or any other sinkes into a man's heart is for none to judge but God Conf. p. 213. Further yet Her ghostly Father of the Roman Church if none of ours were to be trusted might have instructed her That Suarez among divers other a learned man of great note with them made plain confession That to believe Transubstantiation is not necessary to be taken in to the Doctrine of Fayth and why then should her H. be so much concerned for it And D. Fisher sometime Bishop of Rochester That it cannot be proved by any Scripture Bishop Iewell Repl. And if not thence to be proved her perswasion was groundess and her labour in the search fruitless if not fallicious as to her self for most certain it is those deep-learned Doctours could dive further into the sense of H. Writ then a Lady that meant well but had little skill in Metaphysicks to assist her which Suarez himself sayes this point requires but against private illumination or a self-conceit of it whether so or no I can say nothing In summe the change that does so divide us what e're it be is a secret of God's own making and a secret of God's own keeping wherein her H. might have acquiesced with the like moderation as the Lady Elizabeth shewed before she came to be Queen which she might have read with the other passages in Dr. Heylyn's History very substantially and significantly allthough rhythmically thus expressed 'T was God the Word that spake it He took the Bread and brake it And what the Word did make it That I believe and take it I add but one word more The mysteries being so great and the difficulties being so many I much doubt whether the more intelligent sort of Roman-Catholiques do themselves believe Transubstantiation though so earnest for it to obtain the better Character among the more simple Devotes that do which when I was in those countreys I adventur'd to tell some of them who had patience enough to hear it without making a very earnest much less a reproachfull answer and very glad I am that upon this occasion I have met with countenance and am confirmed in my suspicion by a most reverend and able Authour Archbishop Laud Conf. pag. 192. where his Grace declares opinion in these few lines As for the Learned of those zealous-men that died in this Cause in Q. Maries dayes they denied not the Reall presence simply taken but as their Opposites forced Transubstantiation upon them as if that and the Reall presence had been all one Whereas all the Ancient Christians ever believed the one and none but Modern and Superstitious Christians believe the other if they do believe it for I for my part doubt they do not And as for the Un-learned in those times and all times their zeal they holding the Foundation may eat out their Ignorances and leave them safe Be contented with That it is the Body of Christ and do not seek nor define how it is so and we shall not contest nor contend sayes Bishop Mountagu in his Appeal Ch. 31. In which happy medium may both parties meet and be indissolubly or indivisibly for ever reconciled Of Infallibility Her Highnesses next discovery was an Infallibility of the Church but points not to any one or more Texts of Scripture by which she owned her self convinced nor yet teils us what she means by the Church nor in what points or cases she would have it infallible unless she intends all And where is that or those Texts of Scripture that did convince her What concerning Infallibility she might have learned from our most eminent Writers I shall produce for their sakes who may be under the same difficulty and perhaps not so successfull or sodain in meeting with the like satisfaction as our Dutchess did As for the most learned and acute Dr. Ier. Taylour I can not tell whether I were best advise 'em to read first or last of all his 1. Sect. of the second Part of the Disswalive from Popery where he treateth of it at large because if first I am afraid they will meet with such Moeanders uncertain windings and short turnes of subtilty I mean not Sophistry but Scholastike double refined notices which he makes unavoidable in the inquiry as they will hardly have courage enough to consult any other Authour afterward nor submission enough to arrest on him And if they take him last in hand whatsoever Rock of Authority or Reason they may have built on before the sharpness of his
over-scrupulous persons so well in smaller as greater matters in whose behalf for living Oracles or other certainty of infallible resolution I am yet to seek I confess And therefore setting aside all nice disputes about indefectibility of their Church and generality of Truth preserved by her I must and may I hope freely demand of Mounsieur Maimburg's Proxy if he have any in England Whether the Controversies or doubts raised in our Princess's breast were not emergent whereof since her R. H. could not be resolved with us I may modestly ask whither they sent her for satisfaction or rather what infallible Judge it was whom they brought to her bedside in that infirm condition I would use no railery in these solemn discourses but their matter of stating the case in quaestion does as it were obliege me to do somewhat like it after which short apologie I hope I may be allowed to proceed The Pope in person it could not be who is resident at Rome and has enough to do with the Controversies and emergences that from all parts of Christendome are carryed to him The Catholique Church it could be less in what notion soever taken whether as Collective Diffusive Representative c. No Councel sitting the dispersed Members of any impossibility not consulted and from the Conclave I hope came not the infallible spirit I say not in a Carriers budget as my Lord of Derry hath been pleased in a little ironie to word it with reference to that at Trent In fine this infallible Judge might be Monsieur Maimburg himself or some other Ghostly Father nearer hand alwayes readily prepared In nomine Domini sanctaeque Matris Ecclesiae to decide all Controversies and clear all scruples in an instant that could be suggested to him If so then I come about again to my learned Controvertist Mr. Chillingworth and borrow two or three questions from him which I leave to be applyed to the present Case as thought fit 1. Whether an ignorant man I insert or a knowing but doubting Lady be bound to believe any point to be decreed by the Church when his Priest or Ghostly Father assures him it is so 2. Whether his ghostly Father may not err in telling him so and whether any man can be obliged under pain of damnation to believe an errour 3. Whether he be bound to believe such a thing defined when a number of Priests perhaps ten or twenty tell him it is so And what assurance he can have that they neither err nor deceive him in this matter 4. I add another upon my own account though others may have done it before me whether it be not the same Church which now averrs her self to be infallible that made the first decision of it and if so how she can be sure she erred not in making the said decision which may carry on the question in infinitum where I leave it concluding with my Lord Bishop of Derry's question in the case What availeth it to say they have the Church for an infallible Iudge whilst they are not certain or do not know what the Church is or who this infallible Iudge is Sch. Gard. Pag. 406. Or what satisfaction had her R. H. in deserting our Church because she found no infallibility pretended by it and going over to the Church of Rome which though it pretends all that may be to it yet in reality can have as little as appears by what is said above CONFESSION The next point wherein her R. H. declares she was convinced is that of Confession The use whereof our Church neither denies nor discourageth in any case as I know but in some adviseth and in other wisheth it might be reduced into practice no exception being by her made against any frequency whereunto poor penitents may be inclined for quiet of Conscience and internal acquiessence The necessity of it she rejects yet layes no censure on them that hold it so they keep their opinion within their breasts and neither impose it on any dissenting brethren nor publish it to the disturbance of her members who may be well enough satisfied if when they see cause they can open their grief and by the ministery of God's holy Word receive the benefit and comfort of absolution That I may not be thought herein to go beyond my line or the rule by which I am to draw it Mr. Iones I will consult two or three of our very Orthodox Fathers whom I am sure you and your party are not able to confute Let the Learned Bishop Mountague be the first in his books afore cited who sayes in brief so much as needs in the case against his Informers who alledged for the opinion of our Church this That we must not confess our sins but only unto God 1. Shew me any such inhibition 2. The most that hath been said is That private Confession is free not tyed and therefore Juris positivi not divini 3. Therefore happily of conveniency not of absolute necessity 4. That in a private Confession unto a Priest a peculiar enumeration of all sinns both commission and omission with all circumstances and accidents is never necessary necessarily most an end not expedient nor yet all things considered required 5. It is confessed that private Confession unto a Priest is of very ancient practise in the Church of excellent use and practice being discreetly handled 6. We refuse it to none if men require it if need be to have it We urge it and perswade it in extremis We require it in case of perplexity for the quieting of men disturbed and their consciences 7. It hath been so acknowledged by those of the Church of Rome in the Visitation of the sick Before the receiving of the Lord's Supper According to which doctrine and injunction our Bishops do and should enquire in their Visitations touching the use and neglect of this so good an order as did that pious learned and reverend Bishop of Norwich Dr. Overal in the 21 Article enquired of in his Visitation 1619. concerning Ministers And as perhaps would do as who of our worthy Prelacy would not do his learned Successor in that See at Presentments were it not for the trouble of vindicating himself from Popery in the point against such as you and your party Mr. Jones which I the rather presume without his Lordships leave because of the excellent Sermon on this subject many years since Printed which I heard Preached by him at St. Mary's in Cambridge and although question'd by the Puritanical pragmatick party yet cleared by all other the more sound Doctors in that Consistory and applauded by all intelligent and right-principled Members in that our famous and flourishing University The more modern and most excellent Bishop Ier. Taylor although very censorious and invective in some circumstances enjoyn'd and practis'd in the Church of Rome is near so indulgent as his Predecessors in what hath been alledged as allowed by our Church for in Part 2. Sect. 11. of Disuas
he or it shall be so understood Else we know not where to find any words of Christ that import the real subsistence of both elements in one wine in bread or bread in wine eating his blood or drinking his flesh His Institution was otherwise and so was accordingly the practice of the Church for 1300 years together And Dr. Cressey confesseth Exom Pag. 602. This is not a matter of Doctrine but meer practise The Church sayes not it is unlawful to take it in both kindes Nor do we know where Christ ever sayd It is lawful or allowable to take it but in one Extraordinary Cases come not under consideration here and therefore he might have refrained to mention either the sick or antipathetick people As the Councel of Basil ought to have granted the poor Bohemians their dispensation without so hard I say not onely but most impious condition if in their Consciences they were otherwise perswaded as is believed they were I shall transcribe it from Archbishop Laud Conf. pag. 198. That it may be lawfull for them to receive the Sacrament as Christ commanded them but not unless they will acknowledge most opposite to Truth that they are not bound by Divine Law to receive it in both kindes At this rate our departed Dutchess might very well undertake for Christ's both promising and performing when her good Preist whom now she must say after has the like effrontery as others to make him say what they will Like the Heretick Severus in Anastasius Sinatia who maintained it lawfull and even necessary according to occasions and emergent heresies to alter and change the Doctrines of Christ and the Cardinal of Cusa affirmed it lawfull diversly to expound the Scriptures according to the times See Bishop Taylor Reall Pres. Sect. 3. Where his Lordship very pertinently observes That in the sixth Chapter of St. John's Gospell is earnestly pretended that our Saviour taught the mystery of Transubstantiation but with some different opinions And yet very many of the Romanists affirm That in this Chapter Christ does not speak of sacramental or oral manducation or of the Sacrament at all And Bellarmine going to excuse it sayes in effect That they did not do it very honestly for he affirms that they did it that they might confute the Hussites and the Lutherans about the Communion under both kinds And if it be so and not be so as it may serve a turn It is so for Transubstantiation and it is not so for half-Communion we have but little reason to rely upon their Judgment or Candor in any exposition of Scripture And here sayes Archbishop Laud their building with untempered mortar appears most manifestly For they have no shew to maintain this but the fiction of Thomas of Aquin That he which receives the Body of Christ receives also his Blood per concomitantiam by concomitancy because the Blood goes alwaies with the Body of which Term Thomas was the first Author I can find Conf. p. 198. Who was born says Bellarmine Anno 1224. and died Anno 1274. And as he was the first that invented it so the Councel of Constance was the first that decreed it after the year 1400. sayes my Lord of Derry in his Answer to Mounsieur de la Militiere But be the invention whose it will Bishop Taylor sayes it is a new whimsie of theirs which will not serve their turn for which he gives four reasons which are to be found in the forecited Section And the Bishop of Derry speakes slightly of it and good reason why because we need it not being secure without it Let what will become of Concomitance sayes he whilest we keep our selves to the Institution of Christ and the Universall practice of the Primitive Church p. 92. But I know his Lordships Christian charity was ever such as not to condemn so many millions of devout Souls as after the Councell of Constance if not after the more early invention of Thomas Aquinas neither had nor could have participated the H. Sacrament of the Altar otherwise then under one kind as at that time was and ever since has been the standing Decree or Practice of the Latine Church to all the ill effects and unhappy consequences of a perpetuall profanation and sacriledge in a half-Communion the fruition and benefit but of a meer Skeleton a bloodless carkass nor vivified nor vivifying body of Christ which carrieth horrour in the very conception and where beleeved utter affrightment from all future so imperfect so insignificant if not altogether a null-participation I am well assured neither of their Lordships were unacquainted with that special Treatise upon this subject written by the pious Cassander Dignissimus lectu A book most worthy the reading sayes Grotious to whose judgement our moderate Divines are prompt enough favourably to attend beside what Modrevius hath in his on the same Argument Vid. H. Gr. Annot. ad Consult Cassand Artic. 21. where he shews how easily this difference might be accorded were it not for the sin of Sacriledge so fiercely laid to the charge of the Roman Church in denying the Cup to the Laiety Which Luther Melanchthon and Bucer three leading men in the Reformation thought need not discourage well prepared Communicants from receivng the Sacrament in one kind which might be done they thought without sin What may be replyed to this sure enough that great Doctor and amphibious Calvinist Andr. Rivet on whom I affix that Epithet because of his living so long in France and Holland whence he contracted a perfect knowledge of all that Sect in either Nation had to urge in any point of Controversie against all others in Communion with the Church of Rome had in readiness what apologies could be made for those three too indulgent Patrons of the Reformation which he seperately and singly thus allegeth 1. That Luther when he came fresh from the Papacy confessed se fuisse Monachum Papistam insanissimum That he had been a Monk and a most mad Papist I think it was but by dilucid intervalls when he and his rigid followers became the soberest party of the Protestants and requested therefore that his writings might be read with commiseration no wonder then that he saw not alltogether at one prospect or intuition Certainly if he thought it Sacriledge in good earnest and properly so called he could not but know it at first sight to be a sin and the good Doctors apology in his behalf is but weak and accordingly the learned Grotius in his turn takes no notice of it What more for Luther Dr. Rivet addes Gr. Disc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 375. That he had brought in excuse his infirmity and as it were infancy and that when his mind was more illuminated he learned to be wise mends not the matter much it takes not off what Grotius affirmes at first he said 2. Let us therefore see what more he can say for Melanchthon To shew his better opinion in the Case he remits us to some
along with a finall renunciation of the Pope's usurpt Supremacy and tyranny over our King and Nation after 400 years dispute about the point with intervalls and variety of success on either side And an Oath may be tender'd to maintain the Kings Independent Praerogative in Church affairs quoad extra without any offence or resistance of the said H. Spirit Of which Praerogative yet if a King which I put at large because all Christian Kings are alike concern'd in the case will at any time remit and deliver freely or with some reserve his Ecclesiastike Power into the hands of the Church or into his whom he will constitute for the time Caput unitatis the Head of unity in his Realm as many have done and do at this present I know no reason why the Subject should not submit to that derivative power which being held of the King is ordained of God For to say That before the Reformation made any Subject might have withdrawn his obedience to the King because the King had vested that part of his power in the Pope I fear had been little less than resisting or at least declining the ordinance of God to go on no further in that Text. But I return to our most unhappily perplexed Princess who takes offence at the Bishops that were of the first Reformers for pretending their sole design to have been re-establishing the Doctrine and Discipline of the Primitive Church after Henry 8. had enterpriz'd a separation from Rome upon no other account but his own satisfaction in criminall pleasures What K. Henry 8's principall or less principall intents were I know none but the ghost of his Confessour if raised again could assure her The most Reverend Archbishop Cranmer no doubt knew most of his mind from beginning to end in the matter of divorce and what annexes it had of his criminall pleasures c. but in what I have seen of his Grace's writing I met with nothing at all which in that particular could have gratified her Highness yet be K. Henry's meaning alltogether so bad as suspected I understand not why the Reverend Bishops who were better inclined should be involved with him in the sin being instruments under God of bringing good out of evil and who by such degrees as K. Henry's other policies would permit made good that pretence both the rest of his and in the few years of Edward 6. his Reign howsoever managed by that covetous Lord Protectour in his minority as in a great part beside other instances our Historians have mentioned does undeniably appear in that little Code of Reformation as I may call it entituled The institution of a Christian Man composed and published by and with the consent of many pious and prudent persons Anno 1537. viz the two Archbishops at that time nineteen of the Bishops eight Archdeacons and seventeen Professours of Divinity Ecclesiasticall and Civill Lawes which book and some other like beside many Dedicatory and Praefatory Epistles praefixed to them if her H. had neither in possession nor seen she was strangely destitute of due assistance and not well praepared for so severe a censure in a praecipitate Declaration Nor yet much better I fear for the application she next made to instruct her self in the controversiall points between us and the Roman-Catholiques having not read as may be presumed the Primitive Fathers and Councels but relying upon sole Scripture without the Conciliators of Texts if not opposite inconsistent in shew nor other authentike Interpreters but her own private spirit perhaps forearmed with prayers and teares but not praeassured by promise of Divine assistance and all desired success in the revelation of truth the solemn objection thrust upon us successively by the Papists and a too forward adventure which most commonly imports more haste then good speed as is here manifested by the sequel in her own Confession That the Scripture she believed not her self by her self capable to understand Yet on her H. went and notwithstanding the distrust she had of self and solitary abilities to her astonishment in the most difficult points of all drew with her own Bucket more truth as she was mis-perswaded from the bottom of the Well then the woman of Samaria could do with hers who went her way and left her water-pot behind her having her thirst quencht indeed yet not with the water she her self had drawn but with that of the Spirit infused from the mouth of the Messias the infallible Prophet the Christ as the Samaritan so good as confessed to the Citizens she earnestly called upon to come and see not to suddainly believe until better attested to 'em Venite videte not venite credite as Aquinas has it from St. Chrysostom And proijciat hydriam qui vult Evangelizare He or she that will evangelize or interpret the Gospell rightly must leave his Bucket behind him or break his Water-pot in pieces I' ay tronve neantmoins c. Yet notwithstanding her distrust her H. found what she could not promise her self so soon to discover severall things which now appeared so plain and according to her judgment so easie to comprehend that she wondred a thousand times how so long time had passed without reflecting on 'em The particulars whereof she now was strongly convinced fortement convaincue were 1. The reall presence of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar 2. The infallibility of the Church 3. Confession Auricular she meanes And 4. Prayers for the Dead Of all which could I be convinced by the strongest argument I have heard or read in their Controversiall Writers I would soon be so far converted too Of the first so many volumes have been written on both sides that I am perswaded there can be little argument invented new on either to avoid transcript or the Author's disrepute of being plagiary but what is futile in so serious a quaestion or what makes the Schisme and Distance between us unnecessarily if not affectedly greater for setting aside the History of opinions in the severall ages of the Church the quotations of Fathers and other modern Authors the variety of expressions every man desiring to utter his own mind in his own words I really believe the substance of what we mean as relating to the whole controversie might be as well and as intelligibly contracted into one single sheet as spread upon so many thousand quires of Paper which fly about the world But to the point The reall presence la presence reelle in the Sacrament of the Altar was the first thing her R. H. missed in the Church of England I hope the Reverend D. Sutclive did not whose book she ever had in her hand when we approached to administer the body and blood of our Saviour to her upon her knees If he did I am sure his equalls and his superiours our Church Dignitaries and others have not declined the term Real from the beginning of our Reformation to this day nor to declare what is meant by
the same according to the sense and acception of the Primitive Fathers whom they cite in multitudes to authorize the Doctrine of our Church therein Of some the most eminent I shall render their own words and afterward apply my self to what follows Let the most Reverend Archbishop Cranmer be the first who in the Preface of his Answer unto D. Stephen Gardiner p. 1. sayeth Where I use to speak sometimes as the old Authors do that Christ is in the Sacraments I mean the same as they did understand the matter that is to say not of Christ's carnall presence in the outward Sacrament but sometimes of his Sacramentall presence That Christ and his holy Spirit be truely and indeed present by their mighty and sanctifying power vertue and grace in all them that worthily receive the same Again pag. 8. of his first Book of the Sacrament As he giveth the Bread so giveth he his very body to be eaten with our Faith And therefore I say that Christ giveth himself truely to be eaten chawed and digested but all is Spiritually with Faith not with mouth The Reader is to take notice That when his Grace useth the termes verily and indeed which are the same in our Church-Catechisme I understand his sense aequivalent to theirs after him who say really upon the like occasion neither he nor they meaning more or less then our Church does nor all otherwise then did the Primitive Fathers for when really is extended to denote transubstantially his Grace afterward utterly disclaimes it As does likewise the Right Reverend Bishop Iewell of Sarum our Church Apologist against the Papists pag. 319. of his Reply to Mr. Harding's Answer We teach the people not that a naked Sign or Token but that Christ's Body and Blood indeed and verily is given unto us that we verily eat it that we verily drink it that we verily be relieved and live by it Yet we say not either that the substance of the Bread or Wine is done away or that Christ's Body is let down from Heaven or made Really or Fleashly Present in the Sacrament The most Reverend Archbishop Laud declines not at all the word but commends it for the best that can be used in the matter of the H. Sacrament pag. 188. of the Relat. of his Conf. speaking of C. Bellarmine thus Now if he had left out Conversion and affirmed only Christ's reall presence there after a mysterious and indeed an ineffable manner no man could have spoke better Again pag. 192. And for the Church of England nothing is more plain than that it believes and teaches the True and Reall presence of Christ in the Eucharist And this his Grace declares not only for himself but urgeth that Archbishop Cranmer comes more plainly and more home to it than Frith a Martyr for it that had said enough before For if you understand saith he by this word really Reipsa that is in very deed and effectually so Christ by the grace and efficacy of his Passion is indeed and truly present c. but if by this word Really you understand Corporaliter Corporally in his natural and Organical Body under the Forms of Bread and Wine 't is contrary to the Holy Word of God And so likewise Bishop Ridley Nay Bishop Ridley addes yet farther and speaks so fully to this Point as I think no man can add to his Expression Both you and I saith he agree in this That in the Sacrament is the very true and natural Body and Blood of Christ even that which was born of the Virgin Mary which ascended into Heaven which sits on the right hand of God the Father which shall come thence to judge the quick and the dead Only we differ in modo c. With the aforesaid Prelates the learned Bishop Mountagu thus accords pag. 250. of his Answer to the Gagger He gave substance and really subsisting essence who said This is my body this is my Blood It. pag. 251. Poor Woodcock or Catholique Cockscomb that sendest a Protestant to seek a figure who is as reall and substantiall as any Papist Id. afterward in his Appeale pag. 289. speaking to the Informers Which Reall presence in your Divinity is flat Popery but not in the Divinity of the Church of England for this he cites Bishop Bilson Andrews Morton and for the easie accommoding the difference between them and us were it not for the Jesuites faction on their side and the Puritans on ours the incomparable Hooker that Puritanomastix as he calls him To this effect is the late Bishop of Durham's first Chapter in his accurate History of Papal Transubstantiation where the Reall that is the true and not imaginary Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist is asserted out of the Sacred Scriptures according to the very words praefixed in the Title of it And the most acute no less solid Bishop Ier. Taylor in his larger Tractate entituled The Reall presence and Spirituall of Christ in the blessed Sacrament Proved against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Which Doctrine is that no question her H. meanes though couched in the word Reall not considering perhapps that Real-Spiritual may alltogether as well be in conjunction as Real-Carnal or Corporeal otherwise her complaisance in the discovery had not been such as to deserve her astonishment or wonder when of so many learned Writers we have upon that Subject she could scarce have taken a book in hand which would not have set the terme or true sense and meaning of it in her view with the concession of our Church if she had read or heard other of it the Authours were not well studyed in the point but took on trust the expressions of our early Writers after the Reformation whereas the true state of the Controversy was not so clearly understood at first on either side as it is now Sayed the Bishop of Derry Sch. Gard. p. 378. And being so in the opinion of those I mention'd and many more may the difference so formidable as it looks be much more easily reconciled then heretofore both sides contributing their symbol to a happy peace and not struggling for that which never will be made good and evident on either For had her H. known or consided what the Authour of Fiat lux saies there have been fifty or threescore several interpretations of these few words Hoc est corpus meum This is my body which it may be upon further search he might have multiplied to a hundred by variety of paraphrase in every man's peculiar distinct way of expression and did all those vanish or return to their first origen the literal sense at last by fixing a more steady eye or serious thought then formerly upon the Text Bishop Mountagu who had many Bibles and Interpreters of all sorts about him after a thorough search could not so determine it but much otherwise viz. Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine in the Supper of the Lord cannot be proved