difficulty to get thither and yet that belonging of right to the examination of all men the darkness of the understanding the easiness wherewith men may deceive themselves the want of necessary helps the ignorance and simplicity of the greatest part of men would not hinder it Those are then no other than frivolous Reasons which cannot take away from men that right that God and Nature have given them They ought therefore to enjoy it at least in some respect to wit for the deciding of the question whether they ought to lose it or no. 13. But it is certain they can never so enjoy it in that regard nor decide that Question without entring upon an examination of all their Doctrines which lets us see yet more and more the absurdity of our Adversaries Principle For there is not any Principle more absurd than that which destroys it self which cannot be established but by making use of a contrary Principle and which precisely can have no place but there where it cannot be of any use But all that may be said of that Principle of those Gentlemen since it is most true that to establish it one must necessarily proceed to examine their Doctrines and that they can never know whether they ought to refer themselves to the Latin Church or examine that Doctrine by themselves till they have made that examination that is to say till there shall be no farther occasion to refer themselves to that Authority of the Latin Church which makes pleasant sport enough This is that which is evidently manifest if one consider it that before one can acknowledge the Authority of the Latin Church it must be supposed that one is assured that among all the Religious Societies that are in the World the Christian is the only one in which one ought to place himself and that can never be known but by one way only which is that of examining its Doctrine and its Worship In effect there is not any one of those external marks that can make that difference The Jews had their Miracles Antiquity Succession an uninterrupted Duration the Holiness of their Patriarchs the Light of their Prophecies the Majesty of their Ceremonies we do not dispute these marks with them and as to Temporal Prosperity they had it heretofore and we are not assured that we have always had that whereof we make such boasting which nevertheless is not very great The Mahometans glory that they have the same things with the consent of the People and the admirable success of their Arms and as for Antiquity which they fail in they say that as Jesus Christ did but succeed Moses so Mahomet also has succeeded Jesus Christ As for the Heathens they had as I have said their Miracles their Saints their Prophets their Ceremonies their Succession their uninterrupted Duration their Temporal Prosperities and if we strive with them about Antiquity and Multitude the advantage will not lye on our side There is then nothing more deceitful than those external appearances separated from their Doctrines they are as proper to make a Jew remain a Jew a Heathen a Heathen and a Mahometan to remain a Mahometan as to make a Christian to remain a Christian whence it follows that to form well that difference and to be assured that the Christian Communion is the only good one one ought to examine its Worship and its Doctrines Moreover before they could acknowledge the Authority of the Latin Church they must suppose that a man is sure that among all the Christian Sects the Latin only is the true Church and that cannot be known but by the examination of its Doctrines Those external marks can be no ways proper for it The Greeks the Abyssines the Nestorians ascribe to themselves Antiquity Succession Miracles an uninterrupted Duration as well as the Latins They have their Saints their Prophets their Ceremonies and their Multitude which is not less considerable and as to worldly Prosperity the Abyssines may boast of it and the Muscovites also who make a part of the Greek Church and who knows whether that of the Latin Church shall never change It is then manifest that they can conclude nothing from those marks separated from their Doctrine they are so ambiguous and uncertain that they cannot fix any setled Judgment upon them concerning the truth of the Latin Church But supposing that they could by those external marks or by any other ways which they would take be assured that the Latin Church was the true Church I say it must necessarily be understood in this Sence to wit that in that visible Communion God brings up and preserves his truly Faithful ones For it is in those only that that name of the visible Church is verified and not in the prophane the wicked and the worldly who are mingled with them and who are none of that Body that is the Spouse of Jesus Christ They must then be assured before they can know whether they ought to refer themselves absolutely to that Body of Pastors that governs the Latin Church that the prophane and the worldly do not prevail in that Body and that they never have prevailed for if they do prevail or if they ever have prevailed they may introduce errours into the publick Ministry and false Worship or suffer them to come in through their negligence or otherwise or scatter abroad the ill Doctrines of the Schools amongst the People favour ill customs and in a word corrupt that Communion as it appears that that did come to pass in the Jewish Church and sometimes in the Christian But how can any be fully assured that it may not be so at present otherwise then by the examining of her Doctrine They ought then to give up that point of external marks our Fathers have gained their cause without going any farther by the Prejudices of Corruption which I have set down in the second and third Chapters But if you take them only as meer conjectures and if you will reckon them to be nothing it is certain that to be assured that there is nothing corrupted in a Communion where God brings up and preserves his true Faithful people that the publick Ministry is pure in all its Doctrines and in its Worship one must of necessity take that way of examination and that examination must be very exact So that before we can enter only upon that Question whether we ought to give to the Latin Church a Soveraign Authority over our Faith and Consciences the discussing of which they know not how to avoid all must be examined from whence it follows that that Principle which I have opposed is absur'd because it destroys it self and none can ever practise it till it cannot be any more of any use and more absur'd yet in that when it would hinder us from examining it constrains us to make an examination as exact as can be thought of CHAP. IX An Examen of those Reasons they alleadge to Establish that Soveraign Authority
wrote to Leo with all the respect imaginable and let him see that the Questors and those who had till that time upheld them had dishonoured his See and his Church that as to himself he found himself very unhappy to see that their Calumnies should have prevailed over his Innocence and he further offered to give over that matter of Indulgences and wholly to be silent in it provided that his Adversaries should do the like But whether it was that all that Negotiation of Miltit was but feigned on his part or that in effect his counsel was not approved by those of his Party as Luther himself insinautes it is certain that from the time that that Letter had been drawn from him George Duke of Saxony a Prince that stuck very close to the Interests of the Pope desired that he would make a publick Disputation at Leipsic upon the matters in controversy the dispute was managed the beginning between Eccius and Carolostad concerning Free-will and Grace but they drew in Luther himself upon the subject of Indulgences of Purgatory and the Power of the Pope And they procured almost at the same time from the Universities of Cologn and Lovain a condemnation of divers Articles drawn out of his Books He defended himself against these new Adversaries and made the World see by his publick writings the truth of his Doctrine and the injustice of those Condemnations But within a little after Pope Leo being unwilling to try any thing further published his terrible Bull of Excommunication against him which they call the Bull Exurge There after having earnestly importuned Jesus Christ Saint Peter and Saint Paul with all the Saints in Paradise to come to the succour of the Church of Rome he sets down in particular one and forty Articles of Luthers Doctrine which he declared to be respectively pestilent destructive scandalous false heretical offending pious Ears seducing Souls and contrary to the Catholick Truth and to the Charity to the respect and obedience that was owing to the Church of Rome which is the Mother of all the Faithful and the Mistriss of the Faith and as such severally he condemned them disproved them rejected them and declared that they ought to be rejected by Christians of both Sexes He forbad all Bishops Patriarchs Metropolitans and generally all Church-men and Kings the Emperour the Electors Princes Dukes Marquesses Earls Barons Captains c. and in a word all sorts of men to hold those Articles or to favour them in any manner what soever under the penalty of Excommunication and being deprived of their Lands and of their Goods and treated as infamous Hereticks favourers of Hereticks and guilty of High Treason And as to Luther he complained of him that he would not come to Rome where he would have let him have seen that he had not done so much evil as he believed and he agravated it as a great rashness in him to have appealed to a Council against the Constitutions of Pius the Second and of Julius the Second who would have those punished as Hereticks that made such appeals That therefore he condemned as Hereticks him and all his Adherents if in the space of fifty days they did not renounce all their Errours he forbad all Christians to have any Commerce or Conversation with them or to yeild them any necessary things and gave his Orders to the Emperour to Kings and Princes c. to seize their Persons and to send them to Rome promising great rewards to those who should do so good a work Luther some time after wrote against that Bull and appealed afresh to a Council lawfully called notwithstanding he justified himself with great solidity about all those condemned Articles And it is pertinent to note that among those Articles that the Pope Anathematized as Heretical or Rash or Scandalous and contrary to the Catholick Truth these following Propositions might be found That that Proverb was most true that said That the best Pennance is a good Life that it would be very well if the Church in a Council should ordain that the Laity should receive the Communion in both kinds That the Treasure of the Church from whence the Pope drew his Indulgences is not the Merits of Jesus Christ and the Saints That the Bishop of Rome the Successour of Saint Peter is not the Vicar of Jesus Christ over all the Churches of the world nor that there was any one established by Jesus Christ himself in the Person of Saint Peter That it is not in the power of the Church or of the Pope to make Articles of Faith nor to establish new Laws for Manners or for good Works That tho' the Pope should hold with a great part of the Church an opinion which should not it self be erronious yet it would not be a sin or an heresy to hold a contrary opinion especially in things not necessary to Salvation until a General Council should have disproved the one and approved of the other that the Ecclesiastical Prelats and Secular Princes did not do ill when they abolished the Order of begging Friers That Purgatory could not be proved by the Holy Canonical Scripture These Propositions are declared to be either pestilent or pernicious or scandalous or heretical without specifying any one in particular for the Pope speaks of them only in the whole that they are such So it was that Leo and all his Court managed those matters To affirm that a true amendment of Life a holy and sincere return from Vice to Vertue is the best of all Pennances appeared to be a detestable crime to them To wish that a General Council might establish the Communion of the Eucharist according to the Institution of Jesus Christ and the Custom of the Primitive Church was such an abomination with them as was thought sufficient to deserve the Flames Not to beleive that the Merits of Jesus Christ and of the Saints made up a certain Treasure which neither Faith nor Holiness nor Repentance could give the Faithful any part of but which were to be dispenced only by the way of Indulgences for money pass'd in their Judgments for a Hellish Heresie To hold that our Faith has nothing else but the Word of God for its object and not that of men also and that God alone can impose moral Laws on the Conscience was in their opinion an astonishing wickedness To believe that one may without Herefy hold an opinion contrary to that of the Pope in matters not necessary to Salvation and not determined by any Council was a pestilent errour To give the least blow to the interests of Monks or the Fire of Purgatory was an horrible sacriledge for which there was not any remission After that condemnation the Pope wrote to John Frederick Elector of Saxony earnestly entreating him not to give any more protection to Luther and he sent Hierome Aleander his Nuntio into Germany to cause that condemnation to be executed But Aleander not being able to obtain of
God lose nothing either of its Truth or its Authority 3. It is a very strange thing that the Author of the Prejudices has not taken any heed in laying down a very bad Argument against us of furnishing us with a very good one against the Church of Rome in that Estate wherein it was in the days of our Fathers For if we ought to Judge of the Doctrine by the Qualities or the Actions of those who Teach it I pray consider what Judgment could our Fathers make of that Religion that the Court of Rome and its Prelats taught and whether they had not all the grounds in the World to reform themselves If there be no likelyhood that God committed the Care of Reforming his Church to persons who were guilty of Scandalous Actions there is far less that God has given Infallibility and a Soveraign Authority over mens Consciences to such persons as the Popes and Prelats in the days of our Fathers were according to the Description which the unsuspected Authors that we have quoted give us of them and divers others that we might here add to them if we so pleased And that which makes these two Arguments differ is that his concludes upon a Principle which we maintain to be false and ill where ours concludes upon a Principle which he himself admits and acknowledges to be good so that in his own Judgment we have a sufficient Fundation whereon to Establish the Justice of our Reformation Let us see nevertheless of what Nature those Actions are wherewith he reproaches our first Reformers I will not says he stay to examine the Accusations wherewith they have been charged by divers Authors I do not pretend to detain my self in any but those publick things that are so manifest and so exposed to the Eyes of all the World I confess he has Reason not to stay upon all that which his Passion has invented against them for who knows not that Calumny has no bounds especially when interest and passion stir it up Our Reformers are not the only persons who have been attacked after that manner The Jews said of John the Baptist that he had a Devil and of Jesus Christ that he was a Blasphemer a Samaritan a glutton and a Wine-bibber a friend of Publicans and sinners If then they have called the Father of the Family Beelzebub what will they not say of his Servants But what then are those things that are so Publick so manifest and so exposed to the Eyes of the whole World which the Author of the Prejudices has found fit to be insisted upon That new Gospel says he was Preached only out of the mouths of those Monks who had quitted their habit and their profession ouly to contract Scandalous Marriages or from the mouths of those Priests who had violated that Vow of Virginity which the Calvinists themselves confess to have been imposed on all Priests and on all Monks in the West by divers Councils and on all the Monks and all the Bishops in the East and the first fruit of this Doctrine was the setting open the Cloisters the taking off the Vails of the Nuns the abolishing of all Austerities and overthrowing of all manner of discipline in the Church This is that that forces him to say That the Reformers struck mens Eyes with a Spectacle that could not but create horrour according to the common Idea's of Piety and Vertue whech the Fathers give us The Author of the Prejudices will not take it ill that in order to our Answering him we must put him in mind what he himself exhorts us to To Transport our selves into another Time then that wherein we are at present and to represent to our selves our Separation in its first rise and during the first years wherein it was made amidst the Switzers and in France Upon his thus placing us in that State which he desires we will declare to him that The general Depravation which reign'd amidst the Monks and the Priests is to our Eyes a Spectacle worthy of horror according to the common Ideas of Piety and Vertue which the holy Scriptures and right Reason give us We will tell him that that which Scandalizes us is to see that for a respect of a purely humane Order they endured for so long a time a disorder that dishonoured the Latin Church that drew upon it God's Judgments and that laid open the Ministry of the Church to an everlasting reproach It is in the detesting of those Infamies and those Impurities that the true zeal of Christians ought to consist and it is to the searching out of a solid remedy for them that one ought to apply the Discipline of the Church and not to keep them up under a pretence of observing rash Vows and a Caelibasy that God never commanded If the Author of the Prejudices is more Scandalized to see Priests and Monks Married then to see them plunged into all the filthyness of Debauchery I cannot hinder my self from telling him that he makes Christianity a Law of Hypocrisy and it may be yet somewhat worse for Hypocrisy does not content it self with meer Names she would have fair appearances without of those things which she really rejects Whereas for him he rejects not only the things but their appearances also suffering patiently the loss of any more seeing either the things or their appearances provided we do not meddle with those empty names of Caelibacy and Virginity But true Moral Christianity inspires other Sentiments she would have us honour that Caelibacy and Virginity as gifts that come from God but she would also have a Contempt and horrour for those specious names when they shall be applyed to those beastlinesses and excesses which both God and Men condemn She would have us in that Case instead of being Scandalized to see a false Caelibacy made void and a vain shadow of Virginity abolished that we should on the contrary be edified to see them got out from those snares of sin and to have recourse to a lawful Marriage that God has allowed unto all and that he has even commanded unto those who have not received the gift of Continency It was in the View of this that our Fathers lookt upon the Marriage of those Priests and Monks as the Abolishing of an unjust Law contrary to the express words of Saint Paul if they cannot contain let them Marry and which moreover had produced such mischeivous effects as it was no longer possible for them to indure But says the Author of Prejudices we do not intend to speak of the Interests of Families of Marriage nor of base and fleshly passions in the lives of those Great Bishops and all those great men of old whom God opposed to the Heresies that rose up against his Church as Saint Cyprian Saint Athanasius Saint Basil Saint Gregory Nazianzen Saint Jerome Saint Epiphanius Saint Chrysostome and Saint Augustine They were all of them eminent in Sanctity in a disingagement
who laboured in the Reformation of their Churches religiously Observed They constrained no person and they rejected nothing that was not Alien to the Christian Religion But says the Author of the Prejudices Those two hundred Burghers of a Swisse Town were as Learned and ready in matters of Divinity as we may easily Judge Swisse Burghers to be I answer that this is the Objection of the Pharisees This People said the Enemies of Jesus Christ know not the Law But Jesus Christ did not answer them amiss when he said to them Father I thank thee Lord of Heaven and Earth that thou hast bid these things from the Wise and Prudent and revealed them unto Babes Let the Author of the Prejudices if he will be of the number of those wise and prudent ones we shall not envy him his readiness and his Learning and we shall rest satisfied with this that it has pleased God to place us in the same Rank with those mean Swisse Burghers to whom as much Babes as they were God vouschafed to make his Gospel known The true knowledge of Christians does not consist in having a head full of Scholastick Speculations and a Memory loaded with a great many Histories and multitudes of passages of divers Authors or a great many Critical Notions nor in having well-studied Lombard Albertus Magnus Thomas Aquinas Scotus Bonaventure Capreolus Aegidius Romanus Occham Gabriel Biel the Canon Law the Decretals and all those other great Names wherewith they stunned the People in times past Our True knowledge is the Holy Scripture Read with Humility Charity Faith and Piety See here all that those poor Burghers of Zurich knew they were neither Prelats nor Cardinals nor Doctors of Lovain nor of the Sorbonne but they were good men they feared God they studied his Word and for the rest of the State of their understandings and the degree of their light may appear by the Reformation which they made for the Tree may be known by its Fruits 4. Objection The matter which was to have been handled in that pretended Synod cannot be more considerable For they Treated therein about abolishing all at once the Authority of all the Councils that were held in the Church since the Apostles days under a pretence of reducing all to the Scripture Answer Since the True Authority of the Fathers and Councils consists in their Conformity with the Divine writings the way solidly to establish them is to reduce all to the Scripture as they did in that Synod If the Author of the Prejudices pretends to give the Fathers and Councils and Authority quite different from that of the Word of God whereof they ought to be the Ministers and Interpreters we may answer him that he affronts them under a pretence of Honouring them For as it is the greatest real injury that can be done to a Subject to give him the Authority of his Prince So it is the most real injury which they can do to the Fathers to invest them with the Authority of God 5. Objection They medled with the Faith of all the other Christian Churches which the Switzers could not but condemn in embracing a new Faith Answer The Swisses did not embrace a new Faith but they renounced those Errors that it may be might have prevailed for some Ages but which were new in regard of the Christian Religion They did not condemn other Churches in that which they had of good but they condemned that evil which they had in them A sick person who has cured himself condemns the diseases of others but he condemns not that Life which remains in them On the contrary he exhorts them to be healed for fear least remaining in that sick condition they should die 6. Object They treated about all those dangerous Consequences which that Change of Religion would have produced and which were easy to have been foreseen Answ They Treated also about the Glory of God and their own Salvation and all those dangerous Consequences which could not but come from the blindness and passion of those who would hold the People of God under their servitude ought not to have prevailed over two such great interests as that of the Glory of God and Mens Salvation All these Objections are well near the same that the Pagans made against the Primitive Christians and it seems that the Author of the Prejudices has studied them out of Celsus Prophyrie and Julian to make use of them against us 7. Object Moreover they declared that they would have men make use of the Authority of the Scripture only and by that rash and unheard of Prejudice they condemned the procedure of all the foregoing Councils wherein they were wont to produce the opinion of the Fathers to decide the controverted Questions Answ The Scripture is the only Rule of the Faith of Christians and there is no other but that alone whose Authority we ought to admit as Soveraign and decisive of Controversies It is not True that all the foregoing Councils admitted of the Opinions of the Fathers and their Traditions under that Quality The Author of the Prejudice lays it down without Proof and Reason 8. Object The Church being in possession of its Doctrine they ought to have forced Zuinglius to produce his Accusations against that Doctrine and to have made the proofs which he alleadged against it to have been examined But in stead of that they ordered that he should appear in that Disputation in Quality of Defender and that it should be the others part to convince him if Error Answ If the Church of Rome would have the World believe the Doctrine that she Teacheth it is fit she should furnish it with proofs and her pretended possession cannot assure it Those who propound any thing as matter of Faith are naturally bound to prove it and it is absurd to say that Possession discharges that Obligation for the Faith ought to be always founded upon proof and it never stands upon meer possession otherwise the Heathens ought to have kept their Religion which was established on so Antient a Possession 9. Object All that Examination was further grounded upon this ridiculous Principle That if there could not be found any person within the Territory of Zurich that could make the Errors of Zuinglius appear by the Scripture it ought to be concluded that he had none As if the weakness of those who opposed his Doctrine could not be an effect of their Ignorance rather then a default in the cause they defended Answ This Objection is no more to the purpose then the foregoing What could the Senate of Zurich have done more then to have assembled all the Clergy of their States to have called the Bishop of Constance or his Deputies thither to have received all the World and given all liberty of propounding their Arguments and Proofs It belonged to them to propound them if they had any and if they had none they ought to have acknowledged that 'till then
her by her common Practice which being open to the Eyes of all the World discovers much more clearly the true Sentiments of that Church when the decisions of the Councils do not and the Act of which the people scarce know any 2. Because the Council of Trent it self and the Act of the Profession of the Faith obliging as they do those who submit themselves to it to receive in general unwritten Traditions and those things which the Church of Rome Observes they engage them by consequence to receive and practise all that which is commonly observed and practised in that Church under a pretence of Tradition and observance although it should not be formally contained either in the decisions of Councils or in that Profession of Faith So that the Conscience of a man who is in that Communion binds him to believe and do all that others believe and do 16. Objection The Third kind of Calumny is not less ordinary in their Ministers nor less unjust in it self It consists in running down as blameable Errors certain Articles of the belief of the Church which not only were no Errors but about which they have been at last constrained to acknowledge that the difference between them and the Church consists more in words then in the thing it self whether they themselves have forsook their first thoughts to take up those of the Catholicks or whether by a blind rashness they had openly condemned them without understanding them To prove this Corruption the Author of the Prejudices lays down the point of Justification which he says the first Reformers took for the chief ground of their Separation and yet nevertheless he adds one of their Professors of Sedan named Ludovicus le Blanc who has made some Theses of Justification after having examined the Doctrine of the Catholicks and that of the Protestants and their principal differences about that matter concludes upon all the Articles that that of the Catholicks is good and that the Protestants are only contrary to them in name Answ I acknowledge that in this Controversy the Church of Rome takes the word Justification in one sence and that we take it in another and I do not deny but that has sometimes produced in that dispute ambiguities and differences or Words This is also that which M. le Blanc had a design to clear in his Theses of Justification which the Author of the Prejudices has abused But besides that in that very thing we have two advantages over the Church of Rome the one that we speak as the Scripture has done and that we take the words after the manner that Jesus Christ that Saint Paul and Saint James have taken them when they have Treated about this Doctrine whereas the Church of Rome gives them another sence and the other that in so taking the words in their true Signification that Idea that we give of Justification is distinct and clear where that of the Church of Rome is embroiled and confused Besides that I say it is certain that we have but too real differences upon that point which no ways consists in words but in the very things themselves and which make very weighty Controversies To Manifest this Truth we need but to cast our Eyes upon the four chief Doctrines that form the Idea of our Justification according as the Scripture has given it us The First is That it is an Act of the Soveraign mercy of God that pardons our sins and which by Vertue of the Satisfaction of Jesus Christ discharges us from the punishment we have deserved by them The Second is That God out of that same mercy in pardoning our sins adopts us for his Children and gives us a right to his Eternal Inheritance by the merit of Jesus Christ his Son The Third That we apply to our selves the satisfaction and merit of Jesus Christ by a lively Faith accompanied with a sincere Repentance and a Holy Recourse to the Divine Mercy and that it is this Faith that puts us into the Communion of our Redeemer And the Fourth That God in pardoning and adopting us imposes this Condition upon us that for the time to come we live Holily according to the Laws which he has given us and that this very thing is a necessary Consequence of that Communion which we have with Jesus Christ as well as of our Faith our Repentance and our Recourse to the Divine mercy There is not any one of these parts of our Justification upon which we have nor very considerable differences with the Church of Rome For in the First we differ 1. Concerning him who Pardons us The Church of Rome would have it not only that it should be God in the Quality of a Soveraign Judge but men also that is to say Priests and Bishops in Quality of inferiour and Subordinate Judges and that their Absolution is a Judiciary Act for so the Council of Trent has defined it to be But we believe that there is none besides God who can pardon our sins under the Quality of a Soveraign Judge and that the Pardon which we receive from the Mouth of his Ministers is a Ministerial Pardon which consists in a Declaration that they make to us of Gods Pardon as the Interpreters of his will revealed in the Gospel 2. We differ about the extent of that Pardon The Church of Rome would have it that God in pardoning the Sin retains the Punishment that is to say that he acquits us from eternal Punishment but that reserves to himself the inflicting of Temporal Punishments and we on the contrary hold that he remits all sorts of Temporal and Eternal punishments and that the Afflictions which he sends us are not the Punishments of his Justice but the Corrections and Chastisements of his Fatherly Discipline 3. From whence there arises a Third difference which consists in this that the Church of Rome believes that those Temporal Punishments wherewith God visits us are true Satisfactions to his Justice for our sins which we deny 4. There arises from thence yet another difference concerning that which they call those penal works which every one imposes upon himself or which their Confessors impose on their Penitents for they would that these should be also satisfactions to the Justice of God which we do not believe 5. The Church of Rome would have it that those satisfactory Punishments should go beyond this Life and it is partly upon this that they ground their Doctrine of Purgatory which we reject 6. It is also upon that very thing that the Indulgences of the Church of Rome are grounded which cannot be taken for meer Relaxations of Canonical Punishments since they extend most frequently very far beyond the life of man and sometimes even unto five and twenty and Thirty thousand Years 7. We may say also that it is a difference which we have with them by which we understand that first Act of the mercy of God that Pardons our sins which comes from the
difference which we have with them concerning the Opinion of the Necessity of Auricular Confession for that Opinion is partly founded upon this that Absolution of the Priests is a Judiciary Act and that in that respect the Church has a true Tribunal before which the Faithful are bound to appear and partly upon the Opinion that the penances which the Priest enjoyns are true Satisfactions to the Divine Justice which they are bound to undergo 8. Lastly it is from the same source that the difference proceeds which we have with them concerning the Super-abundant satisfactions of the Saints of which they will have it that the Faithful may partake and whereof in part they compose the Treasure of the Church Behold here Eight Controversies included in the Explication of the first Act of our Justification Upon the second we differ about the Foundation upon which the right that God gives us to life eternal is established or if you will about the proper and direct cause in consideration of which God gives us that right for we establish it alone upon the merits of Jesus Christ in Vertue of that Comunion which we have with him But the Church of Rome Establishes it upon the merit of our works also for she would have it that after God has given us his Grace by which we do good works we truly inherit not only an increase of Grace but Eternal life and even an increase of Glory and she Anathematizes those who do not believe it 2. We differ also about those to whom God gives that right for we believe that God gives it only to his Elect in whom he preserves it by his Grace and by the gift of perseverance but the Church of Rome believes that he gives it also to divers Reprobates whom his Grace abandons and who finally Perish in their Sins Upon the Third Doctrine we differ concerning the Nature and the Definition of Justifying Faith for as for us we look on it as an Act of the Soul that embraces or accepts the satisfaction and merit of Jesus Christ and which applies the promises of God's mercy made to us in the Gospel and we labour as much as we can to live according to that thought But the Doctors of the Roman Church frame an Idea of that Faith of a very great coldness and negligence for they content themselves to say that it is a consent that we yield in general to all the Truths revealed in the Word of God and there are some that go so far as to say that Faith fails not to Justify us although it should not have the least regard to the particular mercy of God towards us which is a thing that we cannot understand without horrour For the rest when I shall say that the Doctrines of the Imputation of the merit of Jesus Christ and his satisfaction are known but to a very few in the Church of Rome as that also is of the Application that we make of them to our selves by the internal Act of our Souls which receives them when I shall say that these Truths so important and so necessary to the practise of Christianity are almost stifled by that great Multitude of external Exercises with which they busy the People I shall say nothing in my Judgment that the more sincere persons will not acknowledge and of which God grant they may be able hereafter to convince me of a falshood in that respect In fine the last Doctrine that fully makes up the Idea of our Justification according to the Scripture produces of it self a considerable Controversy between the Church of Rome and us For as for us we limit our selves to the good works to which our Justification Obliges us and which God has enjoyned us without going any further But the Church of Rome extends them even to those which she her self Commands for the pretends that her Laws properly and directly bind the Conscience under pain of mortal Sin and therefore it was that Leo X. condemned Luther for having wrote that the Church had no power to make Laws concerning manners or good works All these Controversies that naturally arise from the different Explications which they give of the Tenet of Justification let us sufficiently see that the Author of the Prejudices is mistaken if he thinks that we should have no more upon this matter then differences about words and M. le Blanc is too sincere and too Learned to have pretended to deny any of those things which I have mentioned although he has Judiciously remarked that men may easily Equivocate upon the different Significations of the Terms It is therefore neither a piece of Rashness nor Impertinency that our first Reformers had such a regard to the matter of Justification as being a thing of the greatest importance in Religion and it is on the contrary most Just that having seen that Doctrine of the Salvation of Christians neglected obscured and depraved that they should have Judged it necessary to set themselves upon the re-establishing of it CHAP. VII An Answer to the Objections of the twelfth and thirteenth Chapters of the Prejudices TO understand well what is in the Twelfth Chapter of the Author of the Prejudices we must in the first place take notice of the design he propounds to himself and the means he makes use of to reach it As to his design he Explains himself in the very Title of the Chapter which bears this That the Spirit of a Politician every way Humane that appears in the differences that the Calvinists have had with the Lutherans gives a right to reject them without any further Examination as a sort of men without any Conscience He explains himself yet further in the beginning of his discourse after this manner It has been demanded says he of the Calvinists with good reason how it could come to pass that if Luther Zuinglius and Calvin had received a Mission from God and were the Instruments that he made choice of for the greatest work that ever was which is the Reformation of the Errors of sixteen Centuries they should not avoid being openly divided between themselves to dismember themselves from one another to persecute one another after so outragious a manner and to Treat one another as the declared Enemies of God and his Church He explains himself also in another place where he speaks after this manner The Innocence or the Crimes of Luther equally condemn the Calvinists either for having declaimed against an innocent person or for having given unjust praises to one of the most wicked men that ever was and that monstrous conjunction which they have made in his person of holiness with the most detestable Crimes is an evident proof that they have not the least Idea of Christian Vertue nor of the Spirit of Christianity See yet further how he speaks in the same Chapter If Luther were an instrument of the Devil a wicked person a Schismatick a violent and passionate man what will become of
how to Read What will become of those who have no understanding nor any readiness of mind How can all those People examine all those Points the Discussion of the least of which notwithstanding is evidently necessary to make them rationally determine It is easy to see that all that heap of Objections and Difficulties which the Author of the Prejudices has proposed against the way of the Scripture tends only to lead men to the Authority of the Church of Rome to the end they should subject themselves to that as a Soveraign and Infallible Rule But as the Doctrine of the Soveraign Authority of that Church is not one of those first Principles which the light of Nature dictates to all men since of Thirty parts of our known World there are at least nine and twenty who do not acknowledge it and as they cannot also say that it is one of the first and common notions of Christianity since of all those who profess themselves to be Christians there are Three parts which reject it The Author may freely give us leave if he pleases that we should first demand of him upon what Foundation he would build that Doctrine to make us receive it as a point of Divine Faith I say of Divine Faith for if we should hold it only as a matter of human Faith he himself would see well that we could not believe the things which the Church of Rome should teach in vertue of its Authority otherwise then with a humane Faith since the things which depend upon a principle cannot make an impression in us different from that which the principle has made To the end therefore that I should believe with a Divine Faith that which the Church of Rome shall teach me by its Authority it is necessary that I should also believe its Authority with a Divine Faith Thus far methinks we should not have any Controversy Let us see therefore upon what Foundations of Divine Faith he would pretend to establish this Proposition The Authority of the Church of Rome is Soveraign and Infallible He can only do it by these Three ways The first is by a new Revelation that God should have made to us of this Truth the Second in shewing that it is one of the Articles that is contained in the Revelation of the Apostles and the Third in shewing us the Characters of Divinity and Infallibility impressed upon the Church of Rome even after the same manner as every thing proves it self by the marks that distinguish it and thus it is that we pretend that the Scripture forces the acknowledgment of its own Divinity The first of these ways is nullified since they agree with us that since Jesus Christ and his Apostles there has been no new Revelation and that there must not be any expected The second would be proper and necessarily supposes a recourse either to Tradition or the Scripture for there are but these two Channels in which we can seek for the Revelation of the Apostles But that of the Scripture is forbidden us by the Author of the Prejudices by reason of the unconquerable difficulties which he discovers there It is says he a way full of obstacles and difficulties and even those who profess to spend all their days in the Study of Divinity ought to judge that Examination to be above all their abilities He must therefore content himself with the way of Tradition But before he can make use of that he must be first assured and that with a certainty of Divine Faith that that which that Tradition contains is come down from the Revelation of Jesus Christ and his Apostles or at least that this particular point of the Authority of the Roman Church in the state wherein it is at present must have proceeded from thence that the Apostles must have Transmitted it viva voce down to their Successours and that their Successours must have received it and Transmitted it down to those who descended from them in the same sence and every whit the same as the Apostles had given it to them If he cannot be assured of that Transmission all that he would build upon it will be uncertain and if he cannot be assured of it with a Divine Faith that which he would build upon it will not be more so But how can he be assur'd of that He has no more that living Voice of the Apostles to represent it to us he must rely upon Testimonyes would it therefore be the Roman Church that must assure us But her Divine and Infallible Authority is as yet in Question and while it shall be questioned it remains suspended it cannot be believed any further then with a humane Faith Shall it be the Scripture that must give Testimony to that Tradition But there are so many Difficulties in that way says the Author of the Prejudices That it is Evident that it is not that which God has chosen to Instruct us in his Truths Must we learn it from that Tradition it self But to decide that point whether that Tradition came from the Apostles or no Tradition it self can be yet no other than a humane Testimony I mean that the Successors of the Apostles declare to us that they have received such and such Doctrines from the Apostles viva voce and that they have receiv'd them in the same sence in which the Apostles gave them to them we cannot at the most have more then a humane Faith for them for they are men as well as others Hitherto therefore there cannot be had a Divine Faith concerning the point of the Sovereign and Infallible Authority of the Roman Church and nothing by Consequence that can assure the Conscience and set the mind of man at rest Let us therefore pass over to the third means which is that of examining the Characters of Divinity and Infallibility that may be seen in the Roman Church It is in my Judgment in the sight of this that they give us certain external Marks and we have already seen that the Author of the Prejudices establishes upon this that Authority about which we dispute The most eminent Authority says he that can be in the world is easily discover'd to be in the Catholick Church because though there are Sects that dispute with it the Truth of its Tenets yet there are none that can with any Colour contend with it for that eminence of Authority which arises from its External Marks But without entring here far into the Controversy touching those Marks I say that he is very far from being able to establish such a certainty upon them as we ought to have of a Principle of Religion And this will appear from these three Reasons The First is That the greatest part of those marks are common to false Societies and even to Schismatical Churches which not only are not Infallible but which are actually in Errour as I have shewn in the first part of this Treatise The Greek Church for example in
its greatest contests with the Latin was always a Catholick Church she was of as great Antiquity as the Roman she had an uninterrupted duration from many Ages ago she had her large extent and her multitude as well as the Roman she had a Personal Succession of her Bishops down from the Apostles she gloried in a Conformity to the Doctrine of the Fathers she had her members united among themselves and with her Patriarchs she did no less then the Roman affirm her Doctrine to be Holy and her word to be Efficacious and that her Authors were holy men she has yet at this day her Miracles which she boasts of she had her Prophets and Temporal Prosperity in a word she might propound all that which the Church of Rome alleadges The Aethiopian Church on her side may do it as much and yet nevertheless those Marks no ways conclude a Soveraign and Infallible Authority for them they do not therefore conclude it for the Roman Church The Second Reason is that of all those pretended marks some are disputed with the Church of Rome others are fallaciously attributed to it and others conclude nothing less then that which they pretend We dispute with her her Conformity to the Fathers the Unity of her Members between themselves and with their Head the Holiness of her Doctrine and the Efficacy of her Word It is true that she boasts of these advantages but if we should come to examine them we should find they would have nothing of Solidity in them she fallaciously ascribes to her self the name of the Catholick The Antiquity and Holiness of her Authors Miracles Prophecy and the Personal Succession of her Bishops For before they can make any advantage of those marks they ought to shew that she is a Catholick not only in name but in deed that she has chang'd nothing in the Antient Doctrine nor in the Antient worship that she has in nothing degenerated from her first Authors that she is conformable to her first Christians whose Miracles and Prophecys are beyond all question that her Bishops are the Successors of the Mind and Doctrine as well as of the Sees of the Antient Bishops and unless they do so those marks are an Illusion She produces others which conclude nothing less then that which she should conclude as the Multitude of her Children or the largeness of her extent and Temporal Prosperity which are wordly advantages more proper to denote a corruption then an Infallibility The third Reason is That there are contrary Characters in the Church of Rome which note not only that she has been and that she is yet subject to err but that she has actually err'd and we have propos'd some in the beginning of this Treatise which it may be deserve to be better consider'd No man can therefore establish any thing of certainty upon those pretended external marks and in general that principle of the Soveraign and Infallible Authority of the Church of Rome cannot be a matter of divine Faith on which side soever he takes it nor by Consequence can any of those things be so which depend upon that Authority See here then the Obligation which lies upon those in the Roman Communion to the Author of the Prejudices for having thus Abolish'd all manner of Divine Faith for those things which that Church teaches by her Authority in shutting up as he has done the way of the Scripture with his Obstacles and unconquerable Difficulties he has reduc'd all to meer Conjectures or almost all to humane Testimonies Is it therefore after that manner that he would have us believe Transubstantiation the Real presence Purgatory The Sacrifice of the Mass Is it upon the Foundations of that nature that he would have us to Invocate Saints that we should worship Images That we should adore the Host and receive the Indulgences of the Pope and Absolutions of their Confessors But he has done yet worse for it is not only the Laity and private men from whom he has taken away a divine Faith he has torn it away even from the whole Body of his Church from her Prelats her Popes and her Councils since if this Point of their Soveraign and Infallible Authority is founded upon nothing but Conjectures and humane Testimonies They can neither have a Divine Faith for those Conjectures and those humane Testimonies nor for all those other things which depend upon them Have they a Revelation an immediate Illumination that instructs them There is no more either for the Popes or Councils Should they have it from the Scripture The Author of the Prejudices has told them that it is an Infinite a Ridiculous way to Instruct men in the Truth a path which we cannot know how to find an end of whatsoever Diligence we use But it may be he says that only for the Laity and not for the Clergy Let us see his words Even those says he who profess to spend their whole Lives in the Study of Divinity ought to judge that Examination to be above all their Abilities The Church of Rome the Body of her Prelats the Councils cannot at furthest but be made up of those men who profess to spend their whole Lives in the Study of Divinity and that Examination is above all their Abilities He ought not to say that they can altogether do that which it would be impossible for each one to do in particular For when they go about to decide the matters of Faith by their Soveraign Authority as they pretend that Councils should do each particular man ought to be assured by himself of the Truth and not to refer himself to the knowledge of his Brethren With what Conscience therefore can they exercise their Authority With what Conscience can they decide the points of the Faith and propose them to be believed as points of a Divine Faith With what Conscience can they retain men in their Dependance And with what Conscience can men remain therein The Author of the Prejudices may disintangle this Business with his Church as it shall please him we have no peculiar Interest in it but only to let him see more and more the Truth of that which I have said elsewhere that he does not sufficiently consider what he has wrote Let us grant him that there is no necessity of a Divine Faith for the establishing of that Article of the Soveraign and Infallible Authority of the Roman Church let us yield if he will have it so that he may be contented with the having a humane certainty such as he may have it is clear that whether he takes the way of Tradition or that of the Examination of the External marks we shall find the same Difficulties there thes me Obstacles the same Hindrances the same length that the Author of the Prejudices pretends to have discovered in the way of the Scripture And as the External Marks themselves cannot be otherwise justified then by Tradition it shall suffice to shew what I have
said in the way of Tradition for all will be reduced to that 1. In the first place it is certain that we ought not to take all sorts of Traditions to be true indifferently since we have already seen that there are some false and Apocryphal so that we must learn plainly to distinguish it by it self the good and the Authentick from the others and to that effect to know certainly the rules by which we ought to make that distinction always remembring that the Authority of the Church of Rome is not here of any use because it is in question and that it is that Authority which we are treating of in that search See here already a no small Confusion for we must for this turn over a great many Books be well read in Histories Pass a great many Judgments which cannot be very easy to a man who will not help himself with the Authority of the Scripture 2. After we have set aside Apocryphal Tradition and it being restrained to the True we must enter upon the Examination of the question that is controverted to wit Whether the Authority of the Church of Rome as it pretends at this day be taught in that Tradition And to this effect he must see whether the Passages that are brought to prove it are faithfully related and for that he must consult the Originals and compare them with the Translations which require a great knowledge of the Tongues or at least as the Author of the Prejudices says that one should referr himself to a sufficient number of fit persons to have no occasion to doubt of the Fidelity of their Relations And as the number of Antient Books is not small that Consultation could not but be long enough 3. He must not forget also to inquire whether there be not diverse ways of reading the Passages that may weaken that proof For since the Author of the Prejudices would have us observe this Precaution to assure our selves of one only passage of Scripture why would he not have it observed to assure himself of the Passages of that Tradition It will therefore be necessary to consult the Manuscripts of Libraries or at least to read the notes which the Criticks have made upon the Books out of which those Passages shall be taken this would be yet a matter of further Labour 4. But must he not also be bound to examine narrowly the meaning of the Passages not to give them too great a Latitude and avoid being blinded with a meer Appearance For if there are in the Scripture as the Author of the Prejudices assures us that the Passages that appear clearly to Contain certain Truths and which do not in Effect contain them are an occasion of deluding those who are too easily led by that Appearance which at first sight presents it self Why must it not be so in Tradition also They ordinarily alleadge that Passage of Saint Irenaeus in Favour of the particular Church of Rome Ad haue Ecclesiam propter Potentiorem Principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est cos qui sunt undique Fideles in qua semper ab 〈◊〉 qui sunt undique Conservata est ea quae est ab his Apostolis Tradâ—tio These words seem clear to the Partisans of the Court of Rome for the establishing a necessity of being united with the particular Church of Rome and living in Dependance upon it and yet if we look a little narrowly into them we may see that they signify nothing less then that which they pretend they signify and that Irenaeus would only say thus much That the Faithfull came from all parts to the Church of Rome by reason of the Imperial power which drew all the World thither and that from thence it was that they all together preserved the Doctrine that the Apostles had left without their having any considerable difference between them That this was the meaning of Saint Irenaeus appears from the Connexion of his discourse wherein he proposes to prove that the Pretended Traditions of Hereticks could not come from the Apostles and his reason is that if they could have come from them they would have been yet found in his Time in the Churches which they had instituted and particularly in the Roman which was in a manner an Abridgment and Composition of all others by reason of the concourse of all Nations to Rome So that to shew that the Church of Rome in those times did not own any of the Tenets of those Hereticks was at once to shew that they were Traditions unknown to all the Churches and by Consequence false and not Apostolical This Example therefore shews us that one ought not to let himself be dazzled by the first Appearances of a Passage but that it ought to be narrowly examined and that as every one may see requires time and is not altogether so easy to be done 5. To carry on that Examination well in respect of the Passages of the Scripture the Author of the Prejudices would that we should carefully consider the like Expressions and contrary Passages to see whether we should not be bound by them to give another meaning to those Passages which we gather He says That Common Sense dictates this Rule and that it is full of Equity and Justice I see not therefore how he can exempt his Catechumeni from it in regard of the Passages of Tradition It is requisite that he should carefully remark the ways of speaking in the Fathers in diverse matters in order to the making them mutually give light to one another It is necessary that he should look after the contrary Passages of the Antients and that he compare them one with another to draw out clear Observations from them But this will be yet further no small Business for it is very well known that there are things enough in the Antients directly opposite to the Pretensions of the Church of Rome 6. But not to detain the Readers much longer upon so clear a matter all the Intricate Perplexity which he pretends to find in the way of the Scripture fâ—lls back again upon the way of Tradition when they would by this without the aid of the Scripture be fully satisfied concerning the Authority of the Church of Rome It is necessary to discern a true Tradition from a false one It is necessary to consult the Originals It is necessary to know the Different Ways of reading passages It is necessary to search out the meaning with great Attentiveness It is necessary to examine the like Expressions and contrary Passages It is necessary to see divers Interpretations of both sides It is necessary to know why the Roman Church distinguishes between points which every Faithful man is bound to believe with a distinct Faith and those which it is enough to believe upon the Faith of the Church It is necessary to Examine that which each Sect that does not acknowledge the Roman Church says against her And after
there is reason for that or no it is sufficient that he consents that they should not any more have had those for their Pastors which were so before and that they should have withdrawn themselves from their communion and external worship we demand no more at present We ought now to pass on to the second Proposition upon which the Objection is grounded that I have propounded in the beginning of this Chapter and to examine whether the Priviledge of the Church of Rome is such that one ought not upon any pretence whatsoever to separate ones self from her communion All the world knows that this is the pretension of that Church and that it is for that that she makes her self the Mother and the Mistress of all others and that she has also made it to be defined in her Council of Trent It is upon that account that one of her Popes Boniface the Eighth formerly determined That it was necessary to the Salvation of every creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome But clearly to decide so weighty a Question there seems to me to be only these two wayes The first is to enquire whether that Church can or cannot fall into Error and cease to be the True Church of Jesus Christ for if it be true that she can never fall into Errors nor lose the quality of a true Church we must conclude that we ought alwayes to remain in her Communion But if on the contrary she may erre and cease to be a true Church we must also conclude that we may and ought to separate our selves when there shall be a just occasion there The second way is that laying aside the Question Whether she may err or not we examine whether it be true that God has made her the Mistress of all other Churches as she pretends whether he has established her to be the perpetual and inviolable Center of the Christian Unity with a command to all the faithful not to fly off from her For if it be an Order that God has made we cannot resist it without destroying our selves but if it be only an ill-grounded pretension of that Church her communion is neither more necessary nor more inviolable than that of other particular Churches But as to the first of these wayes I have already shewn that it engages those who will follow it in the examination of the foundation and in effect the proofs that they set before us to establish the Infallibility of the Roman See are neither so clear nor so concluding that it should not be necessary to see whether the Doctrines that the Church of Rome teaches answer that pretension which she makes to be infallible and unable to fall away or to say better those proofs are so weak and so trivial that they themselves bind us to have recourse to the examination of the Doctrines of that Church to judge of her pretension by them These two Arguments are equally good as to their form The Church of Rome cannot err in the Faith therefore the things which she teaches us of Faith are true And the things which the Church of Rome teaches us are not true therefore the Church of Rome may err I do not here examine the question which of these two wayes of reasoning is the more natural I yield if they will that they should chuse the first but when they shall have chose it good sense would also require that if the things which they shall set before us to prove this Proposition The Church of Rome cannot err in the faith do no wayes satisfie the mind if instead of assuring us they plunge us into the greatest uncertainties we must pass over to the other way and by consequence we must enter into the examination of the foundation But to judge of what nature those proofs are which they give for the infallibility of the Church of Rome we need but a naked view of them For they are not the express declarations of the will of God although it should be very necessary that they should have such a one for the establishment of so great and peculiar a priviledge the knowledge of which is so very important to all Christians They are not evident consequences drawn from some passages of Scripture or some actions of the Apostles they are neither clear and convincing reasonings nor even strong presumptions and such as have much likelihood They are strained consequences which they draw as they are able from two or three passages of the Scripture and which a man that should have never heard them speak of that Infallibility with all his circumspection would not have gathered They produce the Testimony that St. Paul gives to the Church of Rome in his dayes That her faith was spoken of through all the world and they consider not that he gives the same testimony to the Thessalonians in far higher terms than to the Romans for he tells them That they were an example to the faithful and that the word of the Lord sounded from them not only in Macedonia and Achaia but in every place also Although they do not conclude the infallibility of the Church of Thessalonica from thence They do not see that he renders well near the same testimony to the Philippians in adding a clause that seems much more express to wit That he is assured of this very thing that he which had begun a good work in them would perform it until the day of Jesus Christ Although they cannot notwithstanding conclude infallibility from thence in the behalf of the Church of Philippi In effect these testimonies only regard the persons who at that time composed those Churches and not those who should come after them and do not found any priviledge on them They produce the passages of the Gospel that relate to S. Peter as this Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it and this I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. and this I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not when therefore thou art converted strengthen thy brethren and this Feed my sheep But to perceive the weakness of the consequence which they draw from these passages we need but to see that which is between two things of which it is necessary that we should be assured before we can conclude any thing First of all we must be assured that S. Peter was at Rome that he preached and fixed his See there for these actions are not so evident as they imagine they are inveloped with divers difficulties that appear unconquerable and accompanied with many circumstances that have no appearance of truth and which make at least that whole History to be doubted I confess that the Ancients did believe so but they have sometimes readily admitted Fables for truths and after all these
are matters of fact whereof we have not any Divine Revelation about which according to the very principle of our Adversaries all the whole Church may be deceived and which by consequence are not of faith nor can serve as a foundation for an Article so much concerning the faith as this is That the Church of Rome cannot err and that it is alwayes necessary to salvation to be in her communion Secondly We must be assured that the Bishops of Rome are the True and ordinary Successors of S. Peter in the Government of every Christian Church For why should not they be his Successors in the Government of the particular Church of Rome as well as the Bishops of Antioch in the particular Government of that of Antioch When the Apostles preached in those places where they gathered Churches and setled Pastors they did not intend that those Pastors after them should receive all the rights of their Apostleship nor that they should be Universal Bishops They say that there must have been one and that that could have been in no other Church but that where S. Peter dy'd But all this is said without any ground The Church is a Kingdom that acknowledges none besides Jesus Christ for its Monarch he is our only Lord and our Soveraign Teacher and after that the Apostles had formed Churches and that the Christian Religion had been laid down in the Books of the New Testament the Pastors had in those Divine Books the exact Rule of their Preaching and their Government Those who have applyed themselves only to that have alwayes well governed their Flocks without standing in need of that pretended Universal Episcopacy which is a Chimerical Office more proper to ruine Religion than to preserve it In the Third place we must be assured that S. Peter himself had received in those passages some peculiar dignity that had raised him above the other Apostles and some rights which were not common to all of them But this is what they cannot conclude from those forecited passages for granting that Jesus Christ has built his Church upon S. Peter has he not also built it upon the other Apostles is it not elsewhere written That we are built upon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone Is it not written That the New Jerusalem has twelve foundations wherein the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb are written If Jesus Christ has prayed for the perseverance of the faith of S. Peter has he not made the same Prayer for all the other Keep them sayes he in thine own name that they may be one as we are If he said to him Strengthen thy Brethren is it not a common duty not only to the Apostles but to all the Faithful Let us consider one another sayes S. Paul to provoke unto love and to good works If he said to him Feed my sheep did he not say to all in common Go and teach all Nations If he said to him I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven has he not said to all of them I appcint unto you a Kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven In the Fourth place we must be assured that when there should be in all those passages some peculiar priviledge for S. Peter exclusive from the rest of the Apostles that it is a thing that could be transmitted down to his Successors and not some personal priviledge that resided in him alone and must have dyed with him For can we not say that the twelve Apostles being the twelve foundations of the Church the priviledge of S. Peter is to be first in order because he was the first who laboured in the conversion of the Jews at the day of Pentecost and in that of the Gentiles in the Sermon that he made to Cornelius May we not say that Jesus Christ has particularly prayed for his perseverance in the faith because that he alone had been winnowed by the Temptation that hapned to him in the Court of the High Priest That he said to him alone When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren because that he alone had given a sad experience of humane weakness That he said to him thrice Feed my sheep or my lambs because that he only having thrice denyed his Master by words full of horror and ingratitude our Lord would for his consolation and re-establishment thrice pronounce words full of love and goodness In fine when those Texts should contain a peculiar priviledge that might be communicated to the Successors of S. Peter we must be assured that that priviledge must be the perpetual infallibility of the Church of Rome and a certainty of never falling away from the quality of a True Church And this is that which they know not how to conclude from those passages for in respect of the first The Church may have been built upon S. Peter and upon his first Successors and remain firm and unshaken upon those foundations that is to say upon their Doctrine and Example although in the course of some Ages the Bishops of Rome have degenerated and changed the faith of their Predecessors and the words of Jesus Christ extended even to the Successors of S. Peter would not be less true when they should not extend themselves unto all those who bear that name S. Paul has called the Churches of Asia in the midst of which Timothy his Disciple was when he wrote his first Epistle to him he has I say called them the pillar and ground of Truth For although those Titles belong in general to every Church it is notwithstanding certain that they regard more directly and more particularly that part of the Universal Church I would say the Churches of Asia where Timothy resided when S. Paul wrote to him But the word of this Apostle does not fail to be true although in the course of many Ages those Churches have degenerated from their first purity and though the Successors of Timothy lost it very quickly after And as to the Prayer that Jesus Christ made to God that the faith of S. Peter might not fail when they would extend it down to his Successors they cannot conclude a greater Infallibility for them than that of S. Peter himself who preserving his faith concealed at the bottom of his heart outwardly denyed his Master three times and who according to the opinion of our Adversaries lost entirely his love and had fallen from a state of Grace being no more either in the Communion of God nor in that of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ Let the Church of Rome therefore call her self infallible as much as she pleases in vertue of the Prayer of Jesus Christ that Infallibility will not
hinder but that she may externally deny the faith of Jesus Christ but that she may intirely lose her love and the communion of our Saviour and the quality of the True Church and by consequence that we should not be bound to separate from her while she should be in that state and till it should please God to re-establish her See here of what force those proofs are which they produce to ground this special priviledge of the Church of Rome upon It is not hard to see that a man of good understanding who would satisfie his mind and his conscience upon so weighty a point ought not to remain there but that he ought to pass on to the other way of clearing that doubt which I have noted which is to judge of the pretension of the Church of Rome by the examination of her Doctrines and her Worship For it is there principally that the characters of truth and infallibility ought to be found and by consequence he must come to the foundation and no further amuse himself with Prejudices As to the second Way by which I have said we might clear this Question Whether it be necessary to the salvation of Christians to be joyned to the Church of Rome it consists in examining whether it be true that God has made her the Mistress of all other Churches whether there is any particular order that binds us indispensably to her For if that be so the Separation of our Fathers must be condemned but if it be not so we must judge of that Church as of all other particular Churches and say that we cannot and ought not to separate our selves from her but when we have just and lawful causes so to do There is no person who does not judge that we cannot pass over lightly a point of so great importance which ought to serve for a general and perpetual Rule to all Christians and that if the Church of Rome would so set her self beyond a state of equality above other Churches it is necessary that she should produce some very express and indisputable Order of God for it But instead of that she does nothing but reverberate the same passages which I have mentioned She boasts her self to be the See of S. Peter and under that pretence she applyes to her self all that she can find in the Scripture in favour of that Apostle and particularly the Order that Jesus Christ gave him to feed his sheep as if the Office of the Apostleship in which Jesus Christ re-established him by those words could be communicated to his Successors or as if the foundation that Jesus Christ supposed and upon which he re-established him in saying to him feed my sheep to wit that he should love him more than the rest was not a thing purely personal in S. Peter and whereof it was not in his power to transmit any part to his Successors nor by consequence to invest them with his Office which was restored to him only upon a supposition of that love or lastly as if the office of feeding Christ's sheep included an absolute and indispensable necessity for the sheep to receive their death when they should give it them under the name of their food It must be acknowledg'd that there never was a higher pretension than this of the Church of Rome for what more could she pretend to then to make Heaven it self depend on her communion and to leave no possibility of salvation to any but those who should be in her communion and under her dependance But it must also be acknowledged that there never was any thing worse established than that pretension They alledge in its favour nothing that is clear and distinct and even the consequences which they draw for it are made after a very strange manner This is in my judgement the Reason why our Adversaries when they treat of this matter do not insist much upon Scripture but fly off presently to the Fathers and the usage of the Ancient Church For by this means they hope to prolong the dispute to eternity and that notwithstanding the Church of Rome shall be alwayes in possession of that Despotical Authority which she exercises over the Churches that remain in her communion In effect the life of a man would scarce suffice to read well and throughly examine all the Volumes which have been composed on one side and on the other upon this Question of the place that the Church of Rome and its Bishops have held among the Christian Churches during the first six Centuries and of the Authority which they had then But to say the truth there is too much artifice in that procedure for that the Church of Rome should be the Mistress of all others and that no one could be saved but in her communion that does not depend upon the order of men but only on that of God and when they should find among the Antients a thousand times more complaisance for the See of Rome than they had that may very well establish an ancient possession and make clear the fact but it can never establish the right of it To establish a right of that nature a word of God an express declaration of his will is necessary for it is a right not only above nature but even above the ordinary and common favour that God gives to other Churches and which by consequence depends only upon God And so it is but a wandring from the way to go to search for the grounds of it in the Writings of Men. It is no hard matter to conceive that those Bishops which were raised to Dignities in the Metropolis of the World and engaged in the greatest affairs might mannage matters so as to ascribe to themselves those rights which no wayes belonged to them nor to imagine that their flatterers and Courtiers might not have offered more incense to them than they ought nor that those persecuted ones who had recourse to their protection might not have helped the increase of their Authority nor that the Princes and Emperors who had need of them might not have given them those priviledges which they ought not to have had that which renders to a just title all that which they alledge in their favour suspected and to no purpose at all Notwithstanding there are moreover evident matters of fact that let us clearly see that the Ancient Church did not acknowledge that Universal Episcopacy that the Bishops of Rome pretend to nor that absolute and indispensable necessity to be joyned to their See to be saved nor that their Church should be the Mistress of all the rest 1. Every one knows that the Bishops of Rome were anciently chosen by the suffrages of the people and of the Clergy of that Church without any other Churches taking part in those Elections which is a mark manifest enough that they did not mean that those Bishops should be Universal Bishops nor that they should have a more peculiar interest in their creation than
of it but they would have subordinate heads humane heads on whom they might depend by an external dependance and that was necessary for them to be by that means linked to Jesus Christ after the same manner that they would have us at this day to depend on the See of Rome Wherefore did S. Paul say to them Is Christ divided Why did he not say to them that as for Paul and Apollos they had no reason to take them for their heads but that it was far otherwise as to Peter since God had set up him and his Successors for ever to be the heads of the Universal Church Why in stead of that did he conclude after this manner That no one should glory in men for all things are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come all are yours and ye are Christs and Christ is Gods Is it not to let them understand that Jesus Christ is the only head of the Church that there is only his communion that is absolutely necessary and that as for other Ministers whosoever they were they were appointed for our use as all other things to serve us in as much as they lead us to Jesus Christ If the Church under the New Testament ought to be inviolably ty'd to the See of Rome how should the Scripture have been silent in so weighty a truth which could not be ignor'd without extream danger nor contested without evident damnation Notwithstanding we do not find any other head of the Church in those Sacred Books but Jesus Christ nor any other High Priest but him We do not find in the Scripture any Universal Bishop nor Ministerial head or subordinate or any particular Church the Mistress of all others We find there indeed that Jesus Christ being ascended up on high gave some to be Apostles others to be Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers for the assembling of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ How came the Apostle to forget in that Enumeration the chief of all Offices to wit that of the Ministerial Head of the whole Church and the Universal Vicar of Jesus Christ in the Government and conduct of his flock If the Christian Church ought in that to resemble the Synagogue and to have as that a Soveraign High Priest upon earth who should be the head of that Religion and who should have his Successors as the ancient High Priest had whence comes it that the Scripture has alwayes regarded that Ancient High Priest as a Figure of Jesus Christ that it alwayes referred it to him and never to the Roman Bishops nor even to S. Peter who was then alive and who should by consequence have exercised that pretended charge which they would make to descend from him There is therefore no lawful foundation in all that pretension of Rome and her See We ought to pass the same judgement on all other Sees and other particular Churches with which it is just we should hold communion while they teach good and sound Doctrine and that we should even bear with them when they should fall into some errors provided they constrain no body to believe them but from which it is also just to separate our selves when they shall fall into errors contrary to the communion of Jesus Christ our only Saviour and when they would violently force all others to believe the same If in a long course of Ages Rome has usurped by little and little the rights that do not belong to her if she has found it very easie through the ignorance or complaisance of men in the diverse intrigues of the World to raise her Throne as high as our Fathers beheld it and as we do yet at this day If her flatterers have not failed alwayes to raise her pretensions as high as Heaven and if she has been lull'd asleep with the sound of those sweet charms that enchant her we do not believe that that ought to prejudice our separation We have no other aversion for her communion than that which our conscience gives us and if it shall please God to re-establish her in her ancient purity she would not have so great a joy to spread forth her arms to us as we should have an impatience to demand her peace of her But as long as we shall see her in that bad state wherein we are perswaded she is we cannot but bewail and pray for her and yet notwithstanding no body can blame us for preferring our own salvation to her communion CHAP. III. That the Conduct of the Court of Rome and those of her party in respect of the Protestants has given them a just cause to separate themselves from them supposing that they had had right at the foundation BEfore we leave this matter of our Separation from the Church of Rome there yet remains two Questions for us to examine the one Whether our Fathers were not too precipitate in so great an affair whether they did not act with too much haste or Whether they had sufficient motives from the conduct of those from whom they separated to forsake in the end their communion The other Whether with all that they can say that they separated themselves from the communion of the Catholick Church spread over the whole World as the Donatists did heretofore and whether they did not fall into the same crime with those ancient Schismaticks against whom Optatus and S. Augustine so strongly disputed I will treat of this second Question in the following Chapter and this here shall be design'd to the clearing of the former To effect this methinks we need but freely to set before their eyes all that I have said in the second Part touching the necessity that lay upon our Fathers to reform themselves For since it clearly results from those matters of fact which I have set down that the Popes and those of their party were so far from applying themselves seriously to a Reformation that they studied on the contrary only how to stifle the truth from the very first moment they beheld it appear and to defend their Errors and Superstitions by all manner of wayes who sees not that that inflexible resolution which had not yielded either to the first or second admonition rendred from that time the separation of our Fathers just and exempted them from all reproach For when there are Errors capable of giving ground for a separation it ought to be defer'd only upon a hope of amendment and that hope seem'd to be sufficiently destroy'd by those Historical actions which I have already set down Notwithstanding to shew them more and more how the conduct of our Fathers was very prudent in that respect and full of circumspection it will not be besides our purpose to resume here the close of their story from the unjust condemnation of Luther and his Doctrine made by Pope Leo the Tenth
Church no one is responsible but for his own crimes and not for those of others at least if he take no part with them or do not approve them or consent to them So that while there is no obstinateness to maintain error while there is no danger of being seduced and while one is not bound to take any part in the evil nor to hide ones faith and piety under the vail of hypocrisie this Father yields that we should have communion with Hereticks as the ancient Prophets had communion with the Idolaters of their times and as Jesus Christ and his Disciples had communion with the Pharisees and Sadducees and were found among them in the same Assemblies But when there is an invincible opinionativeness and error is so deeply rooted that there is no more hope of its being healed S. Augustine would in this case that a man should separate himself from their communion This is that which he teaches in the same Book of the True Religion The Church sayes he suffers their error while they have no accusers or do not defend their false opinions with obstinacy but when they are accused and defend themselves obstinately in their opinions she separates them from her communion which is formally to acknowledge the right of active separation in an Orthodox Church And from the same we may evidently conclude that this Father does not approve that we should remain in an Heretical Communion when there is the least necessity of partaking in error wickedness or superstition whether in effect or appearance and that he would on the contrary conclude that in this case the good should separate themselves for the conservation of their own righteousness But to give a yet greater light to this matter we must note that according to the Doctrine of this Father every Society whatsoever it be that determines a false Doctrine and publishes Books of it to teach it posterity and who will have none receive its communion but those who approve that Doctrine in giving the Orthodox a just occasion to separate themselves she her self first of all breaks the bond of Unity and it is she that makes the active separation and becomes schismatical This is that which he teaches in his Treatise against Cresconius This Donatist had said to him that if he did not approve of the crime of the Traditors if on the contrary it displeased him he ought to fly from and abandon the Church of the Traditors To answer to this S. Augustine sayes first of all that though there should have been Traditors in his Church yet he ought not to forsake it while he did not communicate with their crime and that on the contrary he condemned it and laboured to correct it by preaching and discipline He proves it by the example of S. Cyprian who declaimed against the vices of the Church but who did not separate himself from it and by that of David of Samuel of Isaiah of Jeremiah of Zachary and other Saints who cryed out against the Transgressors of the Law yet without separating themselves notwithstanding Since immediately after he adds Is it that the Traditors have instituted some new Sacraments or some new Baptism Is it that they have composed Books to teach others to do or imitate the action of the Traditors or that they have recommended those Books to posterity or that we hold and follow that Doctrine If they had done so and suffered no person to have been in their communion but those who would read their Books and approve that Doctrine I say that they would have separated themselves from the Vnity of the Church and if you saw me in their Schism you would then have reason to say that I were in the Church of the Traditors These words note clearly what I have said that when a Church teaches a false Doctrine which it makes to enter into the use of the Sacraments and that it would receive into its communion none but those who approve it it is not only just to separate from her but it is she her self that breaks the bond of the Unity of the Church and casts her self into Schism But this is precisely that which the Church of Rome does in respect of us for she has not only decided as of faith the Doctrines that we do not believe to be true she has not only set forth Books to teach those Tenets to Posterity but she has cut off all those from her communion who will not believe them after the manner that she teaches them So that we have in this regard a just reason to say that it is she that has made the active separation and if it be true that we have reason in the foundation it is she that has broken the Christian Unity and to which the Schism ought to be imputed and not to us who are in a meer passive separation From whence by the way it further follows that to the deciding the Question of the Schism that is between us and to know which of the two parties is to blame we must necessarily come to the discussion of the controverted Articles For if the Church of Rome has decided nothing that is not conformable to the Gospel she has a right to reject all those from her communion who refuse to believe her Doctrine we will grant this But if she has decided Errors it is certain also that the necessity which she has imposed on others to believe and practise them in order to their being in her communion renders her guilty of Schism All depends therefore on the discussion of the foundation For there is no ground left of doubting that according to the Doctrine of S. Augustine it is not only permitted but even necessary to the Orthodox in some certain cases to be no longer joyned in the assemblies of those who teach those errors and to live separated from their communion We shall see in the close whether that multitude and visible extension can take away that right from a small party restrain'd to a few persons and places for there remains nothing but this doubt to be taken away but to effect this we must go on to the examination of the second Proposition of the Author of the Prejudices The infallible and perpetual mark sayes he to know the Church by according to S. Augustine and the other African Fathers is a visible extension throughout all Nations because that visible extension according to them agreed with the Church in all Ages and that it is a negative mark that is to say that every Society which has not that extension is not the Church so that this arguing is alwayes just your Society is shut up in a small part of the world therefore it is not the Church It is adds he by this principle that S. Augustine has disputed against the Donatists and convinc'd them to be schismaticks This Proposition is not less captious nor less ambiguous than the former For if the Author of the
Author of the Commentary on the Psalms attributed to S. Jerom does not consist in her Walls but in the truth of her Tenets She is where the true Faith is For as to the other it is but fifteen or twenty years since the walls of these Churches were in the power of Hereticks They possess'd all these Churches which you see But the Church was where the True Faith was As the Author of the Prejudices has not scrupled sometimes to make use of the Testimonies of our own Authors when he thought he could draw any advantage from them he will not it may be take it ill if I oppose to him also upon the subject about which we now dispute the Testimony of two men famous in the Roman communion and who well deserve to be heard the one is Driedo whom Bellarmine calls a most learned man and the other is Bellarmine himself both very great defenders of the Church of Rome See here therefore what Cardinal Bellarmine hath wrote in the name of both in his Controversies of the Church We must note sayes he according to the Doctrine of Driedo that it is not necessary that the Catholick Church should have that extension in all places all at once or in the same time that is to say that there should be the faithful in all Provinces and that it is enough if that be successively done From whence it follows that when there should remain but one Province alone that should retain the true Faith this Province would not fail to be truly and properly called the Catholick Church provided that we see clearly that it is the same Church which sometimes or at divers times is found spread over all the world Could any one have more clearly contradicted the Author of the Prejudices He would that this visible extension through all Nations should be a perpetual mark of the True Church and these here say that it is sufficient that it is sometimes and even in divers times successively he would that this extension should be the mark of the Church for all following Ages and these here maintain that it is not necessary He would that this reasoning should be alwayes just your society is shut up in a small part of the world Therefore it is not the Church and these here say that when there should remain but one only Province that should retain the true faith this Province would not cease to be properly and truly called the Catholick Church But it may be that Bellarmine had not observed that his opinion and Driedo's favoured the Donatists and that it was contrary to the doctrine of S. Augustine This may be so in effect not only because a man in writing may not have all things in view but because also at the bottom the sentiment of these Doctors is very remote from that of the Donatists and that it does not encounter that of S. Augustine It is yet true that Bellarmine saw that they could make that Objection which he has prevented and answered this I say to the end the Author of the Prejudices may see that this which he has treated of as an Argument and as a convincing Argument for which he has made two Chapters Bellarmine has look'd on as a very trivial objection which he proposes and resolves in a few words They will say sayes he that this is to fall into the Error of Petilianus and the Donatists who maintain'd that in truth the Church had been spread over all the world but that it was afterwards lost in all the Provinces and remain'd no where but in Africa which S. Augustine disputes against I answer that the Error of the Donatists consisted in two things the first that they would have it that the Church should be in Africa only in a time wherein it manifestly increased throughout all the world the second in that they could not connect their Church of Africa with that which had before been spread through all the world for in that Church there they had alwayes good and bad as S. Augustine proves whereas they would compose theirs of the righteous only This Answer of Bellarmine overthrows all the pretensions of the Author of the Prejudices for it establishes these following Propositions 1. That Visible Extension is not a mark of the true Church but in a certain time that is to say when we see it manifestly increase throughout all the world from whence it follows that this mark is vain at other times 2. That the Argument of S. Augustine concludes only for the time then being by reason of that manifest fruitfulness from whence it follows that it is very impertinent that the Author of the Prejudices goes to apply it to these last Ages wherein we maintain the field of the Church has been fruitful only in Errors and Superstitions 3. That if the Donatists had accused all the world to have fallen into Heresie and if they had said by consequence that it was not the time of fruitfulness for the Church it had been in vain for S. Augustine to alledge to them the visible extension of his Church to exempt himself from entring into the discussion of that accusation from whence it follows that it is also in vain that the Author of the Prejudices propounds the visible extension of his since we say that it is fallen into fundamental errors 4. That the Argument of S. Augustine concluded because the Donatists agreed that his communion was Orthodox from whence it follows that that of the Author of the Prejudices concludes nothing since we question that Orthodoxy of his Church 5. That by consequence visible extension is not a mark that can make us know which is the True Church when the dispute is between two Societies contesting that Orthodoxy between themselves but at farthest only when the dispute is between two Societies that mutually own one another to be Orthodox from whence it follows that the Author of the Prejudices makes use of this mark to no purpose since our chief question is to know whether the Church of Rome is Orthodox or no. All these consequences which flow naturally from the answer of Bellarmine contradict the Argument of the Author of the Prejudices and it concerns him to see after what manner he can decline the Authority of this Cardinal But some will say lastly It may be Bellarmine was deceived and that he had not well understood the state of the question which was between S. Augustine and the Donatists nor well comprehended the true Hypothesis of that Father I confess that this may be but it may be also that he did well understand it and that the misconstruing should be on the side of the Author of the Prejudices This is that which must be further cleared and for this effect we must note a thing that the Author of the Prejudices seems not to have comprized which is that if the Donatists had accused the Society of S. Augustine of Heresie S.
Augustine had been very well able to have prov'd that they were Schismaticks but that he had not notwithstanding been able to conclude from thence that his Society was the True Church The reason of this is because they had broken the general bond of an External Call that S. Augustine would have them obliged to keep even in regard of Hereticks so that according to him they might very well have been Schismaticks although the Church which they had forsaken had not been the true Church He prov'd therefore that his Society was the true Church only because they acknowledg'd it to be Orthodox and did not lay to its charge either any Error in the Faith or depravation in Worship For in supposing that confession it manifestly appears that that time was a time of the increase of the Church since it cannot be deny'd that the Church does not then encrease when the true Doctrine is spread abroad in all places from whence would follow that the Society that taught that true Doctrine throughout the world was the true Church rather than a small party that were shut up within one only Province So that the Error of the Donatists consisted in this in that they would have restrain'd the Church in their Africa in a time wherein it manifestly increased in all Nations and this increase was manifest by the acknowledgement which they themselves made that the Society that was spread over all the world was Orthodox This is that precisely that Bellarmine would say He would have S. Augustine reason after this manner in a time wherein it manifestly appears that the Church encreases it is an error not to acknowledge that Society that is spread over all the world to be the true Church of Jesus Christ in opposition to a small party But in this time it manifestly appears that the Church increases since by your own confession it is the true Doctrine and not Heresie that multiplies it self Therefore it is an error not to acknowledge at this time the Society that is spread over the world to be the true Church This is in effect the true reasoning of S. Augustine and Bellarmine is no wayes deceiv'd in it But it clearly follows from thence that according to S. Augustine that visible extension may be sometimes a mark of the true Church in opposition to a small party to wit then when the true and pure Doctrine is spread abroad every where because that is the time of the increase of the Church But it does not follow that this mark is perpetual since the time of that increase does not last alwayes From whence it appears that the arguing of S. Augustine can have no place in the question that is between the Church of Rome and us In one word then when we contest the title of the true Church with a Society that does otherwise own us to be Orthodox then visible extension decides the question according to S. Augustine But then when we contest that title with a Society that accuses us with false Doctrine that visible extension decides nothing and the difference cannot be determined but by the discussion of the foundation it self S. Augustine alledg'd it in the former case and the Author of the Prejudices alledges it in the latter What need we to do more to set down this truth in its full evidence and to give the Author of the Prejudices entire satisfaction Do we need to let him see that if they had accused the Society of S. Augustine of false Doctrine that Father had not pretended in this case that that visible extension should have decided the contest but that he would have decided it at the foundation Need we to go yet farther and to shew him that S. Augustine has formally acknowledg'd that there have been in effect times wherein the true Church has had no visible extension If we could shew him these two things he would methinks have some reason to be contented and to leave us in peace about this business of extension Let us therefore endeavour to satisfie him about these two Articles The first will be decided if we here appeal to what I have related of that Father on the occasion of what Cresconius had said to him that he ought to withdraw himself from the Church of the Traditors Is it sayes he that the Traditors have composed Books to shew that we ought to do or imitate their action Is it because they have recommended those Books to posterity Is it because we hold and follow that Doctrine If they had done that and if they would have permitted none to remain in their communion but such as would read those Books and approve that Doctrine I say that they would have separated themselves from the Unity of the Church and if you saw me in their Schism you would then have reason to say that I am in the Church of the Traditors We need no great learning to understand by this discourse 1. That S. Augustine had acknowledg'd that if in effect his Society had determined a false Doctrine if it had framed Books about it and suffered no person its communion who had not approved it it had lost the title of the True Church although that visible extension should have been secured to it 2. That if the Donatists who were but a small party had accused it it would have admitted them to proof without a wrangling with them about that extension For he who sayes Is it because we hold and follow that Doctrine makes us sufficiently see that he would not have refused them liberty to come to a proof if his adversaries had said that they held and followed it indeed And it ought not to be said that S. Augustine makes not that supposition only in regard of the whole of his Society but only in regard of some Traditors For he makes that supposition in regard of that same Society that Cresconius had called the Church of the Traditors and these words Is it because we hold and follow this Doctrine leave no place for that evasion See here the first Article the second is yet more formal in S. Augustine for no one can doubt that he has not acknowledg'd that there have been in effect times wherein the true Church has scarce had any visible extension This is that which he has in his Letter to Hesychius wherein he treats of the state of the Church in those miserable times which Jesus Christ foretold in the four and twentieth of S. Matthew Then the Sun sayes he shall be darkned and the Moon shall not give her light the Stars shall fall from heaven and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken The Church shall not appear because the wicked becoming persecutors shall no more observe any bounds in their cruelties Temporal Prosperity shall accompany them every where so that seeing no occasion of fear they shall say peace and security to themselves Then the Stars shall fall from heaven and the powers of the heavens
excommunicate all those who would not believe them As to the fifth S. Augustine did not intend to say that those who had separated themselves from the Arians when the Arians were the Masters of the Ministry were Schismaticks since he himself calls them the Stars of Heaven the Couragious and Unshaken firmissimi qui fortiter pro fide exulabant he never meant to condemn their Assemblies which they made apart to have nothing common with Heresie since it was nothing else but the effect of that heroical courage which he ascribes to them and of that ardent zeal which they had for the glory of God In effect S. Hilary praises some Bishops of France Germany and Flanders of whom he writes that they had separated themselves from the communion of those who held the Orthodox Bishops in Exile and in particular he extolls those among them who having appealed to a Synod of Bithynia remained firm and constant in the faith and in gathering themselves into a communion among themselves they separated themselves from the communion of the others S. Augustine has therefore answered that they were no wayes Schismaticks for two reasons The first is because the causes for which they refused communion with the Arians and withdrew themselves from their Ministry were just and lawful not frivolous and capricious as those of the Donatists but weighty and fundamental since they disputed about the Eternal Divinity of Jesus Christ which the Arians would abolish The second because that although these couragious men of S. Augustine had renounced the communion of the Arians and withdrawn themselves from their Ministry yet they did not believe notwithstanding that there was absolutely no more salvation to be had in the Society which they had forsaken For besides that receiving as they did their Baptism from it they could not doubt that the Children who dyed before they were infected with that Heresie were saved they did not also condemn the simple and the weak who remained unfeignedly in that communion without taking part in the impieties which were taught there so that their separation did not absolutely respect that Society but only the Hereticks that corrupted it But this is that which we say concerning the Berengarians the Waldenses the Albigenses c. we need but only to apply the same answer to them Lastly as to that which regards the sixth Objection S. Augustine has said that there was a considerable difference between the time wherein the Arians made up almost the whole body of the Christian Church and that wherein the true Doctrine was re-established in a great part of the Churches that the first was a time of oppression and the other a time of liberty that in the former time there being scarce any more a visible communion on the Earth under which the faithful might place themselves they could remain under a corrupted Ministry from which each one in particular had a right to separate the pure from the impure in waiting till God should deliver his Church out of the hands of those bad Pastors But in the second time where the Orthodox and Arian communions were in a visible opposition and such as was every where known it was not possible for them to remain under the Arian Ministry without having an Arian heart or at least without falling into a detestable hypocrisie For in the opposition of these two communions this very thing that they should remain in the Arian was a manifest condemnation of the Orthodox which they could not do without being either Arians or hypocrites Moreover in the former time those who remained out of necessity under the Ministry of the Arians remained there in grief and ardently desiring that God would procure them some means to get out of it and to return to an Orthodox Ministry But in the latter God having given them the power to joyn themselves to a pure communion they could not remain in the Arian without loving and being pleased with it through those worldly interests which they could never prefer before the Confession of a pure faith without being injurious to God without wounding their own consciences without having a debauched and profane spirit and in a word without binding over themselves to eternal damnation Behold here what S. Augustine has answered and it is no hard matter to judge that we must answer them thus when they make the like Objections to us We must distinguish between two Times to wit that which went before the Reformation and that which followed it and by the same reasons which I have alledged we will shew them that although it was possible in the former time for some to work out their own salvation under the corrupted Ministry of the Latin Church yet it does not follow that we may do so at this day under that of the Church of Rome since those two communions are now found to be set in opposition I shall not urge this matter further We may now methinks conclude from all that which I have handled in the foregoing Chapter and in this that if there ever was a vain and ill-grounded Objection that which the Author of the Prejudices has made against us is certainly one of that nature His Argument is founded upon nothing else but false or ill-understood Propositions For it is not true that S. Augustine believed that there was any particular Society among all those which make a profession of Christianity from whose Assemblies one might not in certain cases depart and withdraw ones self from its communion It is not true that the Separation which is between the Church of Rome and us is that which that Father has absolutely condemned and for which he accuses the Donatists to be Schismaticks It is not true that he would accuse them of Schism without examining the foundation by a meer passive Separation as that is wherein we are from the Church of Rome It is not true that he has taken that visible extension throughout all Nations for a perpetual mark of the true Church It is not true that he would have that mark to decide the question of the true Church when the Doctrine of it is disputed It is not true that we hold that the Church before the Reformation had perished throughout all the Earth It is not true that we reduce all to the Berengarians Waldenses and Albigenses c. only Lastly It is not true that the Doctrine of S. Augustine upon this subject is any way contrary to us but it is true that our Principles have all the conformity with his that any man can reasonably require This is in my judgement that which may be clearly collected from that which I have said As the Interest that we have in the clearing of this matter does not go much farther I would here put an end to this Chapter and this Third Part concerning our Separation if the interest of Truth and Charity did not bind me to make a reflection upon a Proposition that the Author of
been noted in the Third Part. But sometimes the ground of those Divisions is taken from Doctrine or Worship or the general Rules of Manners and consists in those things that are acknowledged by both sides to be weighty and essential and in this Rank we may place those Divisions which arose in the Antient Church by reason of the Samosatenians the Arrians the Macedonians Nestorians and Eutychians I acknowledge that when the Question is only about Divisions of the former sort we cannot rationally hinder our selves from acknowledging that Party to be the Body of the Church which has the advantages before spoken of and looking by consequence on the other Party as a Sect cut from it The one is the Tree and the other the cut-off Branch the one is the Sun and the other a separated Ray. And the Reason that makes that Prejudice Just is not that the greater party cannot have done wrong at the bottom or that it cannot erre For it frequently happens that Prejudice Passion Interest Cabals prevail among those who have the Ecclesiastical Authority in their hands which makes them give unjust Judgments and it may be the Author of the Prejudices would not maintain all the decisions and Excommunications of the Church of Rome to be Just But the Reason of that Prejudice is that though even the greater Part should have done wrong in the Foundation yet the matter treated on is not of such importance as that it can take away from a Society the Quality of the true Church of Jesus Christ while sound Doctrine intirely subsists there and Worship remains pure From whence it follows that there being there no sufficient cause of Separation the lesser Party can't be looked upon otherwise then as Schismatical because it is cut off from the Greater without necessity and supposing at the same time that it should have Reason in the Foundation yet its Separation would not cease to be criminal It is in this Case that Saint Augustin would have those whom violence or as he says carnal Sedition has driven from the Christian Assemblies to suffer patiently the injury done to them without throwing themselves either into Heresy or Schism and without setting up of Assemblies apart but that they should maintain and defend even to the death the Faith which they know Preached in the Church Sine ulla says he Conventiculorum segregatione usque ad mortem defendentes Testimonio juvantes eam fidem quam in Ecclesia Catholica praedicari sciunt But it is otherwise when the Division is about matters of the Second sort those I mean that are founded upon the weighty points of Doctrine or Worship For then the true Church ought alone to be sought for where the true Faith is where it is goes neither by extent of places nor by number nor by the Body of Pastors or Prelates nor by the Walls of Temples nor by Councils that we ought to Judge of it but by the true Doctrine and where that is to be found there without doubt is a Right to be in a Society and to gather Assemblies The Reason is evident because we cannot say in that Case that although the more numerous Party more extended and which has the Body of Pastors of its side should be wrong in the Foundation yet that it would not always keep the quality of a true Church as it may be said in the former Case For a Society that Teaches Error and practises a false Worship and that will receive none into its Communion but those who believe all that it believes and practise all that it practises cannot be a True Church whatsoever advantages it have otherwise so that finding it opposite to another pure Society there is no need to hesitate in ones Choice In the first Case the lesser Party cannot be other then Schismatical because whatsoever Reason it may have at the bottom it would be better to yield then to Separate ones self but it is not so in the Second for it would be better to separate ones self then to yield since in yielding one should fall into Fundamental Errors and Superstitions contrary to true Piety In a word in the former Case the Number Dignity Extent of place the Body of the Pastors Multitude ought to prevail over Reason in a particular Injustice because a Church may be in some respect unjust without hazarding the Salvation of its Children but in the Second Reason drawn from Injustice Error false Doctrine false Worship is a thousand times more considerable then all those advantages which I have noted because we cannot renounce the true Doctrine and the true Worship of God in things of great moment in which our Salvation would not be absolutely concerned It is this difference that causes us to take notice of two different ways in the Fathers which appear so opposite and contrary one to another that at first sight trouble our minds For when they wrote against the Novatians or against the Donatists or against the Luciferians who separated themselves out of frivolous Reasons that is to say upon points of Discipline and personal accusations but who otherwise acknowledged the Church they had quitted to be Orthodox they set before the people that Multitude Extension the Body of the Pastors Succession and other advantages of that Nature as things that shewed of what side the Church was and then they held that the lesser Party cut off from the greater was as a Member divided from the Body a Branch cut off from the Tree or as a Ray Separated from the Sun But when they were engag'd against the Arrians who taught false Doctrine they did not care to make use of those sorts of Arguments on the contrary they restrain'd themselves to look for the Church where the True Doctrine and Faith was and they had no Consideration either of the Body of the Pastors or of the Multitude or Pulpits or Councils when the Arrians made use of them to the Prejudice of the true Doctrine as I have shewn in the Third Part. But that very thing evidently discovers the Ordinary Cheat that their Missionaries are guilty of and the other petty Writers of Controversy of the Church of Rome and into which the Author of the Prejudices himself falls Which is that in stead of following with respect to us the way of Writing that the Fathers took when they wrote against the Arrians from whom they differed in points of Doctrine since the Cause is like they follow on the contrary that that the same Fathers took against the Novations the Donatists and Luciferians with whom they did not quarrel about matters of Doctrine which is a meer Sophism where they confound two altogether different Questions in referring to one Case that which cannot have any place but in the other But they will say Are not you your self guilty of Fallacy in perpetually supposing as you do in this dispute that you have Right at the Bottom For that is the thing that is most
Contested and when we alleadge to you the Body of the Pastors Extension Multitude and the other advantages of the Church of Rome we do not pretend to own that the Doctrine of that Church is false or that its Worship is corrupted or to conclude that those Advantages alone would give it the Quality of a True Church though it should not be Orthodox but we pretend only that setting aside the Discussion of Doctrines we can Convince you of Schism by those Prejudices alone which without any further Examination mark out which of the two Communions is the True Church and by Consequence which is false and Schismatical I have already answered Divers Times this Objection but that it may be reviv'd here further in the Minds of the Readers I shall not fail to shew yet farther the Vanity of it and to discover more and more on which side the Fallacy lies I say then that when I suppose in this Dispute that we have Right at the Bottom my Supposition is just and within the Rules of good Reason for I do not Suppose it either as a thing that I have already proved nor as a thing granted to me but as a Matter which ought to be Examin'd and on the Examination of which that Question of Schism and the True Church ought necessarily to depend We would say they shew you without entring into the Discussion of the Doctrine by meer Prejudices that you are guilty of Schism and that you have no Right to be in a Society nor to gather Assemblies And as for me I pretend to shew that that way is Illusory and Sophistical and that one ought to examine the Doctrines in order to know which of the two Communions is Schismatical and which is the True Church To this effect I prove that though the Protestant Party should be despoiled of all those Advantages treated on Provided it have on its side the True Doctrine and Worship and the Church of Rome have it not it has all the Rights of a Christian Society that its Assemblies are Lawful and that its Separation from the Church of Rome is just from whence it evidently follows that all those Prejudices are to no purpose in the deciding of our Question and that all depends on the Discussion of those Points that are in Controversy between us See here the use of my Supposition The Business at present is not to know whether we have Right in the Foundation or not if that were all the Business I would not suppose it at all I would prove it but the Business is to know whether they can by those meer Prejudices prove that our Separate Assemblies from those of the Church of Rome are unlawful But I shew that they cannot because if we have Reason on our side in the Matters that are Controverted our Assemblies are Lawfull notwithstanding those Prejudices In a word we pretend to maintain our Assemblies no otherwise then by the Right that the Foundation gives us but by that Right alone we pretend to maintain them so that when they Contest it with us we run back to the Foundation and we shew them that the Foundation is sufficient to render our Assemblies Lawfull from whence it necessarily follows that they can't treat us as unjust and Schismaticks otherwise then in coming to the Discussion of the Foundation it self When therefore they tell us that to Convince us of Schism they need but to set aside the Discussion of Doctrines it is as much as if they should say that to shew us that we have no Reason they need but to lay aside that Reason upon which we ground our selves The Author of the Prejudices has found this shift to be so Fine and Ingenuous that he has Judged it worthy to be Consecrated to Posterity by one of his Books In Fine if we were to clear this Truth by Examples we need but to repeat here two things which we have justified in the Third Part and which are clear and certain out of the History of the Antient Church The one That in the Time of the Arrians the Body of the Pastors followed Heresy and the other That a small Number of the Orthodox a small Party separated from the Body of its Pastors and spoiled of all those kinds of Advantages did not fail to set up its Assemblies apart and to hold the best Christian Society that it was possible for them to do Those that were Hereticks filled the Churches and as for the Orthodox they met as they could sometimes in the Fields and sometimes even in the Churches of the Novatians As these Matters of Fact are Indisputable and Justified by History we have nothing else to do but to demand of the Author of the Prejudices Whether he believes that those Orthodox were Schismaticks for having so Separated themselves from the Body of their Pastors not only by a Negative Separation but even by a Positive one Whether he believes that their Assemblies were Unlawfull Whether he believes that they had done better to have remained in the same Communion with Hereticks then in withdrawing from them Whether he thinks that the Arrians could have said to them with any Reason That without Entring upon any Examination of their Doctrine they could Convince them of Schism by that Separation alone Whether he believes that those Orthodox had given a very ill answer in saying That since their Separation was only founded on their Doctrine it was by that that they ought to judge and not by those vain and deceitfull Advantages which sometimes follow the Church but which oftentimes Abandon it also and upon which nothing of Certainty can be established The Author of the Prejudices may answer what he pleases but we are at least assured that he can neither condemn the Arrians without Justifying us nor justify the Orthodox without Condemning himself It is Necessary then that we come to agree in this Truth That the Right to be in an External Society and by Consequence to raise Assemblies belong to the truly Faithful only and that if it falls out that the Body of the Pastors teaches false Doctrine and corrupts the Ministry to that degree that it cannot be allowed to the Faithfull to live in Communion with them The True Faithfull remain yet united among themselves by that External Union out of which their Assemblies proceed and that by Consequence they have a Right to meet together and to make up a Body in a visible Communion But they will say If it falls out that generally all the Pastors forsake those pretended True Faithfull whereof you speak Who is there that shall Assemble them they are all but so many meer private men and what Right have those private men to gather Assemblies besides Religious Assemblies are chiefly Instituted for the Preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sarraments and can any ascribe the Right of Preaching and Administring the Sacraments to meer private men Separated from their Pastors When therefore
Judges of things no otherwise then by what they tell them and by some light appearances without informing themselves any further Nevertheless it is certain that there never was a more unjust Accusation then that nor whose injustice could be more easily seen if they would but open their Eyes a little For as to that which respects that pretended Novelty of Religion which they say that we have introduced I would fain have them mark out some positive Articles of our Faith that were not always believed in the Christian Church and which they themselves to this day do not believe in the Church of Rome without any ways scrupling them I confess that they may have among them some Questions of the School about which our positive Doctrine is different from that of the Church of Rome as the Question of the Nature of Concupiscence that of the dolors of the Soul of Jesus Christ and that of the Definition of the Faith But besides that those Questions are very few in Number and that they are scarce known by the People we have the Holy Scriptures so clearly on our side upon all those points that they cannot lay any Novelty to our Charge and for the rest all our great Differences consist in respect of us in Negative Articles that is to say in those points which the Church of Rome believes and which we do not believe as the Sacrifice of the Mass Transubstantiation Oral Manducation Adoration of the Host Purgatory Invocation of Saints and Angels Religious Worship of Images that of Relicks the Divine Service in an unknown Tongue the Necessity of the Caelibacy of the Clergy the merit of good works the Authority of Traditions the Monarchy of the Pope the Infallibility of the Church of Rome her Soveraign power over mens Consciences and other such like Doctrines It is True that we have rejected those Doctrines but since it is also true that we have rejected them only because they are Novelties that men have added to God's Revelation beyond which there can be nothing in Religion that should not be new what ground have any of them to accuse us as Innovators They would have far more ground to say that we are too rigid Followers of Antiquity and that we urge our Scruples and our Aversions for these Novelties further then we ought or at least that we deceive our selves and take that for new which indeed is not so If they said no more but that we should labour to justify our selves but to charge us under that pretence with a Spirit of Novelty is the most unreasonable and groundless thing in the World That which makes the Fallacy is That the people whose sight is extream short and who Judge of the Novelty and Antiquity of things only by that which appears open to them imagine that all that which they received from their Fathers and which they found setled when they came into the World is Antient throughout so that a false Antiquity which shall be only of two or three Ages past passes in their Judgments for as good and true a one as if it had been always so Notwithstanding which it is certain that in matters of Religion nothing can be truly Antient but that which was from the beginning and nothing can be Divine but that which is from Jesus Christ and his Apostles for it is a thing very evident and acknowledged on both sides that from the Time of Jesus Christ and his Apostles There has been no immediate Revelation whence it follows That all that which is sprung up since is humane and by consequence New This is the True Idea that we ought to form of Old and New and not that popular Idea which cannot but be false and deceitful and yet notwithstanding it is upon this latter that they ground themselves when they accuse us to have been Innovators and to have made a new Religion as if Jesus Christ had been an Innovator then when he would correct the abuses that the Jews committed in their Divorces by telling them In the beginning it was not so It is after the same manner that they charge us with having made a new Church for they play upon the Equivocalness of the word New The People who imagine that all that which appears to them in another form then that which they have been wont to see is new believe that our Society is new because they see that we do not Assemble our selves any more with them as we did before that we have other places then the usual that we do not any more say Mass in our Assemblies that we hold another Order and that we have other Ministers But there needs here only a Distinction For a thing is called New either with respect to its being and its Essence in respect of its External State and its changeable Accidents When an Infant comes into the World they say a new man is born when a new House or Town is built where there none before they say it is a new Town or a new House and the same may be said when one thing is essentially changed into another thing as when God changed Moses's Rod into a Serpent or when Jesus Christ changed the water of Cana into Wine it might be said that it was a new thing because in effect it was not essentially the same thing that it was before But when it is only changed in its State or External Form as when a Man changes his countenance his Stature or his Inclination manner of acting or Cloaths or when he repairs a House or a Town if then any should say this were a new thing without doubt he would speak improperly It is not less manifest that it is no more then a sigurative Expression which ought not to be taken litterally nor in a rigorous sence So when Saint Paul calls a converted man a new Man a new Creature and the Church a new Heaven a new Earth a new World every one sees that these are ways of speaking that ought not to be taken literally but figuratively for a Believer is essentially the same man and the same Creature of God that he was before his Conversion and Heaven Earth and the World are not changed in their Essence by the manifestation of the Gospel Besides a thing that is changed in its external Form may be called new either with respect to the State wherein it was immediately before its change or with respect to the Just and lawful State wherein it should be according to its first Establishment so when one repairs a ruined House if it keeps its first proportion We may say that it is made new in respect of what it was before its Reparation but if its first and natural Fashion should be changed it would be new even in respect of what it should have been according to the Model by which it was made at first These Distinctions clear this whole Dispute and it is not difficult to apply them to the subject we
we see the Conditions that are necessary to a Lawful Call as Examination Information of manners and the like so ill observed in the Church of Rome that Christian Prudence will not suffer us to Trust to her and her Elections which for the most part would be Null if they were Examin'd according to their own Canons Calvin has wrote that God set up Apostles in his time or at least Evangelists to draw men from the Party of Antichrist I answer that Calvin only called the Reformers Apostles and Evangelists by some kind of resemblance which they had with the first Evangelists in some respect not that they brought a new Revelation with them into the World as the Apostles and Evangelists did but because God made use of them to make the light of his Gospel which was much darkened strike upon the eyes of Men with splendor and they honour those to this day with the Title of Apostles who now employ themselves in making Christianity known to the Nations that are Strangers to it although they are not immediately sent from God and though they have not any new Revelation He alleadges in the end the Dispute that was between a Protetestant named Adrian Saravias and Beza where Beza seems to admit of only an Extraordinary Call in the Reformers I answer That as well Saravias as Beza are particular Authors who may have had both the one and the other thoughts a little excessive about this matter and it may be may have even disputed the one against the other without well understanding one another This is that which falls out every day between persons otherwise very learned Beza rejected the Ordinations of the Church of Rome not that he thought the Ministry was absolutely extinct there nor that they had not there any Right to a Call but because the Calls of persons there were made after a very confused and corrupted manner without Examination either of Doctrine or manners by reason of which they were most frequently given to unworthy persons and that instead of ordaining them to Preach the Gospel they ordain them only to Sacrifice That concludes that the Ordinary Call which the first Reformers received was not purer than that of others if God had not given them the Grace to rectify it as they did by a just and lawful use of it but that does not conclude that such as it was it did not put them into a Right and Obligation to cleanse it from that ill which it had by that good which remained in it The Author of the Prejudices opposes further an Article of a National Synod held at Gap Anno 1603. which he sets down in these words Vpon the 31 Article of the Confession of Faith it having been put to the question whether when they came to Treat of the Call of our Pastors they should found the Authority which they had to Reform the Church and to Teach upon the Call which they had received from the Roman Church The Assembly determined that they ought meerly to referr it to the Article of the Extraordinary Call by which God extraordinarily and inwardly stirr'd them up to their Ministry and not in the least to any thing that remained of that Ordinary Corrupted Call But since he would give himself the trouble to look into our National Synods he ought not to stop there he ought to go on even to that of Rochel which was held immediately after that of Gap in the year 1607 and there he would have found that that Article having been set down differently in several Copies and having been altered by the negligence of the Copiers it was re-established in that Synod which was drawn into an Act in these words In the 31 Article of the Confession of Faith of the Synod of Gap wherein mention is made of the first Pastors of the Reformed Churches these words and to Teach which are found in some Copies should be raised out and in the place of meerly there should be put chiefly and that last Clause And not in the least to any thing that remained of that Ordinary Corrupted Call should be also mended Rather than to that little which remained of their Ordinary Call To have made use of that Article seriously he ought to have done it not in the State wherein the ignorance of the Copiers had put it but in that wherein a whole Synod had re-established it At the bottom it will appear that they there treated only about a Call for the Reformation and not for the exercise of the Ordinary Ministry and the Synod does not but in some respects only deny that that Call for a Reformation was not founded upon that that the first Reformers had received from the Church of Rome howsoever corrupted it was but it would that it should be chiefly referred to a particular Providence of God which by Extraordinary Gifts and Talents had raised men up for so great a work In effect although we should acknowledge that in the Church the rejecting or Reformation of Errours should be the common Right of all Christians and that that Right would yet more especially belong to the Ordinary Pastors then to others by the Obligation of their Charge joyned to that of their Baptism yet we do not fail to acknowledge also that there was something extraordinary in the persons of the Reformers to wit the Gifts or the admirable Talents which made them fit for that work and capable of reducing their Right into Act without which their Right would have been to no purpose as it did remain in divers others unprofitable who had not the same Gifts But that very thing might gain them the greatest Authority and this is that which the Synod would say and which we say also with it For we distinguish three things in the Reformers from whence there results as full and intire a Call to Reform the Church as they can desire the one is The general and common Right that all Christians have to Combat Errours since they are all called to defend the Truth the other is a more peculiar Right which they had for the same thing in quality of Pastors for how impure soever their Call was it would alwayes bind them to have a Care of their Flocks and to procure Gods Glory and the third is the Extraordinary Graces and Light that God had communicated to them and rendred them thereby fit for that work But it is this last that reduc'd the two others into Act and therefore they look'd on it there principally when they treated of the Reformation because if they had never met with this the two others would have been useless Rights and ineffectual Obligations After that it is easy to comprehend how the Author of the Prejudices was mistaken when under a pretence of that Extraordinary Call that we Attribute to the first Reformers in respect of their Gifts or Talents he imagines that he can lay it to our charge that we believe that the
the External State of that Religion it self had in the times of our Fathers Signs of its Corruption sufficient to afford them just Motives to Examine it Page 23. Chap. IV. That such a Corruption of the Latin Church as our Fathers had conceived was no ways an Impossible thing Page 37. Chap. V. More particular Reflections upon that priviledge of Infallibility which they ascribe to the Church and of its Authority Page 45. Chap. VI. An Examination of the Proofs which they produce to Establish the Infallibility of the Church-of Rome Page 54. Chap. VII That the Authority of the Prelates of the Latin Church had not any Right to bind our Fathers to yield a blind Obedience to them or to hinder them from Examining their Doctrines Page 75. Chap. VIII A further Examination of that Authority of the Prelates and that Absolute Obedience which they pretend ought to be given them Page 85. Chap. IX An Examen of those Reasons they Alledge to Establish that Soveraign Authority of the Prelates in the Latin Church Page 109. The Second Part. Of the Justice of the REFORMATION CHap. I. That our Fathers could not expect a Reformation either from the hands of the Popes or from those of the Prelates Page 125. Chap. II. A Confirmation of the same thing from the History of that which passed in the first Quarrels of Luther with the Conrt of Rome concerning Indulgences Page 142. Chap. III. That our Fathers not being able any more to hope for a Reformation on the part of the Pope or his Prelates were indispensably bound to provide for their own Salvation and to Reform themselves Page 156. Chap. IV. That our Fathers had a Lawful and sufficient Call to Reform themselves and to labour to Reform others Page 166. Chap. V. An Answer to the Objections that are made against the Persons of the Reformers Page 177. Chap. VI. A further Justification of the first Reformers against the Objections of the Author of the Prejudices contained in his Tenth and Eleventh Chapters Page 196. Chap. VII An Answer to the Twelfth and Thirteenth Chapters of the Prejudices Page 222. Chap. VIII That our Fathers in their Design of Reforming themselves were bound to take the Holy Scriptures alone for the Rule of their Faith Page 241 Chap. IX An Examination of the Objections which the Author of the Prejudices makes against the Scripture Page 260. The Third Part. Of the Obligation and Necessity that lay-upon our Fathers to separate themselves from the Church of Rome CHap. I. That our Fathers had just sufficient and necessary Causes for their Separation supposing that they had Right at the Bottom in the Controverted Points Page 1. Chap. II. That our Fathers were bound to Separate themselves from the Body of those who possess'd the Ministry in the Church and particularly in the See of Rome supposing that they had a Right at the Foundation Page 15. Chap. III. That the Conduct of the Court of Rome and those of her Party in respect of the Protestants has given them a just cause to separate themselves from them supposing that they had Right at the Foundation Page 53. Chap. IV. An Examination of the Objection of the Author of the Prejudices taken out of the Dispute of Saint Augustine against the Schism of the Donatists Page 79. Chap. V. A further Examination of the Reasoning of the Author of the Prejudices upon the Subject of our Separation Page 113. The Fourth Part. Of the Right that our Fathers had to hold a Christian Society among themselves by Publick Assemblies and the Exercise of the Ministry CHap. 1. That our Fathers had a Right to have their Church-Assemblies separate from those of the Church of Rome on the Supposition that they were right in the Foundation Page 1. Chap. II. That the Society of the Protestants is not a new Cburch Page 28. Chap. III. That the Ministry Exercised in the Communion of the Protestants is Lawful and that the Call of their Ministers is so also Page 48. Chap. IV. An Answer to the Objections of the Author of the Prejudices about the Call of the first Reformers and the Validity of our Baptism P. 84 The End of the CONTENTS of the CHAPTERS Advertisement THere is newly Published a Book Entituled ☞ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a Treatise wherein you have 1. The Divine Auhtority of the Holy Scriptures proved by undeniable Demonstrations and the Cavils of Objectors confuted 2. A Continuation of the Metaphors Allegories and Express Similitudes of the Old and New Testament gradually expounded Parallel wise with short Inferences from each 3. Sacred Phylologie viz. the Schemes and Figures in Sriipture reduced under their proper Heads with a brief Explication of the most obscure 4. A Treatise of the Types Parables and Allegories in the Old and New Testament 5. Plain and Evident Demonstrations that by the Great Whore Mystery Babylon is meant the Papal Hierarchy or present Church of Rome The whole VVork being partly Compiled and partly Translated from the VVorks of many Learned and Orthodox VVriters Ancient and Modern compleating what was intended by the Undertakers in order to explain that difficult part of the Word of God It being encouraged and recommended by divers Worthy Ministers of London as useful for all Students in Sacred Writ Sold by John Hancock at the Three Bibles over against the Royal Exchange in Cornhil and Benj. Alsop at the Angel and Bible in the Poultrey over-against the Compter Cassander Consult art de Eccles Luke 22. 25 26. 1 Pet. 5. Bernard in Cant. Serm. 77. Item Serm. 33. Nicol Cusan lib. 3. de Concord Cath. c. 29. 1 Tim. 6. 10 3. Col. 5. Nicolaus de Clemangis de corrupto Statit Ecclesiae Bernard de verbis Evangel Dixit Simon c. pag. 1000. Marsil de Pad Defens pacis Part 2. cap. 20. History of the Council of Trent Book 6. In the Instructions and Missives of the most Christian King for the Council of Trent In the same Instructions and Missives Distinct. 96. Canon 7. Aug. Steuchus De fals Donat. Constantini Froissard Tom. 3. Fol. 147. Angel Politian Orat. pro Sen. ad Alexand Sextum Raynald ad Ann. 1492. ss 27. Decretal Greg. lib. 1. tit 7. Can. Quanto in Glossa Itinerar Ital. Part 2. de coron Rom. Pontif. Raynald ad Ann. 1162. Baron ad Ann. 1162. Concil Lateran Sess 7. 9. in Orat. Paulus Jovius in Philippo 3. †Renvoy signifies properly a simple dismission granted to one that being appealed or called before a superiour Judg requires to be dismissed to the prosecuting of his suit already begun before the inferiour his Ordinary Judge Platina in vit Sexto Decret tit 2. cap. 1. Sext. Decret Extravag lib. 1. De major obed cap. 1. Baron ad Ann. 1076. Platin. in vit Bonif. 8. Joan. Gerson de Eccles. potest Consid 10. Decretal Gregor lib. 3. tit 8. cap. 4. Decret part 2. Caus 25. Quest 1. Canon 6. ad Gloss Bernard Epist 42.
them before we go any farther CHAP. II. That the State of the Government of the Latin Church some Ages ago gave to our Fathers Prejudices of its Corruption in Doctrine and Worship sufficient to drive them more nearly to Examine their Religion AS our Fathers did not Reform themselves but by following the Examination which they made of Religion such as it was in their days and as they did not enter upon that Examination but by the Prejudices which they received that its state was extreamly corrupted it is necessary to our judging of their Conduct to consider in the first place of what nature and force those Prejudices were whether they were just or unjust rash or reasonable and whether they justly led our Fathers to make a more particular Reflection upon that which they taught them It shall be then by this Fundamental Question that we will begin and first propose the Prejudices that the corrupted estate of the Ecclesiastical Government gave them some Ages before and afterwards we shall consider those that the same External State of Religion furnisht them with But because this matter will engage us to declare those Truths which it may be will not be agreeable to all the World they ought to remember that we are within the bounds of a just and natural defence having been publickly provoked to it by a Famous Book which is alledged on all occasions with great boasting and that that Book in assaulting us with Prejudices has furnisht us with the very same Example to defend our Ancestours likewise by Prejudices and that it will be a strange injustice if while on the one side they charge us with such foul accusations they will not allow us on the other side to declare those things that are essential to our justification We will declare them then but no otherwise then Historically and upon the proper Testimony of those Authors which the Church of Rome approves with a design rather nakedly to shew them then subtilly to represent or exaggerate them In the first place Our Fathers beheld that instead of having kept that Evangelical simplicity which Jesus Christ and his Apostles had so much recommended by their Sermons and their Examples they had on the contrary framed the Government of the Church according to the Platform and Model of Secular Empires They saw an almost innumerable Company of Dignities elevated by Pompous Titles Canons Honours Preeminencies and Priviledges upheld by the vast Riches and the Splendor of the World and all of them together depending on a Soveraign High-Priest who had lifted himself up above the whole Church as its rightful Monarch yea as a Divine Monarch whose words must be Laws and whose Laws Oracles who pretended to reign not only over the external Actions of men but to Lord it also over their Souls and their Consciences and who left nothing so reserved in the deepest and most inward motions of the Soul of which he did not demand its Subjection It had been very hard if our Fathers had not found in the midst of the Grandeur of this Body so ordered somthing very much alien to the natural Aspect of the Church of Jesus Christ which is much rather a Ministry then an Empire in respect of its External Government Indeed if Jesus Christ had had a design to have established such a Dominion as our Fathers beheld established he had never told his Disciples that which he said to them The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them and they that exercise Authority upon them are called Benefactours But it shall not be so with you but he that is great among you let him be as the less and he that is chief as he that doth serve St. Peter would never have said to the Pastors of the Church that which he told them Feed the stock of Jesus Christ which is committed to you not as being Lords over God's Heritage It had then already from thence in that very Dominion a great sign of its Corruption It was an evil but an evil that discover'd divers others For it had this appearance with it that the Spirit of the World had got possession of the Ministers of the Church till it made them forget what they were in their first Institution beyond which it had made them often commit many outrages 2. They had not contented themselves to establish a Spiritual Dominion upon the plat-from of Secular ones unless they joyned the very Temporal one it self to it The greater part of the Bishops were become Lords properly so called and even some of them had got to be Soveraign Princes with the Titles and Preregatives of other Princes and Lords without any difference had not the Popes themselves done far better if they had put themselves in possession of that which they now call the State of the Church under the quality of Temporal Lords and Monarchs I will not mention by piece-meal the Disorders the Complaints the Contentions the Wars that this Spirit of Temporal Dominion has raised This is not my design It is sufficient for me to remark that one can scarce give a more certain Character of the Corruption of a Church then that For where that Spirit reigns it is by that that men will easily bring in Errors and Superstitions at least those that can bring them any advantage and those that have a tendency to adjust the Crown with the Miter and the worldly Grandeur with the Dignities of the Church It is not very easy in such a state to be studiously watchful over the Flock and much less to repel the Doctrines the Customes and the Maximes that can any ways advance or favour that Elevation 3. Covetousness is almost always inseparable from Ambition They are those two things that nourish and mutually sustain one another So our Fathers saw them reigning together through a long tract of time among the Church-men I will not here speak of the complaints which they made many Ages ago of the Avarice of the Court of Rome because I shall mention something about them hereafter in this Discourse I will only say that those Complaints were universally extended to all the Clergy whom they reproacht with an insatiable greediness of heaping up of Riches The vast stocks they had gained the great Cares they took to hinder an Alienation and procure an increase would not possibly be the worst proofs But as that evil spread it self very far so it was lamented for a long time after They feed on the sins of my people said St. Bernard who lived in the twelfth Century that is to say they require money for their sins without making any other account of the Sinuers Who of the Clergy may you not observe far more careful to empty the Purses of those set under them then to destroy their Vices A disorderly Appetite of those Lands that are annexed to the Churches said Cardinal Cusanus dwells at this day in the hearts of the aspiring Bishops
so that we see them do that openly after their promotion which they secretly coveted before All their Care is for the Temporal and nothing for the Spiritual But this was never the mind of the Emperours They did not then think that the Spiritual affairs would be ingulpht in the Temporal when they gave those goods to the Churches So our Fathers were but too well acquainted with that Spirit of Avarice with animated the Governours of the Church in their Days and every one knows that one of the matters that very much Scandalized them and made them deliberately examine the state of Religion was the Traffick of Indulgences In effect what likelyhood was there that a Vice that corrupts all things and which St. Paul calls the root of all evil and elsewhere a kind of Idolatry being as it was for many Ages so universally spread over the Clergy over the Head and the Members even to the Monks themselves what likelyhood I say was there that this Vice which was found to be so much increased by their Superstitions should have left Religion in its natural purity 4. Our Fathers discern'd a prodigious neglect of the Functions of the Ministry joyn'd with that Covetousness For a Preaching Bishop was for a long time so rare that it was altogether unusual The Care of the poor the visiting of the sick the comforting the Afflicted the correcting the Ignorant the studying of the Scriptures and all the other offices belonging to the Pastoral Crosier were if not quite quite abandoned yet at least extremly neglected All was may almost reduc't to saying of the service as one speak and to reading of the Administration of the Sacraments the Formularies of a Liturgy which a very few of the People understood and neither he himself sometimes who read it before them It was this that made Nicholas de Clemangis Archdeacon of Bayeux who flourished in the beginning of the fifteenth Centuary to say that the study of the Holy Scriptures and those who taught them were derided by all and that which is yet more amazing is that it is chiefly the Bishops that scoff at them preferring their own Traditions to the Ordinances of God Now a days the charge of Preaching which is an Office so admirable and so glorious and which heretofore belonged to the Pastours only is now thought so vile by them that there is nothing which they judge more unworthy of their Grandeur and to bring more reproach to their Dignity He adjoyns that they made no difficulty openly to profess that it belonged only to the begging Fryars to Preach and not to them But this Negligence did not spring up in that Age of the Reformation nor in that that immediatly preceded it for since the ninth Century the Pastors of the Church have been extream slack in dressing the Vineyard of our Lord. Which could not but have made way for false Doctrines and Superstitions and have caused a very great alteration in Religion 5. Ignorance was one inevitable Consequence of that carelessness of the Ministers of the Church that is to say that which of all things in the world was the most improper to engage any to have relied on their Conduct and to have rested assured of the sincerity of their instructions This Ignorance was very great and very general in the time of our Fathers and the most prejudiced of our Adversaries will not deny it But it had began a great while before their days as it appears from the Barbarism of the Schools and from the matter and stile of the greatest part of the Books that the preceding Age had produced and from the express Testimony of divers Authours The Church of God saith St. Bernard every day in divers manners finds by sad experience in what great danger she is when the Shepheard knows not where the Pastures are nor the Guide where the right way is and when that very man who should speak for God and on his side is ignorant what is the will of his Master In these days said Marsilius of Padoua in the fourteenth Century in these days wherein the Government of the Church is corrupted the greatest part of the Priests and Bishops are but meanly instructed in the Holy Scriptures and I dare say they are uncapable of deciding the doubts of their Faith For Ambition Covetousness and Canvassings obtain the Temporal Benefices and they purchase in effect by their services or by their prayers by their Gold or by their Favour all the Dignities of the Age. God is my witness and a great number of his faithful also that I remember I have seen many Priests many Abbots and many Prelats so void of knowledge that they have not known how to speak even according to the Rules of Grammar Is it not very natural to conclude that a number of Errors and Superstitions would infallibly accrew from the favouring of this Ignorance and thereby be established in the Church and that that would produce Novelties and that those which formerly were but private opinions or which consisted but in some first dispositions and tendencies to Errors would become general and be changed into habits 6. But might not our Fathers very well conclude the same thing from that dreadful depravation of manners which they and their Fathers had seen reign for so long a time among the Church-men Those who have any knowledge of History are not ignorant of the Lamentations that all honest men made then and the mournful descriptions that they have left of those times in their writings One may read for the twelfth Century only St. Bernard for the thirteenth Cardinal Hugo for the fourteenth William Bishop of Mende for the fifteenth Werner Rollewink a Carthusian Monk of Cologne for they say but too much for the justifying of these Articles and for the sixteenth which was the Age of the Reformation who does not know that it was extremely corrupted One of the matters of which the Ambassadour of the Duke of Bavaria so vehemently complain'd before the Council of Trent on the behalf of his Master and upon which he so much insisted was the wicked lives of the Clergy where he said that he could not describe their horrible wickednesses without offending the chast ears of the Audience He subjoyns That the Prince his Master remonstrated to the Council That the Correction of points in Doctrine would be vain and unprofitable if they did not first correct their manners That the Clergy was defamed by reason of their Luxury That the Civil Magistrate did not suffer any Lay-man to have a Concubine that notwithstanding amongst the Clergy it was so common a thing to have them that amidst a hundred Priests one could not find above three or four who either kept not Whores or were not Married the one secretly and the others publickly It is with shame that I speak of it said the Cardinal of Lorrain in an Oration that he made to the same Council but it is also
one might make a large Volum of them if these Antient Disorders were not so publickly known One has publisht not long since a Book of the Rates of the Apostolick Chamber and the Taxes enjoyned for Penances which alone declares more then it will be necessary for us to stay upon for our Edification There not only every dispatch of business but every sin also every crime has its set Price and as there is nothing to be done without Money so there is nothing which Money cannot do 19. I could add to all that I have said a multitude of other things that could not but have been very proper to have raised those prejudices in the minds of our Fathers whereof we have spoken For those unjust ways which Rome has made use of to draw all affairs to it self with all the Riches of the West all the underhand Canvassings and strange Practices it has used in the Elections of Popes the Scandalous Schisms that have sprung from the Divisions of Parties and Differences of Elections The Bloody Wars that the Popes are accused to have divers times kindled among Christian Princes the Intrigues the dishonest ways whereby they are said to have served themselves to engage the Kings and Grandees of the World in their Interests the endeavours they have always used to elude the demands of a Reformation all these things sufficiently discover more of the Spirit of the World then of the Spirit of Jesus Christ and will easily perswade all those who are not wholly deprived of their Reason that there must needs have been latent at the bottom an extream Coruption But we ought to make an end of this Chapter and to leave a matter so ungrateful into which we had not at all entred if we had not been obliged by the necessity of a just defence as I have before declared It only remains that we shut up in the Close of all those things which we have represented by concluding that they cannot at least without renouncing all equity any more condemn our Fathers either of rashness or presumption if they durst perswade themselves that the Church and Religion were fallen into the very worst hands and if they judged from thence that they ought to enter upon a more particular scrutiny of those Doctrines that they taught and of those Laws whereby they would bind their Consciences That Consequence which they drew from thence was but the just effect of a Reason animated by the fear of God and a desire which they had of their own Salvation for what colour or pretence could there be that a Disorder in the Government of the Church so great so antient so general should not be accompanied with a multitude of other Errors contrary to the word of God and prejudicial to the Salvation of men CHAP. III. That the External State of that Religion it self had in the times of our Fathers signs of its Corruption sufficient to afford them just motives to Examine it ALthough these Reflections that I have already set down drawn from the Government of the Church were very weighty and by themselves capable of making the most just impressions on the Minds and Consciences of those who would set themselves to work out their own Salvation according to the Exhortation of the Apostle with fear and trembling yet we ought not to imagine that our Fathers were determined by those considerations alone They yet made others which they had that we may yet be more sensibly touched by them since they had for their object not the outward Form or State of the Ministry nor the persons who possessed the Offices and Dignities of the Church but their Religion it self in that State in which it was in their days For it is most true that it was scarce possible for those who did the least in the World fix their Eyes on that Religion to consider its Draught and its External Form without discovering or at least without discerning infinite Characters of its Corruption And this is that which I design to treat of in this Chapter 1. One of the chief Objects that presented it self to our Fathers was that of the great Number of Ceremonies with which they beheld that Religion either shrowded or overwhelmed It matters little which of the two we affirm for which way soever we take it it was always a true Pourtrait of the old Oeconomy of Moses which seem'd to be reviv'd in the World They took special notice of their external sacrifices their solemn Feasts distinction of Meats of their Altars of their Tapers of their sacred Vessels of their Censings of their set Fasts throughout the Year of their mystical Figures and a multitude of particular things altogether resembling those that were enjoin'd under the Law and in general a great Conformity to that Antient-Worship consisting in such a Love and Excessive usage of Ceremonies This was without doubt a Character very opposite to that of the Gospel of Jesus Christ where the Spirit Rules and not the Letter and which is made free from all that great cumbrance of External Observations St. Paul calls these Observances weak and beggerly Elements a Yoak of bondage the rudiments of the World the shadow of things to come whereof the body is Jesus Christ and St. Peter a Yoak which neither the Jews in his days nor their Fathers were able to bear Jesus Christ himself told the woman of Samaria That the time was come when the true worshippers of his Father should worship him in Spirit and in truth What likelyhood was there that they would have spoke after that manner if the Church of Christ her self should be burthened with as many or more Ceremonies then the Synagogue And if as Tertulian speaks God had not removed the difficulties of the Law to substitute in their places the easy Rules of the Gospel They would have Preached to us the Spirit and Liberty only to have us subjected again to the Letter and to have placed us under a servitude far more insupportable then the Former 2. Moreover as our Fathers saw one part of those Ceremonies taken from the Jews so they preceiv'd a multitude of others that were drawn from or imitated the Heathens by their approving of the same which they either Authorised or practised For we might put into this rank the use of holy water or water Consecrated for sprinkling in the entrance into Churches as well as private Houses and the Funerals of the dead the blessings and the sprinklings the using of Spittle in the Baptism of little Children the Invocation of Saints their Canonization their Patronages and ordering of their Charges and Imployments Their Images and Pictures their Agnus Dei's their Feasts for all the Saints for the deaths of St. John and many others their usage of Processions of Rogations their visiting the Shrines or Reliques of Saints of setting up the sign of the Cross where four ways met of Anniversaries for the dead of swearing by their Reliques and
follows not only that God had the same concern in the preservation of the purity of that Church as of that of the Latin Church but that he had yet a far greater For above this that Church had external help for the Conversation of its purity far greater than the Latin Church ever had For it was shut up in one only people and in one Country only It had one Language only one only Tabernacle one only Temple but one civil Government but one only Political Law and but one King where the Western Church had all those apart in many places And yet notwithstanding all that it could not be kept from Corruptions not only at one but divers times not only in matters of small Consequence but after a strange manner by a heap of depraved Traditions by false glosses on the Law by open Idolatries and by a multitude of other things wherewith their Prophets reproached them Had they not then very great reason to think that the Latin Church which had no peculiar promises that it should be kept from Corruption in being distinguisht from that of Israel was not more happy then that in the Conservation of its Purity 4. To this example of the Church of Israel our Fathers adjoyn'd that of the Greek and other Eastern Churches which God had at first honour'd with Christianity as well as the Latin and that the times had nevertheless so dissigur'd them that they did not any farther appear to be what they were heretofore Indeed into what errours and superstitions did not those Churches fall And in how many points does not the Church of Rome find it self to differ at this day from them Some of them observe Circumcision with Baptism others keep up the sacrificing of living creatures after the manner of the Jews some solemnly every Year Baptize their Rivers and their Horses others believe that the smoke of Incense takes away their sins others hold that the Prayers of the Faithful deliver from the pains of Damnation those Souls that are then in Hell others give Pass-ports in due Form to the dying to carry them to Paradise and a thousand other such-like impertinencies that are found to be establisht among those People Why might it not be possible that the Latin Church should have degenerated as well as those Churches Is it that their Christianity was from the beginning different from that of the Latin's or is it because the Latin Church had some peculiar priviledges beyond all others No certainly their Vocation was equal on one part and on the other and the nature of things being so if those Nations had corrupted themselves those of Rome might corrupt themselves as well as they 5. Our Fathers who were not ignorant of those Examples could not but represent all to themselves also in my judgment the times past wherein errours and corruption had visibly prevail'd over the Truth even then when those very Churches of the East and West were joyn'd together in one Body They knew that that had past in the Council of Antioch in favour of the Macedonians in the Councils of Sirmium of Milan of Ariminum at Selucia and at Constantinople in favour of the Arrians and in a Council at Ephesus in favour of the Eutychians without thinking of that which they said of those two Councils held at Constantinople in favour of the Iconoclastes or abolishers of Images the one under the Emperour Leo Isaurious the other under Constantine Copronimus That very thing was an evident token to them that the Latin Church might be very likely in their times fallen into other corruptions and that errour had triumpht over truth For it was not at all impossible that that which had hapned frequently in respect of some errours might not yet with greater success and longer duration happen in respect of other errours 6. Moreover They observed that Councils of a great name among the Latins as those of Constance and Basil had been rejected and opposed by other Councils and that in the most weighty points of Religion to wit in the Case of the Supreme Authority that ought to govern the Church upon Earth For some rais'd the Authority of the Councils above that of the Pope and others would have it that the Popes should have an absolute and an independent and perfectly Monarchical Rule over the Church what could our Fathers conclude from so manifest a contest if not that it had a vast confusion in it and that it was exceeding necessary to the quiet setling of their Minds and Consciences to enter on an examination of that which those men taught in the business of Religion 7. Our Fathers were confirmed in that design when they set before their eyes those obscure Ages through which the Latin Church had past For who knows not what the ninth tenth and eleventh Centuries were not to speak of those that followed them As for the ninth Baronius is forc't to conclude the History of it with saying That it was an Age of affliction to the Church in general and chiefly to the Church of Rome as well by reason of the complaints it had against the Princes of the West and East and the Schism of Photius as by reason of intestine and implacable Wars which had began then to be formed within the very Bosom of that Church That this Age was the most deplorable and dismal above all the rest because those who ought to have been watchful in the Government of the Church not only slept profoundly but the very same Persons laboured all they could intirely to drown the Apostolick-Ship For the Tenth as there are very few Persons but will acknowledge that it was buried in darkness more gross then that of Aegypt so it will be needless here to produce the proofs The eleventh was scarce happier and Baronius begins the History of it with a remark of so universal a Corruption of manners cheifly among the Church-men that it had made way says he for the common beleif of the near approach of Antichrist and of the end of the world How could it be possible that during such gloomy times Religion Faith and Worship should be preserved without any alteration Saint Paul has joyn'd together Faith and a good Conscience as two things that mutually sustain one another and has taken notice that those who cast off a good Conscience make Shipwrack of the Faith In effect saith Saint Chrysostome then when men lead corrupted Lives it is impossible they should keep themselves from falling into perverse Doctrines 8. To these considerations we might joyn that of the two sorts of Philosophies which successively had reign'd in the Church to wit that of Plato and the other of Aristotle to whose principles they had strove to accomodate the Christian Religion For it is scarce to be conceiv'd but that mixture of Platonic and Peripatetic Opinions with the Doctrines of Jesus Christ should have defaced the Faith and quite alter'd his true Worship It was for this
Reason that Saint Paul had caution'd the Faithful to take heed that no one seduc'd them through Philosophy and vain deceitful reasonings after the Traditions of men after the rudiments of the Wisdom of the World and not after Jesus Christ 9. They will say without doubt that all these considerations how strong soever they appear do yet make no more then conjectures and likelihoods which ought to have been immediatly stifled by the only name of the Church which improves so profound a respect for it self in the Souls of all true Beleivers But that very thing serv'd but to increase the just suspitions of our Fathers They understood what respect they ow'd to the Church but they were not also ignorant how easie it was to be deceiv'd by so specious a Name That visible society of men who profess Christianity which we call the Church is not wholly composed of true Believers it takes into its Bosome a great number of false Christians of wicked Worldly and Hypocritical men who are mingled with the good as chaff amongst the Wheat or as the mud of the Stream is with the Water of the Fountain And as on the one side the false Christians are not all so after the same manner for some are full of light and knowledge others of ignorance some are prophane others superstitious one sort are full of contrivances and intrigues in the affairs of Religion others take little care of its interests some are ambitious others covetous others fierce and inflexible others full of impostures and deceits according as we see those different humours ordinarily reign among the men of the world so on the other side the true Beleivers who are in the same visible Society have not all of them the same Degree either of knowledge or sanctification that they have more or less of natural light more or less of supernatural grace more or less of zeal of courage or of vigour according to the measure of the Spirit that is communicated to them it is now almost scarce conceivable that that Medley should not corrupt Religion in a long Train of Ages and that it should not cause to enter in Maxims Doctrines Services and Customs far more conformable to the Spirit of the World then to that of Jesus Christ There needs but a little leven saith Saint Paul to corrupt the whole Mass From thence that two Parties whereof the one is good the other is evil are joyned together experience always instructs us that the ill does far more easily deprave the good then the good better the bad And we cannot say that God is bound to hinder that Corruption and that otherwise his Church would Perish from the Earth For besides that it no way belongs to us to order so boldly what God is bound to do or not to do for the execution of his designs it is certain that he has not hindred it as we have but just before seen in the Church of the Jews nor in the Eastern Christian Churches nor in the the whole Body of the Church in the time of the Arians He has other ways to preserve his Elect and his sincerely Faithful ones who only are to speak properly his Church he can preserve them in the midst of a corrupted Ministry and when that is become impossible he knows how to separate them from the wicked and to draw them away from their Communion But we will speak to that more largely at the end of this Treatise 10. To go on with our Remarks That which I have said supplies us with another which is not less considerable than the rest It is in consequence of that mixture of the good and the wicked in the same visible Church that it might fall out and it has very frequently hapened that the far greatest Number the external Splendour Force and Authority is found among the Party of the wicked and that they are cheifly those who fill up the highest places in the Church For as those highest places yeild them honour and the goods of the World in a very great measure so it is very natural that they should be more hunted after and obtain'd by the men of the World then by the truly Faithful who ordinarily are not so violently carried out to those things After that manner one may very often see the Government of the visible Church to fall into exceedingly wicked hands and then there needs but a capricious Humour but a Passion but an Interest but a Whimsey but some neglect or some other thing of the like nature which it is not hard to conceive to be in such Persons as we suppose to bring into the Church false Doctrines and false Worship to which those of the best minds shall no sooner oppose themselves but they shall be immediatly quell'd which often forces them to keep silence and to give way for a season till it shall please God to deliver them from that oppression 11. Could it not in the least happen that those errours and superstitions that were but little taken notice of at first sprung up in the Schools or among some other sort of men should be by little and little and insensibly spread over the Body of the Church by the means of ignorance and negligence of the Pastours And might not the same thing fall out according to the pleasure and interest that the Pastors might take to see them establish't that in the end being found to be rooted in mens minds and as I may so say incorporated into Religion they might be lookt upon as Traditions or as Customs that for the future ought to be observ'd as Laws No one can deny that a multitude of things had crept after that manner into the Latin Church as the keeping back the Cup which the Concil of Constance had taken up in express terms as a Custome that had been says it rationally introduc'd and which ought to be kept as a Law It was after the same manner that the Celibacy of Priests the Worshipping of Images the Distinction of Meats and many other things which how particular and private soever they were at first came after to be made publick and in the end to be changed into Articles of Religion 12. All these Reflexions might serve to let our Fathers understand that it was no ways impossible for the state of the Latin Church to be corrupted but besides that Reason those examples and that experience which convinc't them of it they yet farther saw the plain proofs of it in the Declarations of the Holy Scripture For after whatsoever manner they expounded that Mystery of Iniquity of which Saint Paul speaks to the Thessalonians which in his days had began to work and that Captivity of God's People whom God commanded to go out of Babylon lest in partaking of its sins it partook also of its plagues no one could avoid acknowledging from those two places but that a great Corruption must needs fall out in the visible Church The
Mystery of Iniquity which had began to work or to form it self could not be conceiv'd of but under the Idea of a secret Plot whose lowest Foundations were laid in the very days of the Apostles and which must at length after a long Train of Ages have come to its utmost pitch and be manifested And as to that other Passage it supposes in the first place a Captivity of the People of God Go out says it of Babylon Secondly a Captivity of that People who did not yet fail to be the People of God Go out of her says it my People And in the third place a Captivity in which while they abode they were in danger of partaking of the sins of their Oppressours Least it adds in partaking of its sins Yee partake also of its plagues All that formed an Idea of a Church that groan'd under the weight of a great Corruption which easily gave way to that thought that it might possibly be the Latin Church as soon as any other and that it might as well fall out in the times of our Fathers as in any other season CHAP. V. More Particular Reflections upon that Priviledge of Infallibility which they ascribe to the Church and of its Authority ANy one may now see methinks from what I have laid down what Judgment ought to be made of that pretended Infallibility that the Latin Church ascribed to it self and by what means they would shut our eyes and reduce us to a slavish Obedience We shall yet nevertheless make here some reflexions upon it and see whether it has any solid Foundation and any Justice in that claim 1. But before we proceed farther it will be necessary to know what they understand by that Infallible Church and examine all the Sences that may be given to this Proposition that the Church cannot err For our Adversaries themselves very differently understand it In the first place then if they would plainly say That that which has been believ'd and universally practis'd by all those who have compos'd the Body of the visible Church throughout the extent of all Ages is Infallibly true I say that it is a very useless Principle since to speak according to men it is impossible to know that which has been so believ'd and universally practis'd So that one need say no more against it but to send back those men to an Infallibility of that nature Who could make a search so just so clear and so general as he ought to assure himself of the unanimous consent of all the particular Members unless he could raise all that were dead and understand them one after another I acknowledge that we have the Books of the Antients but all have not wrote and who can warrant us that those who have not wrote had the same Sentiments with those that have Who can warrant that the many Books that are lost were not in very many points contrary to those that are extant Who can teach us nicely to distingush what those Authors have wrote in Copying out of or in imitating one another from their true and natural Sentiments and that which they have wrote on their own heads from that which they have wrote as Witnesses of the general Belief of their Ages Who can assure us that they were not sometimes deceived in taking for the general Belief or Practise of the Church those things which were not so For the same Case happens in these very days that as to those things that seem so exceeding clear there are yet a sort of men who would perswade us that we do not very well and perfectly know what the General belief of the Church of Rome is and that we may very easily deceive our selves and deceive others how much more then heretofore when those things were by nothing near so clearly decided and so manifest as they are now at this day Who can exactly enough tell us what those Articles were wherein all the Antients were universally agreed and those wherein they did not agree since it has very often fell out that one and the same Author has wrote things very contrary upon one and the same Subject Who can assure us that what three or four Antient Authors had wrote after an agreeable manner was not one of those particular deviations from the Truth which one may often discover in them which does not at all hinder but that the contrary Opinion may be more received and more general In fine there is nothing so vain and so fallacious as that pretended Infallibility of the Church if they restrain it to those Doctrines which shall be found established by the unanimous consent of all Persons and of all Ages Moreover Such a kind of Infallibility would not only have been no hindrance to our Fathers from entring on an examination of the matters of Religion but it would also have obliged them to it For they must always have known whether that which was taught and practis'd in the Church in their days concerning Faith and Worship had been confirm'd by the consent of all the foregoing Ages which they could never have known but by such an examination So that those who in these days dispute with us about the right of the Reformation will never find any reason on their side The Church of Rome must needs be very Infallible with them but it can be so but in one respect I would say in those matters wherein She agrees with the Church throughout all Ages and with all those Persons who Compose it which could not in the least have taken away her possibility of erring in those matters wherein she should withdraw her self from the Antient Church and by consequence she must submit her self her decisions her Doctrines and her Customs to a Rule and an Authority that was superiour according to which they ought to be examined 2. If they understand by it That the Church in every Age cannot err that is to say for Example That that which was believed and generally practis'd and beyond all controversy in the Church in the days of our Fathers could not be otherwise then true and good I say that they make this a Principle which cannot be to any purpose and from which they cannot draw any advantage For how could they assure themselves that all those who made up the Body of the Visible Church a little before the Reformation did well approve of the Doctrines that they then taught and the Worship that was then practis'd and how could they distinctly and precisely affirm that any such thing had been generally received For it cannot be imagin'd under a pretence that some certain Opinions had been ordinarily taught in the Schools or that certain Devotions had been commonly used that they should be brought into the publick Service and spread over their Books under that same pretence It cannot I say be imagin'd that there had not been many in the World who disapprov'd them and look'd on them as errours and abuses altho' they
Fathers an Infallibility It is without doubt the Kings pleasure that we should submit our selves to his Officers and that we should obey them but he does not mean to advance them to be Infallible nor to ordain us to obey them if they shall happen to command us these things that are directly contrary to his service and to that Fidelity which we owe to our Soveraign It is then True that all those Exhortations to hear our Pastors and to obey their words are always to be restrain'd by this clause understood as far as their words shall be conformable to that of God that they can never go beyond that and that they cannot from thence draw any Priviledge of Infallibility 4. As these Gentlemen let slip nothing that may serve for their Interests so they ordinarily make use of that passage in the 18th Chapter of St. Matthew where Jesus Christ ordains that if any one receive an injury from another he is to reprove him between himself and him alone and if that first complaint signifies nothing then he must take witnesses with him and if he neglect to hear those witnesses he is to tell it to the Church and if he neglect to hear the Church he is to be unto us as a Heathen and a Publican All that that follows in the close of that discourse of Jesus Christ shews that he speaks there neither of Faith nor Worship but of some private quarrels that we might have against our Brethren to be taken away and of the use of that Discipline For the mind of our Lord is that before we break off absolutely with our Brethren we should observe all the Rules of Charity and that we should there make use of the Church but if he would refuse to hear the Church that in that case it was allowed us to treat him no longer as a Brother but as a real stranger Who sees not that if they would draw any thing of consequence from that passage they ought to pretend that the Church is Infallible not in matters of Faith for they are not medled with there but in matters of Fact and in the Censures that it gives upon private Quarrels in which nevertheless all the World agrees that she may be deceiv'd And therefore it is that these Gentlemen are wont to alleadge these last words Tell it to the Church and if he will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as the Heathens and Publicans and they alleadge them also as separated from the sequel of that Discourse because otherwise they could not but observe that they would signify nothing to them 5. In fine they produce those words of St. Paul to Timothy These things write I unto thee hoping to come unto thee shortly But if I tarry long that thou mayest know how to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the living God the pillar and ground of the Truth How can say they the Church be the pillar and ground of Truth if it is not Infallible in the Doctrines it proposes as of Faith and in the Worship which it Practises But what likelyhood is there that he would have established an opinion so important as that of the Infallibility of the Latin Church on such Metaphorical terms which St. Paul did not make use of upon the sight of any Infallibility which should respect no other but the Latin Church in particular and which should much rather have respected the Church of Ephesus or the other Churches of Asia where Timothy was then when the Apostle wrote to him which yet did not fail of falling into Error in Terms which may be explained in divers sences and which have been appli'd to divers particular Bishops without yet pretending to raise them up to be Infallible what colour I say is there that they can prove the Infallibility of the Church of Rome It appears in the end of that discourse of St. Paul that he never thought of making the Church Infallible for in all that Chapter he aims at nothing else then to set down the duties of Bishops and Deacons and after having markt out in particular some qualities with which they ought to be endow'd and from what Vices they ought to be more especially exempt after what manner they ought to govern themselves he adds in the close of all That he wrote all that to his disciple to the end he might know how to behave himself in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God the pillar and ground of Truth Who sees not that that Infallibility comes not in at all to the purpose in that close of the Discourse Let the Bishops says he and the Deacons take heed they be wise sober c. That they hold the Mystery of the Faith in a pure Conscience that their Wives should be honest and faithful in all things that their Children should be well educated c. And that which I say in general I apply also to thee Timothy to the end thou mayst live unblameably in the House of God in the Church of the living God Add according to the Interpretation of these Gentlemen Which Church is Infallible and cannot err and there is nothing of any natural Connexion in it On the contrary that conceit of the Infallibility of the Church according to the Principle that our Adversaries makes use of in the Doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints would harden them in security for let them do as they will all would go well and after whatsoever manner the Pastors govern the Church could never be corrupted nor its Truth be lost Which would seem far more proper to inspire negligence into the Bishops then to animate them to do their duty In effect if they cannot tell how to exhort men by motives of that nature They ought then to confess the Truth to wit that these words The Pillar and Ground of Truth note the end and natural design of the Church that for which she is made and to which she is called which is to sustain and bear the Truth and to make it subsist in the World and so the discourse of the Apostle appears very just and well connected Behold says he after what manner the Bishops ought to frame their course and after what sort thou oughtest to live in the Church of God in behaving thy self in it so as remembring that God has appointed it to be the pillar and ground of his Truth Live therefore in that manner that may answer that end or that natural appointment of the Church Just as if the King exhorting one of the Officers of his Parliament to do his duty should tell him That he liv'd in a body that was the Pillar and Ground of Justice and the Rights of the Crown that is to say which is naturally ordain'd for the maintaining Justice in the State and to defend the Rights of the Crown But as that speech of the Prince would not establish any priviledge of
Infallibility in the Parliament so neither can that of the Apostle do it for the Church for Societies do not always follow their natural appointments we see that they often enough depart from them I confess that the Church does not always wander from its end nor in all things yet it cannot also be imagin'd that she never departs For the wicked are mingled with the good in the same Society the Dignities of the Church are sometimes to be found more possessed by the men of the World then by the truly Faithful the very best men themselves are subject to weaknesses and they sometimes commit faults of that importance that may consequently be dilated by continuance and all that cannot but produce Errors and Corruptions which it will be most necessary to reform Behold all those passages of Scripture upon which they seem to me to found that pretension of the Infallibility of the Latin Church To them they joyn some Arguments 1. If say they it be possible for the Church to err why do we call it holy as we do in the Creed I believe the Holy Catholick Church Such an Assembly that is united in the profession of an error is so far unfit to be called Holy That on the contrary it is Impious since it agrees in a Doctrine that is contrary to the Holy Truths revealed by God I answer That if this Argument were good it would follow not only that the Church should be Infallible as to matters of Faith but also that she should be impeccable in respect of manners for she is called Holy as well from that Holiness that regards good works as from that which regards the Faith The Church is Holy but yet after an imperfect manner while she is here upon Earth and she will never be perfectly so but in Heaven Furthermore they ought to remember that the Title of Holy and generally all other Titles of Honour and Glory that are given to the Church belong to it in truth only in respect of the true Believers and not in respect of the Hypocrites and wicked which are mingled with the good in the same visible Society and that it is but only on the same account of the Good that all that visible Body is called the Church For they are none but those whom God has called to his Salvation who only can be the true mystical Body of Jesus Christ When then it shall come to pass that the number of the wicked prevails in that Visible Society they will fill up the Pulpits they will be Masters of Councils and of Decisions of Faith of the Government and Ministry of the Church and will not fail to introduce Errors and a false Worship but when those persons should introduce and authorise them the Church would not cease to be Holy not in respect of those wicked men who waste it and corrupt it as much as it lyes in their power to do but in regard of the Faithful whom God will keep pure by the illuminations of his Holy Spirit and the methods of his Providence The Church of Israel in the midst of its greatest Idolatries did not cease to keep the Titles of a Holy Nation and a Kingdom of Priests which Moses had given her but she kept them not in respect of her Corruptors and those wretched men that would have seduc't her but in respect of those that were Holy For it is certain that God has always done that which he did in the days of Elias where he reserv'd seven thousand men who had not bowed the Knee unto Baal and it is in those that the Church is preserv'd and always kept Holy 2. But yet further say they If the Church may err and particularly the Church Representative that is to say the Body of Pastors why do the Councils pronounce Anathema's against all those who shall not consent to their Decrees Would it not be very unjust to bind men under so great a penalty to consent to things that are uncertain and which may be false I answer that the force of the Anathema's of those Councils depends altogether on their Justice If those Councils have lawfully decided controversies according to the word of God and if with the Truth they have kept Love and Charity according to the Precept of the Apostle their Anathema is very efficacious and all that they bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven But if they have decided any thing against the Truth or against Charity if they have abused their Places their Anathema's are vain and rash and will fall upon none but their Heads who pronounce them For God has never submitted his Righteousness to the Unrighteousness of any Prelats All the force of those Thunderbolts depends on those very things which have been decided We can do nothing says the Apostle against the Truth We ought not then to imagine that those Anathema's must needs be Infallible we ought not also to believe that they could not be rightly used if they had not that Infallibility Saint Hilary did not pretend to be Infallible and yet nevertheless he pronounc'd an Anathema against Liberius who was a Deceiver Saint Paul did not pretend to make us Infallible and yet notwithstanding he commands us to Anathematise even an Angel from Heaven and himself if he should Preach any other Gospel then that which he has preached unto us Cyril of Alexandria did not aspire after Infallibility and yet he thunders out his Anathema's against all the Errours of Nestorius The second Council of Tours never thought of being Infallible and yet nevertheless it Anathematis'd all those who after the third admonition refus'd to restore the goods of the Church In fine every private Person pronounces an Anathema against all Heresies The Anathema's of the Councils are not the Sentences of the Magistrate the force of which depends on the Authority of him who pronounces them they are only the Denuntiations that men make on Gods side as his Interpreters and his Ministers of the severity of his Judgments against the Unbeleivers the Wicked and the Hereticks And provided that those Denuntiations should be founded on the word of God as far as the light of the Pastors of the Church and their good Consciences could perswade them we ought not to doubt but that they would be just altho' they would not be Infallible For howsoever it be that good and lawful Councils assembled in the Name of Jesus Christ would never pretend that their Anathema's should bind any person any farther then their Decisions and their Canons were just and conformable to the Scripture 3. They add yet if it were possible for the Church to err it were possible for it totally to fall away after that manner that there should not be any longer a Church upon the Earth and yet notwithstanding how many promises have we in the Scripture that denote the Perpetuity of the Church God says in Hosea That he would betroth her unto him for ever
Saint Paul calls her the Body of Jesus Christ But the Body of Jesus Christ is Eternal Jesus Christ promises to be with his even unto the end of the World and says that the Comforter shall abide with them for ever and that the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against his Church But it is no need of heaping up these Proofs of a thing which was never contested God will always keep a Church upon Earth that is to say he will always have a number of true Believers whom he will guide by his Word and by his Spirit and they are those that are betroth'd to him for ever and the Mystical Body of his Son to whom he will grant his gratious presence for ever and an assured Victory against the Gates of Hell There is nothing disputed in that point Our business is only to enquire whether all that Body composed of the good and the wicked that Assembly in which the worldly men and Hypocrites are mixt with the truly Faithful and that which they call the Visible Church can never fall into errour after what manner soever it be Whether it is not possible for that party of the men of the World which may be sometimes the stronger to corrupt the publick Ministry and for the same in respect of some errours and superstitions less Fundamental to infect the Good and to draw them tho' not so far from the Truth as to make them wholly lose the true Form of Piety and Communion with God for if that might happen the Church would be brought to nothing yet after such a manner as that their Faith and their Religion could not be said to be altogether pure But this experience justifies For in the Corruptions of the Church of Isral and in those times wherein they had introduc't the Worship of false Gods into the publick Ministry God had reserv'd seven thousand men who had not bowed their knees to Baal and that which is most considerable is that that very Religion of those seven thousand was not pure for they liv'd in that Schism that Jeroboam made and no more went to render that Worship to God which they were bound to pay at Jerusalem but to Bethel It will signify nothing to them to say that the Church then subsisted in the Tribe of Judah for besides that that would not hinder any from seeing clearly by that example of those seven thousand that God can when he pleases preserve his own in a corrupted Communion and that yet the far greater number might fall into errour and that the publick Ministry might be contaminated it will not follow notwithsanding that that Church was wholly extinct which is only that which we say Besides that I say it is yet manifest that those two Churches that of Israel and that of Judah were often found to depart both together sometimes from the true Worship of God as it appears from that which Jeremiah says That God having given a Bill of Divorce to that of Israel for her Idolatries Judah her Sister feared not but that she also had turned aside from his true Worship It appears also by that which Ezekiel said that Samaria had not committed half the sins of Judah who had justifi'd her Sister in multiplying her Abominations The same History of the Kings of Israel and Judah teaches us concerning Joram the Son of Ahab King of Israel that he clave to the sins of Jeroboam by which he had made Israel to sin and that at the same time Joram the Son of Jehoshaphat and his Son Ahaziah Reigned in Judah and walked after the ways of the Kings of Israel in doing that which displeased the Lord. But without going so far is it not true that when Jesus Christ came into the World he did not find a pure Church upon Earth The Schismatical Samaritans had so confused a Religion that Jesus Christ did not scruple to say that Salvation was of the Jews The Jews on their side had defac'd their Religion by a thousand superstitions and by the false Doctrine of the Pharisees and in fine they had crucifi'd the Lord of Life the only Messoas they expected Notwithstanding which we ought not to believe that the Church was perished from the Earth and that God did not preserve his Children in the midst of those Confusions The same thing happened then when the Arrians had made themselves Masters of the Ministry of the Church and when under the Emperour Theodosius the younger the Eutichians prevailed in the second Council of Ephesus For it would be a very absurd thing to imagine that during the time of the Triumph of those Hereticks there were no more any true Believers in those Churches all whose Pulpits they had fill'd and none in all that Communion but those who obeyed the erronious Councils of Milan of Ariminum and of Ephesus At this very day the most zealous among those of the Church of Rome acknowledge that God saves many persons who live under the Schismatical Ministry of the Greeks and the Muscovites although besides that Schism they accuse them of holding a multitude of errours and superstitions For so Possevin sets it down in one of his Relations of Muscovy We ought not then to make the subsistance of the Church to depend absolutely on that Infallibility whereof we dispute We ought yet far less to abuse the promises of God by pretending under that pretext that they can never do that that is ill The true use of the promises is to encourage us to our Duty and in stead of making us presumptious they ought on the contrary to humble us and to shew us the horrour of our sins when it is contrary to that promise For so the Scripture makes use of it in the second Book of the Kings upon the subject of the Idolatries of Manasseh King of Judah for after having reckoned them over particularly it adds that he set up a graven Image of the Grove that he had made in the House of which the Lord had said to David and to Solomon his Son In this House and in Jerusalem which I have chosen out of all the Tribes of Israel will I put my Name for ever See there the promise employed to its right use not to defend Manasseh in what he had done under a pretence that God had promised that his Name should never depart from the Temple which is the Language they speak in these days but to condemn Manasseh of that that as much as it lay in his power he had nullified that promise of God And so also it is that good men ought to speak to the Corrupters of Religion God has promised us that he would betroth his Church to himself for ever and you have laboured to break off that happy Marriage Jesus Christ has promised us that he will be always with us even unto the end of the world and you have endeavoured to deprive us of his presence He has promised us that his Holy
word mentioned either there or any where else And as to that passage Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church c. Whether they understand it of that Confession which Saint Peter had made or whether they refer it to his person I say that no one can understand it of his Successors since there is not any mention made of them either directly or indirectly For when the See of Rome was not when it had never yet been The Church did not fail of being built upon that Confession of Saint Peter comprehended Jesus Christ upon whom the Church is every way built but also because that Confession of Saint Peter or Saint Peter Confessing was as one of the Chief Stones in that mystical Building which is not left alone for Jesus Christ who is not only the Foundation but the Soveraign Architect has added many others in all Ages and will always joyn others to them till the Building be intirely finished that is to say till God fulfilled the Decree of his Election But to go on with our Discourse of the Visibility of the True Church I affirm in the third place that we ought to know very well what a True Church Visible is For we ought not to imagine that all those persons who compose that Visible Society should be that True Church None but those True Believers I would say those who joyn to their external Profession of Christianty a true and sincere Piety are really the Church of Jesus Christ and as for the others that is to say the worldly Prophane and Hypocritical they are but the Church in appearance only and not indeed For having no inward Calling which consists in Faith and Love they do not belong to the Mystical Body of our Saviour nor are they of his Communion Notwithstanding they do not fail to be mixt with the Faithful by reason of that external profession as if they really were in the same Religious Society with them What then is the Visibility of the True Church as to us It is not that we can distinctly and with any certainty affirm Behold these be the Truly faithful of Jesus Christ None but but God alone can know them after that distinct manner and and without a possibility of being deceived But this we may say of that Visible Society that Vnder that Ministry and in that Communion God preserves and raises the truly Faithful Whence we may from this Judgment with Solidity and Truth and I may say also without a possibility of being deceived that there is a True Visible Church In that sence I declare that there has always been some way or other a True Church Visible upon Earth not but that God can make it wholly disappear to the Eyes of men whensoever it shall please him to do so without doing men any wrong or any breach of his promises since he has without doubt extraordinary ways to beget Faith in the hearts of his Children and to keep them on in that course and to lead them in the end unto Salvation without making use either of the publick Assemblies or Ministry but only because we ought not to believe that there ever hapned since the first rise of Christianity an Eclipse so full and intire that one could not some way say There is a Society in which God does keep the truly Faithful I say after some way For as that Judgment depends on two things the one to be able to know a Society and a Ministry and the other to know that under that Ministry and in that Society a Man may work out his own Salvation in respect of the first it is necessary to distinguish between two seasons the one of Liberty and Prosperity where the Church has its Assemblies and exercises its Ministry openly in the face of all the World For then she is much more visible then she would be otherwise that is to say it is far more easy to be known what Society and what Ministry that is Such was the State of the Church under Constantine and other Christian Emperours and it is in such times as those that the promises of Its outward splendour if there are any such in Scripture are accomplished The other season is that of its Afflictions and Persecution such was that of the first Century of the Church under the Pagan Emperours and the Enemies of Christianity For none can deny that then the Church was less discernable by its Assemblies not only because they were more private and less exposed to the publick view but also yet further because the name of Christian had been defamed by a thousand calumnies and charged with a thousand false imputations which made the knowledge of the Church to be far more difficult And it will be to no purpose to say That then the Church was visible and illustrious by the blood of its Martyrs For the blood of its Martyrs did not in the least hinder the accusing of the Christians of most odious crimes that which hindred its being liable to be easily known Those Accusations were as a Cloud before the eyes of the Common people which was necessarily to be discipated before they could come to know what Christianity was So that the True Church is more or less Visible according to the difference of its Seasons As to the second thing which is to know that one may be saved in that Society and under that Ministry it is necessary that we distinguish of the two States or Conditions wherein that Society may be found The one is a more pure State then when the word of God is preached without mixtures of the Doctrines of men when the publick Worship is perform'd without superstitions and the Sacraments plainly administred according to their Primitive Institution and when generally Religion is established taught and observed after the same manner wherein Jesus Christ and his Apostles left it to the World In that Condition it is certain that the True Church in very visible and very discernable for it is easy to behold all the Characters of its Truth which only consist in its Conformity to that lively primitive and natural Image of Christianity which God has left us in his Holy Scriptures But it is not less certain that a Church may fall into a quite contrary Condition that is to say into a State of Corruption then when it adds to divine Truths strange and adulterate Doctrines when it mingles superstitions with the true Worship of God and when in stead of a just Government it exercises an insolent and absolute Dominion over Mens Consciences in one word then when all things appear so confused and in that disorder that one can scarce any more see any traces of that beautiful and glorious Image of Christianity which I have before spoke of to shine forth In that Condition I affirm that True Church is very hard to be known for howsoever it were most Visible in quality of a Church because its Assemblies might be
much frequented it would be nevertheless least of all so in the quality of a True Church in that its natural beauty is so darkned and its Visage so disfigured that in judging according to its Appearances one can but very difficultly say that God does yet preserve some Faithful ones in that Communion and under that Ministry But they will say may not a Church fall into that Condition and yet for all that be a true Church I answer that a Visible Society as I have shewn is not called a true Church but only with respect to those true Believers who are in it and not with respect to the others When then it comes to pass that the party of the Men of the World prevails and fills that Society with its Corruptions all that Society taken in the general does not fail as yet to be called a True Church while their is some appearance how small soever it may be that God does yet keep and hold in it those good men who do not defile their Souls with that Corruption of the wicked But how can say they yet further those good men preserve themselves in the midst of such a Society I answer That they may preserve themselves there after that manner that one may preserve himself in a contagious Air where he draws in the Air because it is necessary to his Life but yet he may keep himself as well as he can from that Contagion by the help of Antidotes There are two things in a Corrupted Church the good and the evil if a Man can separate that good from the evil that is to say if he can take the one and keep himself from the other without falling into Hypocrisy and being bound to do as those who equally take the good and the evil which he knows not how to do without dividing between God and his Conscience he may be saved in a corrupted Communion and there may not be another more pure This evidently appears from the Examples of Zachary and Elizabeth of Simeon of Joseph and the Holy Virgin and divers other persons who liv'd in the Jewish Church when our Saviour came into the World and who preserved their Piety though that Church was fallen into the highest Corruption under the Ministry of the Scribes and Pharisees Jesus Christ himself who reproved the abuses of those wicked men and exhorted his disciples to take heed of their false Doctrines did not fail to live in that Common Society and to be found in the Temple with them and after that he had been Crucified by them his disciples did not wholly withdraw themselves from their Communion during some time and till they had indispensable reasons for it I will shew in the Progress of this Treatise that it does not from thence follow that we may at this day abide in the Roman Communion and that it much less follows that we may return thither by forsaking the Communion of the Protestants under a pretence that we may separate the good from the bad the pure from what is impure since we can no more do that then not become wicked Impostures Hypocritical and Detestable before God and Men. But as this is a point that belongs to another Place it shall suffice me to have clearly shewn in this Chapter in what manner and with what distinctions it may be said that there is always a true Visible Church and to have made it appear that it no ways follows from thence that she must needs be Infallible as the Church of Rome pretends that she is After all this it is not difficult to find out the just and true sence of some passages of Scripture which they abuse in this matter of Visibility For as to that of the Gospel whereof we have spoken Tell it to the Church and if he will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as the Heathens and the Publicans It is clear that particular Churches are treated of there and that the personal differences which we may have one with another and the meaning of it is that the Faithful are bound when they receive any wrong from their brethren to carry their complaints to the Church and to refer themselves to its Judgment Or if it is not to be understood in those Times and in those places where there shall be Churches established to the Judgment of their Guides and Pastors who may end those private Quarrels And if they will infer from thence that then there must be always a Visible Church that may be in a Condition to attend to those Reconciliations this is that that has no colour of Reason For that Command of Jesus Christ obliging the Faithful no further then as it lies in their power it would be but a very bad arguing to say that he has so engaged for that that he will so order it that there shall be perpetually a visible Assembly to hear Complaints and give Judgments It is within a little as if one should say that he was engaged that we should always have wherewithal to Lend and wherewithal to give Alms because he has bid us to Lend without hoping for any thing again and to make our selves friends of the Mammon of unrighteousness Or that our Kings were bound never to leave vacant the Office of a Constable or that of the Mayor of the Palace under a pretence that heretofore they order'd their subjects to acknowledge those Dignities and to have recourse to them in certain Affairs Tell it to the Church then does not in the least suppose that the True Church ought to be always in such a State wherein she should have Authority to pass her Judgments for the determining private Quarrels And besides what I have said Experience contradicts it for it is most true that during the hottest Persecutions of the Heathen Emperours where all was laid in desolation that it had in many places nothing like a Visible Tribunal to which men could easily address themseves There are some other Passages that denote the duty of the Pastors and in particular of the Apostles as those where they are called The Salt of the Earth the light of the World a City set upon a Hill a Candle not lighted to be set under a Bushel and the Gentlemen of the Roman Church do not fail to set them down to give some colour to their Pretensions But this is evidently to abuse the Scriptures to make them establish the perpetual Visibility of the Church after that meaning wherein they understand those passages which exhort the Apostles and after them the Ministers of the Gospel to acquit themselves faithfully of their charge without negligence and weariness from the Consideration of their Calling and the end to which God had appointed them For besides that their Office does not bind them to that of a Martyr which does not suppose a very splendid State of the Church Besides that the same does not oblige them to be Martyrs if they were not specially
called to it Jesus Christ having told them That when they should be persecuted in one place they should fly unto another besides that I say there is so great a difference between the duty of the Pastors of these last Ages which are so far behind that of the Apostles and that which those Pastors have actually done that one caunot know how to draw any consequence from the one to the other One cannot also conclude any thing from some Expressions of the Antient Prophets which seem to promise a great Temporal Prosperity to the Church no one is ignorant that the Stile of the Prophets may be full of figures and darkned with Vails that they ought not to be taken Literally unless men would be deceiv'd and imitate the Error of the Jews who take them in that manner For the Prophets are wont to represent Spiritual blessings under the borrowed Images of Temporal things and so also the Spirit of Christianity obliges us to explain that which they said of the Messiah and of his Church and not to delineate its prosperities and worldly Grandeur which have no relation at all to the nature of the Gospel Not that one cannot say that some of those Prophecies have been accomplish'd according to the Letter of them in the Times of Christian Emperours for then Kings were its nursing-Fathers and Queens its nursing-Mothers But that one ought not to draw a necessary consequence from thence either for all Times or for all Places and as men are always prone to abuse Temporal blessings such a worldly Prosperity of the Church would tend but in the end to corrupt it CHAP. VII That the Authority of the Prelats of the Latin Church had not any right to bind our Fathers to yeild a blind obedience to them or to hinder them from examining their Doctrines HItherto we have not opposed in our course the Book of Prejudices not but that the end which he proposes to himself has a great connexion with the things of which I have treated but because that Authour has not beleived it necessary to make us renounce the Reformation to justify the Latin Church from those strange disorders which moved the minds of our Fathers nor to speak of that priviledge which she pretends that God has given her by making of her Infallible We do not pretend says he to prove directly the Authority and Infallibity of the Catholick Chureh For although it would be most profitable to do it and though those among the Catholicks who have taken that method have used a most just and lawful way Yet as the prepossessions wherewith the Calvinists are full keep most of them from entring upon these Principles howsoever solid and true they are Charity obliges us to try other ways also and that which follows here seems one of the most natural It supposes for a Principle nothing but a Maxim of Common Sence to wit That a man who finds himself joyned to the Catholick Church by himself or by his Ancestors ought not to break off from her to joyn himself to any other Communion if he discover in that new Communion any signs of errour which may make him judge with reason that he ought not to follow it and that he cannot reasonably hope that God has established it to lead men into the truth So it is that he has thought himself bound to employ himself wholly in that way to rid himself of a great deal of trouble and that he may in this progress load us with a multitude of injuries Yet he must excuse me if I am not of his mind The way which he takes is neither just nor natural It is not just because it takes for granted and indisputable those things which not only are but are almost only to the matters of our Difference For it supposes that that Party which would not have a Reformation and from which our Fathers broke of was the Catholick Church but that is that very thing which is questioned and our Dispute can never be decided but by deciding the whole controversy If he will take that advantage of us that we to accommodate our selves to the custom of the World sometimes give those of the Church of Rome the Name of Roman-Catholicks he cannot be ignorant that those sorts of Condescentions which only respect words cannot infer any consequence as to things nor that they can give any ground to make those suppositions in this Dispute which may be regulated by more solid Principles Further that way which he would follow supposes that our Fathers in reforming themselves made a new Communion and that is yet that very thing that is in Question and we maintain that it cannot be reasonably called so as it will appear in the Progress of this Treatise I say also that that course is not natural For before we should come to consider whether there were not signs of errour in our Reformation the nature of things would first let us see whether our Fathers had not just reasons taken from the state of the Latin Church to Reform themselves and whether it was not possible for that Church to corrupt it self But that could not be well known but by examining what that State was in the days of our Fathers with that pretence of Infallibility as we have done But though the Author of those Prejudices has beleived that he might spare himself the trouble of proving to us the Infallibility and Authority of those whom he calls the Catholick-Church yet he fails not to require us to submit our selves to those by rendring them an absolute obedience He would have it that we being all so apt to deceive our selves in our Judgments and that the search of true Religion being so difficult that the surest way is for us to see with their Eyes says he to tread in their steps and wholly to strip our selves of our own guidance to give it unto them So also the chief Priests and the Scribes spake among the Jews This People who know not the Law are cursed But Jesus Christ said of these also Let them alone they be blind leaders of the blind and both shall fall into the Ditch If the Maxim of that Authour be good he must affirm that our Fathers were very unhappy for having had their eyes to see those disorders which reigned among the Church-men in their days and that God had highly favoured them had he made them to have been born stupid and blind for he conceivs it would be so far from causing them to fall and be deceived according to the threatning which Jesus Christ gives to those who leave themselves to be so blindly guided that it would be on the contrary the only means to go on with any certainty Howsoever it be we are not bound to be so blind that before we lose the use of our Eyes we must not examine this Question whether we ought to lose them or not Nature and Grace have given them to us they would have
us to surrender them but let them give us leave to use them at the least this one time to search whether it be just that we should deprive our selves of them Jesus Christ himself has forbid us to do it the Authour of those Prejudices has commanded it We ought at least to examine which of the two has reason on his side That then shall be the business of this Chapter wherein I propose to my self to shew That the Authority of those Prelats who governed the Latin Church in the time of the Reformation could not be high enough to oblige our Fathers blindly to believe all that they told them nor to hinder them from examining the Doctrines of those Prelats But as we find it frequently fall out that they disguise our Sentiments and that they may render them odious they urge them beyond their due bounds it will be meet before we go farther precisely to determine what is Treated of in that Right to the end that all equitable persons may the more easily judg of it We do not here treat of the use of the Ministry in General We acknowledge that God has appointed it in his Church and that it would be a rashness very criminal to go about to abolish it The Confession of our Faith our practice our Books and the very writings of our Adversaries sufficiently justifie us to make us believe that they will not lay any thing to our charge in that point We do not here also meddle with that order that ought to be observed in the Election and Ordination of Pastors we all agree that when the state of the Church is regulated it ought not to be permitted to any that will to thrust themselves into the Ministry nor to encroach upon their Function without being lawfully called and if there is any difference in this matter it only regards other questions and not that which we handle at present Nor do we further Treat of that respect or that obedience which every one ows to good and lawful Pastors Jesus Christ has said He that heareth you heareth me and he that rejecteth you rejecteth me and St. Paul exhorts the Faithful to submit themselves with all teachableness to their conduct Obey them that are set over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls The word then of good Pastors ought to be received with humility their Functions to be considered with veneration and their persons to be loved and honoured not only in respect of their charge but because they acquit themselves faithfully in it We do not yet further concern our selves to know whether one ought not to give that obedience to these Ministers of the Church who preach to us the Word of God although their lives are impure and scandalous and no ways correspond with their Doctrine We confess that it is not allowable for personal crimes to separate our selves from them nor from those who adhere to them whether they own those crimes or whether they deny them We ought to indeavour to reduce them to their duty and if they are incorrigible or if they have committed Actions which render them unworthy of their Function there are ordinary ways that one ought to take to deprive them if they amend the scandal is repaired and if they do not either because they will elude by Artifices the Ecclesiastical Discipline or because that depravation may become so general that there shall be no more punishment of vice then we may pray God that he would send more faithful Labourers into his Harvest nay we ought to do it but we ought always to own those for Pastors who are in that Charge and to receive the Word of God from their Mouths while they Preach it purely I go yet further and I say that we ought always in General to think well of those Pastors and not lightly to entertain suspicions of their goodness and faithfulness especially when we speak of the whole Body and the disorder that appears to be great and very visible therein that we are not absolutely to form a just prejudice against their Ministry This is what we acknowledge and our fathers acknowledged as well as we But if they will not be contented with that if they will have it yet farther that the faithful are bound blindly to receive the Doctrines of their Pastors without having any right to examine their Nature or their Quality and that it would be a crime but to set upon that examination if they would that the Authority of the Pastors after whatsoever manner we consider it whether separatly or conjunctly or altogether or in the greater number should be without any bounds or measures as to matters of Faith or Worship and the general Rules of Manners and that though they cease to believe the Divine Faith and to practise all that which they say without informing our selves any farther This is a Maxim we deny and which we maintain is contrary to the Word of God to right reason and the true interest of Christianity 1. To begin with the Word of God we may say That there never was any Maxim in the World against which it does more expresly declare it self For first it absolutely forbids Lordship in Pastors The Kings of the Gentiles said Jesus Christ in that passage before alledged exercise Lordship over them and those that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors But it shall not be so with you but he that is great among you let him be as the less and he that is chief as he that doth serve In the same sence Saint Peter bids them Feed the flock of Jesus Christ taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind neither as being Lords over Gods heritage but being examples to the Flock St. Paul Preached the same Doctrine with St. Peter We have not says he to the Corinthians Dominion over your Faith but are helpers of your joy We may observe that on purpose to hinder the introducing that Dominion into the Church under the name of Instruction as they have done in these last Ages Jesus Christ goes so far as to forbid his Disciples the name of Masters Be not ye says he called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ but he that is greatest among you shall be your servant And therefore it is that the Scripture gives the Title of chief Shepheard to none but Jesus Christ alone When the chief shepheard shall appear says St. Peter ye shall receive a Crown of Glory that fadeth not away God has brought again from the dead the great shepheard of the sheep says St. Paul But as to other Pastors the Scripture is so farr from giving them any Character of Dominion that on the contrary they are often called Ministers or Servants Stewards of the Mysteries of God Ambassadors Messengers Interpreters to teach us that they ought not to pretend to reign over mens
those who demanded of Pilate his Death by crying against him away with him away with him Crucify him and those in fine who rejected the word of his Apostles and who instead of being converted by them persecuted them would be sufficiently justified in their bold unbeleif and that detestable Parricide which they committed on the Person of the Son of God For what were all those things but just consequences of that Principle They would not hearken to the Censures that Jesus Christ made of the Traditions and Doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees their Church admitted those Traditions They would not believe that Jesus was the true Messiah their Church had determined that whosoever did believe it should be cast out of their Synagogues They rejected the Proofs that he gave them from the Scripture it was not for them to judge of the true meaning of the Scripture and the Church understood it otherwise They demanded that he might be Crucified the Church had condemned him for a Seducer as an Enemy to Moses and the Law it was not for them to inform themselves any farther They rejected his Miracles the Church did so too and said that he cast out Devils by the power of Beelzebub They would not hearken to his Apostles the Authority of the Church forbad them Hitherto their conduct is within due Rules supposing that the Principle of the Author of prejudices might be just and lawful and those miserable People are very much obliged to him for furnishing them with arms wherewith to defend themselves 4. That Maxim of the Author of those Prejudices draws yet far greater absurdities after it It ministers accusations against Jesus Christ himself against his Apostles and all those who were converted by their Words If the Faithful by those Laws of their submission to the Church ought not to have any other Eyes than hers why did Jesus Christ present himself immediatly to the People when he should first of all have made known his call from Heaven the Glory of his Person and the Dignity of his Office to the Church to have made them own it by proving it to them before he Preach't to the People He was they will say her Lord and the Church her self would have had no Authority but by him that is true But if the People owed the Church an absolute obedience they would have owed it all that time that the Lord would have remained unknown He ought then to have began to make himself known to her and to have opened her Eyes that he might at the same time have opened those of all the People If Jesus Christ had been known to have been indeed what he was there is no doubt to be made but that he would alone have been heard without any dependance on the Church of which he is the Soveraign Lord but as yet he was not and till that knowledge had obtained the People would have been always bound according to the Principle of the Author of Prejudices not to have seen but by the Eyes of the Church to which God had subjected them To speak then home to this Question whether Jesus Christ was the Son of God the promised Messiah or whether he was not the Faithful being bound to believe nothing but what the Church should tell them he could not but have addrest himself to her and not to the Faithful People immediatly Nevertheless it is most true that he addressed himself neither to the Priests nor to the Scribes nor to the Pharisees nor to the Doctors he Preached his Gospel to the simple People out of them he took his Disciples and it was among them that he did almost all his Miracles in fine he himself gives thanks to his Father for that he had hid his Mysteries from the Wise and Prudent and had revealed them unto Babes Whence could such a conduct proceed so contrary to that Soveraign Authority wherewith at this day they would invest the Church that is the Pastors in respect of the Lay-men It is not difficult to understand that it was because Jesus Christ did no ways act from that Principle nor owned it for a good one for if he had owned it he had never suffered the People to have violated it he had made use of another way to make himself known to them and he would have employed the Ministry of the Church for that end 5. One may see the same thing of the Apostles if the People ought entirely to refer themselves to the Church in matters of Faith and Religion Why did the Apostles sollicit the Jews to embrace their Doctrine when they could not so much as hear them without being criminal They will say they had a commandment from their Master to Preach this Gospel I confess it but the Jews lived under a Church that had openly declared it self against their Preaching and they might tell them according to the Maxim of those Gentlemen It is vain that you Preach to us that you work Miracles that you alledge the Scriptures We see by the Eyes of the Church we hear by her Ears we march after her Steps and we devest our selves of our own guidance to rest our selves upon hers This is our Duty and the Law that is imposed on us why do you go about to tempt us to violate it Suppose we that a Jew after having heard one of those Divine and admirable Sermons of Saint Paul should have addrest himself to him and have demanded of him what Authority he pretended to give to that new Christian Church which he took such care to establish whether he did not mean that its Children should render a blind Obedience to it and that they should refer themselves wholly to their Pastors for deciding matters of Faith without intermedling themselves to search out the true sence of the Scripture Suppose yet that that great Apostle should have answered him according to that Maxim of the Author of Prejudices That it was true that the darkness of our understandings and our prejudices might be able to hinder us from seeing in the Scriptures those Truths that are clearly contained in them that a man could not assure himself that he was not of the number of those who deceived themselves That that doubt is terrible but that which yet infinitely heightens that dread which it must needs cause is that men are necessarily bound to chuse their Party and to make so weighty a choice to wit of that Religion that they ought to follow amidst the cumbrances of a thousand cares and a thousand worldly necessities that almost wholly take them up and that will allow them but a very little time to examine the Truths of that Religion That the greatest part of Mankind wanted necessary helps that the half of Christians could not tell how to read that others did not understand any Language but their own that others had so narrow and limited a Capacity that they could but very difficultly conceive the most easie
if you would give to the simpler sort to those Babes for Example whereof Jesus Christ speaks that his Mysteries have been revealed unto them if you give them I say that right and liberty to judge of that important and fundamental Question to wit Whether the Call of a man be Extraordinary and Divine or whether it be not so whether his Miracles are those of a true Minister of God or of a false Prophet whether it be a true Angel of Light or a disguised Angel of darkness and to judge of all those things after the Church and against the Church I see no Reason why they should refuse them the right and liberty of judging also of its Doctrine and the points of Religion whereof the true knowledge is by nothing near so difficult God had forewarned his People that they should not give themselves over to be deceiv'd by the first appearances of Miracles and he had appointed that they should judge of them by the Doctrine they accompanied Whence it follows that the discerning of Miracles and judging of that Doctrine are two inseparable things and that their right belongs to the same persons If there arise saith God among you a Prophet or a dreamer of dreams and giveth thee a sign or a wonder And the sign or the wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee saying Let us go after other Gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet or that dreamer of dreams For the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart It appears from thence that the way for men to judge well of Miracles is to examine the Doctrine of him that works them So that if they will a gree to give the people a right to discern Miracles they cannot take away from them that of discerning that Doctrine they uphold Jesus Christ supposes the same thing when he says that there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and that they shall work great signs and wonders to seduce if it were possible the very Elect. For how could they otherwise discern those Miracles of the false Prophets but by examining their words So a famous man of the Roman Communion has not scrupled to write that we are bound to reject Miracles and those men who make use of them then when they are joyned with a Doctrine which the Church has condemned his words are considerable and very well deserve to be transcrib'd The Application says he and direction of a miracle to prove the Truth of a Doctrine is an enterprise so rash and so scandalous that it deserves to be punished There is not any Catholic in the World who knows his Creed and understands it that can be capable of such a persuasion What if the appearance of a Miracle is contrary to the definitions of the Church can any one hesitate or doubt whether it would be better to adhere to the Church supported by the truth of a Miracle or to deny the truth of a Miracle founded upon the Authority of the Church Saint Peter has taught us a great while since what we are to do on that occasion He had been an eye Witness of the Transfiguration of our Saviour and of that glory that lay hid under the Vail of a Suffering and Mortal state and yet nevertheless he trusts more in the obscurity of Prophets than to the clear and manifest experience of his Eyes we have a more sure word of Prophesie The Authority of the Church which is in nothing less than that of the Prophets breaks in pieces all those reasons that oppose it and we ought to take to our selves in regard of the Church that which Saint Peter says with respect to the Prophets To which we do well that we take heed gathering together all our attention to know the true sence of the Church and turning aside from all the Miracles and all those Reasons the men propound to us to make us call into question that which we know the Church to have determined We may see clearly by that passage how far one may carry that Principle of the Authority of the Church in the thoughts of those that admit of it that is to say even to make Miracles themselves submit to it He says that we ought to Collect all our attention to know the true Sentiments of the Church and to turn aside from all those Miracles which would make us call into question that which the Church has determined He says that to go about to make use of Miracles for the proving of a Doctrine that is condemned by the Church is a rash and scandalous enterprise and such as deserves to be punished In effect if they suppose that Maxim that we ought to give to the Church an absolute obedience to see with her Eyes and to rest upon her Conduct those Miracles could not make them be heard whom the Church should have condemned and by which they should have been looked on as false Miracles the Consequence is good and just But because that very thing applied to the times of the first rise of Christianity justifies the Unbeleivers condemns the proceedings of Jesus Christ and his Appostles accuses those of rashness who have believed on their preaching destroys the Gospel and overthrows the Christian Church it is a manifest proof that that Maxim it self is false and rash since those Consequences that arise from it are so detestable that they leave neither to Jesus Christ nor to the Apostles any way to make their Gospel to be heard by men with a good Conscience and the care of their Salvation 8. They must give me leave to speak a little earnestly for the interest of our Lord Jesus Christ The more I consider these inevitable Consequences of that Maxim the more I am astonished If those first Christians who had been Jews could not hear the Doctrine of the Son of God nor receive his Miracles without violating of their Duty toward the Church that had condemned them what scruples might not all that cast into all the Christians that are at this day in the World For in fine we are the Successors of that people our Fathers were not Converted but by their Ministry If then we cannot see clearly that they themselves had a right to be Converted if they laid down on the contrary a Principle which of right ought to have hindered their Conversion where then are all we as many as we are The Reasons that the Author of those Prejudices produces to make us devest our selves of our own guidance in favour of the Church that we should see with her Eyes and tread in her steps had as much place with the Jews as they have with us they could not doubt but that their Church was the Church of God none can dispute with them that eminent Authority which had so many external marks To her belonged the Adoption the
Glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the Promises of whom were the Fathers and who had the Oracles of God committed unto them and in whose bosom Christ according to the flesh was born If that Maxim of the Author of Prejudices were good it must necessarily have been good for that Church which had condemned Jesus Christ his Person his Call his Miracles his Doctrine and what right then had his Disciples to hear and follow him We have seen them from Reason and from the Testimony of a very considerable person of our Age and to whom one of the greatest Kings has given the honour of committing the concerns of his Conscience to him that if that Maxim had place that we ought entirely to refer our selves to the Authority of the Church we could not any more regard those Miracles when they were opposite to that Authority Let them tell us then what right the Disciples had to follow Jesus Christ by what right did the first Converts and those who were afterwards Converted by others embrace the Gospel And if they did it without any right and against their duty into what Labyrinths we cast you What would become of the Christian Church what would become of you your selves You form prejudices against us drawn from the faults that have say you appeared in the persons of our first Reformers You tell us of a pretended precipitancy by which the Magistrates of Zurich Reformed themselves you conclude from thence without entring upon the points in dispute that we ought to renounce the Reformation of our Fathers Answer then your selves to the Prejudices that according to your Maxim the Jews may form against the first Disciples of Jesus Christ and to the Consequence that they may draw from thence that without entring any further into a Discussing of the Points of that Religion without examining either the Miracles or the Antient Prophecies or the success of the Preaching of the Gospel or all the other things that we could alledge in our favour we ought to renounce our Christianity You your selves Authorise their Principle by one that is altogether like it which you lay down and which you know not how to make use of against them without overthrowing your selves in a word you draw the same Consequence from it with them shew us then by what secret Art both you and we may get out of that Abyss whereinto you have plunged us If your Fathers say you have Reformed themselves with an ill design you ought without farther examination to renounce their Reformation If the chief Authors of your Religion a Jew will say have adhered to Jesus with an ill design against the obligation which they had to cleave to the Church you ought to renounce their Christianity Answer if you can to those Arguments and set our Consciences in quiet As for us indeed we are not in pain for we know that that Principle which you urge to those unbelievers is false There is not any person who has not right to examine the points of that Religion and to discern by himself the true from the false the good from the bad that which is from God from that which which from men The Authority of the Church never goes so far as to hinder us with any justice from it and so there is nothing to reproach the first Christians 9. But we ought not to give over these reflections without making one upon the state of the Church in the times of the Councils of Sirmium of Milan and of Ariminum whereof I have spoken before There is no person who knows not that the Arrians were then Masters of the Ecclesiastical Ministry which they called the Catholick Church treating the Orthodox as Hereticks and Disturbers of its Peace deposing them and sending them into banishment The Poyson of the Arrians says Vincentius Lirinensis had not only infected one part but almost all the world and almost all the Latin Bishops some by force others by simplicity giving themselves over to be deceived found themselves engaged in the darkness of Error We are in that condition said Phaebadius that if we would be called Catholicks it is necessary that we embrace Heresie and yet nevertheless if we do not reject Heresie we cannot be truly Catholicks God did yet keep to himself notwithstanding some Bishops few in number but great in Courage and that small remnant in the end serv'd for a spark to rekindle the Fire of the Faith in the Church Apply then to them that Maxim which we have before opposed and weigh those Consequences that may be drawn from it against those and against the Faithful who Heard them and Read their Writings The least is that they were Schismaticks and Corruptors of the people who after having themselves broken off that obedience which they owed to the Church sollicited others to do the like They might have very well urged that they had the Scriptures on their side that they had the Council of Nice for them but they would have answered them That it was no longer time to dispute that they ought to submit themselves to and acquiesce in the definitions of the Church Since it was the duty of the Faithful to strip themselves of their own Conduct to rest upon that of the Church Nevertheless they did not fail generously to maintain the Truth to dispute and write for it to address themselves not only to the Bishops but to the people and to defend it against that specious name of a Church which they set before them and the words of Saint Hilary upon this subject are worthy of a particular consideration The Church says he terrified men by Banishments and by Prisons and constrained them to believe what she tells them she that her self had never been believed but by the Exile and Prisons which she suffered She which had been only Consecrated by the Persecution of men Bene a dignatione Communicantium She drives away the Priests forgetting that by the Banishment of her Priests she increased She boasts that she is beloved by the world but she could not belong to Jesus Christ unless the world hated her Haec de comparatione traditae nobis olim Ecclesiae nunc quam de perditae res ipsa que in oculis omnium est at que ore clamavit Can any one be rash enough to maintain that he was bound then to refer himself to the Authority of that Church to see with its Eyes to tread in its Steps and to rest himself upon its Conduct Will any say that that handful of good men who have since re-established Christianity was nothing else but a company of Rebels and of presumptuous minds Will they charge their Writing and their Letters to the people with Forgeries and Subornations Will they justifie their being Deposed their Banishments the Persecutions which they so constantly suffered Will they say that the Faithful that heard them were rash and
efficacy But if they may see their Ministry to become so corrupted that their is an eminent danger of loosing their Salvation who can doubt that they ought not to be lookt on only as the Enemies of God and the Church rather then the Ministers and their Pastors and that they should not fail to take heed of them and their Doctrine as pernitious leaven in stead of blindly following them The Duties are then reciprocal between the Pastors and the People The Pastors ought to guide their Flock well to give them good pasture and the people owe them Respect Obedience Teachableness and Love on supposition that the Pastors well acquit themselves of their duty those who are under them will become guilty before God and Men of the Crimes of Rebellion Profaneness and Ingratitude if they do not acquit themselves of theirs But if the Pastors abuse their charges if they overturn the Gospel or if they do any thing coming near to it if they abuse their Titles their Sees their Dignities their Sacerdotal Ornaments all that will signify nothing they owe them no more in that regard either that Respect or that Obedience The Reason is manifest because they ought to respect nothing but the cause of God and upon the Consideration of its saving Truth when then they may see that they withdraw themselves from God and that Truth that respect also which ought to be given to God and his Truth should be withdrawn from them And as to what they say that private men would become Judges of their Pastors where of right those Pastors ought to Judge of Controversies who are above private men this is nothing but a playing with words How many of our Judges are there who Judge us every day without our finding any inconvenience or ill in it They Judge us with a Judgment of Indictment which is a publick Judgment and they Judge us with a Judgment of Distinction which is a private Judgment For they do not bind us blindly to believe that all that they declare is equitable because they so declare it we have in that respect a full liberty to examine those things as they are in themselves though we fail of always presuming in their favour But say they whatsoever liberty we have to examine their Judgments their Judgments must be executed notwithstanding when we our selves believe them unjust I confess it but it is because their Execution consists only in those things or in those external Actions which leave the thoughts of the mind always free and not in an inward acquiescence And this is that that puts a difference between their Sentences and the decisions of Pastors concerning the matters of Religion for the Execution of these latter consists in an acquiscence of the Soul and the Conscience which cannot but examine them in the end and be decided but by the knowledge we have of the Equity and Truth of those Doctrines The same thing may sometimes happen in the Civil Society where in stead of putting in Execution the Commands of Superiours one shall be bound formally to oppose and resist them as when the Sates of a Province or a Governour shall command things prejudicial to the Obedience that one owes to one's Soveraign and which would engage the people in a Rebellion Then we may not only Judge our Judges by a private Judgment but our private Judgment is a thousand times more general and publick then that of those Judges yea though it shall not be accompanied with any formality For those formalities signify nothing when the fidelity which we owe to our Prince is concerned Then neither respect of Magistrates nor consideration of Order nor the Authority of our Governours ought to turn us aside but they must all give place to that Great and Fundamental Duty It is the same thing in a Religious Society God and our Salvation are to be preferred before all things and if it fall out that the Pastors either in their Pulpits or in their Writings or in their Councils would plunge us into errors and into a worship that dishonours God and corrupts his Christian Religion we may not only judge them by a private judgment but we ought also at the same time to labour to make that private judgment to become publick and as general as it can be made and howsoever we do it we do not in any thing withdraw our selves from that fidelity which we all owe to God The Inconveniences that arise from that Conduct ought to be imputed not to private men who do but what they are obliged to do but to the Pastors who abuse their Charge and pervert the rule and natural design of their Ministry But say they Is not this to introduce a private spirit into the Church where we all ought to have but one same spirit which is that of the Church There is saith St. Paul but one Body and but one Spirit and therefore it is that he himself exhorts us to abide all in the same spirit and to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace I answer that there ought to be in the Church in effect but one and the same Spirit but that that ought to be the Spirit of God the Spirit of Truth the Spirit of Wisdom not the spirit of the World not the spirit of Errour God gives his holy Spirit immediatly to all his truly Faithful ones whether they be Pastors or whether they be Lay-men which is in all but one same Spirit though the measure according to which each receives may be different Grace says the Apostle is given unto every one of us according to the measure of the gift of Christ And in that Description of the State of the Church under the new Testament which is set down by the Prophet Joel God says That he will purer out his Spirit upon all flesh that their Sons and their Daughtes shall Prophecy and that he will give this Spirit to his Servants and to his Handmaids Elsewhere God promises his Children That he will give them a new heart and a new spirit and that he will put his Spirit within them Saint Paul teaches the same thing By one Spirit says he we are all Baptized into one Body whether we be Jews or Gentiles whether we be bond or free and have been all made to drink into one spirit Because ye are Children says he to the Galatians God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts and in the Epistle which he addresses to the Saints and Faithful of Ephesus he tells them That they were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise and desiring that they might receive a more abundant measure of it he prayed God to give them the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation St. Peter tells the faithful of his age who were persecuted for the name of Jesus Christ That the Spirit of Glory and the Spirit of God rested upon them In fine the
matter which shall be Treated of in its place In effect there are two sorts of Calls which we ought not to confound That of the Reformation and that of the perpetual Exercise of the Gospel-Ministry And the Author of the Prejudices himself seems to have Judiciously enough distinguished them when he lays down two sorts of Separation the one Negative which consists only in a rejecting of those things that are ill and the other Positive which goes so far as to set up a Body apart with the Exercise of the Ministry We shall therefore speak elsewhere of the Right that our Fathers had to set up a publick Ministry and it shall suffice for the present to have solidly Established their Call to Reform To shut up this Chapter it remains only that we speak a Word to a Question which they here raise about this Call in the same sence in which we here consider it For they demand of us whether it was Ordinary or Extraordinary To which I Answer That it was both the one and the other in different respects It was Ordinary as to its Right since all men have an Ordinary and perpetual Right to reject Errors and Superstitions and to employ themselves in making their Brethren to reject them according to the Common Laws of Piety and Charity The Pastors also have an Ordinary and perpetual Right to do the same Thing and to make use of that Publick Authority which their Function gives them for the guidance of their Flocks It was Ordinary as to the Obligation which lay as well upon the People as the Pastors to do that which they did because it was a Law of Christianity and not a new Law or Commandment that bound them to it their Duty was founded upon the principles of that very Gospel and of the same Christian Religion which Jesus Christ had Founded and whereof they made a Profession But I affirm that it was likewise Extraordinary in two things First of all in respect of that extream and indispensable Necessity which lay upon them to do what they did For although we have always a Right to reject those Errors and that false Worship which may creep into the Church and although we should be always bound to make use of it also if it were so yet it is not always Necessary to come to the practise or the Exercise of that Right and of that Obligation at least to so Publick and Splendid a one as that of our Fathers was because the Church is not always in a State of Confusion and Disorder as she was in their Time Things Ordinarily glide away in a more regulated course the Publick Ministry is more pure and the Gospel more disingaged from the oppression of Traditions or Humane Superstitions Secondly That Call was Extraordinary in respect of those qualities wherewith God invested our first Reformers and those who joyned with them in so great a work for it is not an Ordinary thing to see such eminent gifts and that in so great a Number as those which appeared in the Age of the Reformation accompanied with such an Heroical Spirit as our Fathers had and such a great Love for the purity of the Gospel as the People had who received their Instructions All which constrains us to acknowlede a particular and special Providence of God throughout the whole Conduct of that great Divine Work who raised up Labourers fitted for the Harvest which he had prepared CHAP. V. An Answer to the Objections that are made against the Persons of the Reformers WE have hitherto methinks sufficiently justified the Action of our Fathers in the business of the Reformation It appears that they had but too many Reasons to suspect a great Corruption not only in the Government of the Church but in the Worship and Doctrines of it also and too just motives to engage them to make a more particular Examination It may not less appear by what we have said concerning the Infallibility of the Church of Rome and that absolute Authority which she ascribes to her self over mens Consciences that her pretensions have no Foundation and that all the Faithful have a Right to Judge of the matters of Religion by themselves and to discern what is good from what is ill We have seen nevertheless that our Fathers were not moved so publickly to make use of their Right but by an extream and utmost Necessity and if they will do them Justice they ought freely to acknowledge what the Author of the Prejudices has not dared to deny that they had a sufficient Call to go as far as a Negative Separation and openly to refuse to believe and to Act what their Consciences should not allow them to approve But as that Motion of Conscience was not Universal or common to all those of their Time and as it had encountred the interests of a great Body that was in possession of the Government of the Latin Church they have laboured to render it odious by all sorts of ways and even those who were not able directly to condemn it have not failed to search out divers pretences to cry it down and having nothing to say against their Actions they have taken up something against their persons This is that that the most of our Adversaries endeavour with great Care this is that that their Writers of Controversies and Missionaries who are spread abroad on all sides among us and who make use of all sorts of ways to gain Proselytes do even now all their days and this is that that the Author of the Prejudices in particular has done His Argument may be well nigh reduced to this That there is no likelyhood that God committed the care of Reforming his Church to persons whose Life and Conduct was Disorderly and Scandalous And the Conclusion that he pretends to draw from it is that we ought to reject without any further Examination that Reformation and to put our selves into the Communion of the Church of Rome 1. It will be no difficult matter to shew him that Blessed be God we have as to what concerns us on every side matter of Edification from the manners of those who were first of all made use of in so Holy and so Necessary a Work and this we shall presently make out But before I come to that I am obliged to tell him that his way of Reasoning is the most captious and the most contrary to the interests of the true Religion that can be imagined and that it is contrary even to the Interests of that Church of Rome which it would defend I say in the first place that it is captious For since our Fathers Reformed themselves only out of the motion of their Consciences which dictated to them that they ought to do it for the Glory of God and their own Salvation how can he pretend that we who have followed them out of the same Reason can revoke an Action which we believe to be just and lawful out of meerly
Forreign Considerations taken from the persons of those who excited us to do it if otherwise it does not appear to us that the Consciences of our Fathers and our own were deceived and that our Action is unjust in the Foundation If the Law of the Conscience obliges us and gives us a right to separate our selves at least Negatively how can we depart from that Separation on the account of personal Actions in which neither our Fathers nor our selves have had any part and which have nothing of common with our Separation Our Reformation being good and just as we are perswaded it is is it not true that we ought to hold our selves to it whatsoever they tell us further of the Passions of Luther or of the Marriage of some Monks These things are wholly separate For our Fathers might very well Read the Writings of Luther and hear the Preaching of these Monks who should discover to them the Abuses of the Church of Rome they might very well Reform themselves in the end out of a motion of their Consciences stirred up by their Teachings without either approving or Canonizing their other Actions But they will say to have avoided falling into that motion of Conscience your Fathers ought not to have heard them And why ought they not That same motion that their Teachings stirred up and that produced a Reformation sufficiently notes that they ought But whether they ought or whether they ought not they did hear them the thing was done and that which they heard having caused that Sentiment of their Consciences which obliged them to Reform themselves we should be impious if we should quit that Reformation without any ones satisfying us about that Sentiment or shewing us that it is ill and fit to be condemned But that they can never do by those personal Actions which have no Relation to it else they would be bound to condemn the comfort which we every day receive from the Psalms of David under a pretence that David had committed Adultery with Bathsheba and to reject that Instruction that we gather from the Books of Solomon under a pretence that Solomon was not so constant as he ought to have been in the Worship of the True God There is then nothing else but a Sophism in all that 2. But if that way of Reasoning is captious it is not less contrary to the interests of the True Religion since it would have us Judge of the Reformation by the Quality of the persons who Preached it and not by it self or the Nature of the things it Treats of which would Establish a Principle whose Use could not but be very pernicious to the Church For if we ought not to consider its Doctrine in it self but to judge of it by the Persons who should teach it us how could any one discern the Angels of Darkness when they should be disguised into Angels of Light and be able to know the false Prophets when they should work signs and wonders even to deceive if it were possible the very Elect How could any know those Impostors and those Hypocrites who come in Sheeps cloathing but inwardly are ravening Wolves Moreover would it be a hard matter for those men who should be interested against the sound Doctrine to invent a Thousand Calumnies against the persons of the Teachers of it and how many did they invent in the beginning against the Apostles and the Primitive Christians whom they represented to the people as the most wicked among men I confess it is a great means of Edification that those who Preach a good Doctrine confirm it by good Examples and that on the contrary it is Scandalous when their works do not correspond with their words But nevertheless it does not follow that one ought to receive a Word because it is spoken by persons of an honest life or to reject it for the contrary Reason for this Maxim would make us very often reject Truths and receive Heresies It is then certain that we ought to examine that Word in it self without any dependance on those who Preach it For Truth is not in Men but in God alone she cannot change her Nature nor lose her right through the Vices of its Ministers If our Fathers were Reformed by the Authority of Luther or by that of Zuinglius and Calvin they would have some Reason to draw us back to the Examination of their manners since in that Case they would treat of that that would either establish or destroy the Right which they would have had to believe their meer words But how many times have our Fathers and we protested that we do not believe that which our Reformers said because they said it but because they proved it and because those things appeared sufficiently evident in themselves We look upon them only as persons whom God made use of to teach men their Duty they discovered it our Fathers saw it we see it also and it is on the sight of this Duty alone and not on their Authority that the Reformation depends As it frequently falls out that our very Enemies make us know our Duty in reproaching us with our faults suppose we that a Jew or some other Infidel should have accused and convinced the Latins that they had corrupted their Christianity and had not preserved the Gospel in that State wherein Christ and his Apostles left it is it not true that without any regard to the person the Latins would be bound to do that which our Fathers have done and that the Quality of him who should have so reproached them would not have been a sufficient excuse before God to hinder them from the doing of their duty It is then very evident that we ought to Judge of those matters by the matters themselves and not by the persons who teach them to us and by Consequence that the Principle of the Author of Prejudices is false and contrary to true Piety As to what he says that there is no likelyhood that God has committed the Care of Reforming his Church to Scandalous Persons I answer that God has committed to all his Faithful the Care of Reforming themselves and to all his Pastors that of Exhorting their Flocks If it falls out that among those Pastors who have acquitted themselves in that respect of their charges there should have been some few who did Actions worthy to be blamed that ought not to create any Prejudice against the Word nor put a stop to the motion of the Consciences of the Faithful any more then the defection of Saint Peter or his excessive compliance with the Jews ought to have hindred the Conversion of People to Christianity The Ministers that God makes use of are men who have their faults and faults sometimes of the highest nature as may appear from the Example of Aaron who encouraged the Israelites in Idolatry and of Jonas who fled to Tarsis when he was bound to have gone and Preached to Ninive but their faults make the word of
to do and what he should not have done and by that means to raise himself so high as to be a Censor of God's Actions He ought at least to have called it to mind that Jesus Christ made no scruple to chuse married men out of whom to make his Apostles and Evangelists The Scripture mentions the Mother-in-law of Saint Peter that is to say his Wives Mother for that word in Greek can be taken in no other sence but that It speaks also of the four Daughters of Philip the Evangelist The Authour of the Commentaries upon the Epistles of Saint Paul under the name of Saint Ambrose assures us that all the Apostles had Wives except Saint Paul and Saint John and Saint Ignatius and Saint Basil say the same thing without any exception Virginity is not then an inseparable character of the Call of God as the Authour of the Prejudices would perswade us But after that first assault of the Authour of the Prejudices which was made with all the weapons that he first found in his hands he reproaches the Reformers with the little fruit that their Preaching wrought for the Sanctification of those people who followed them Their Ministers themselves says he have been constrained by the Evidence of the Truth to acknowledge That all their pretended Reformation did not produce any Renovation of the spirit of Christianity and that it had rather increased then lessened the disorders of those who embraced it and for that he produces the complaints of some Ministers as of Capito and Calvin himself and of Luther against the Vices of their Age. I acknowledge that if they compare our Fathers manners and ours with the Grace that God has given us in renewing his Gospel in the midst of us they would find but too much reason to make us cover our Faces with confusion that we were unworthy of so great a Favour I confess also that there may be many found among those who at first embraced the Reformation who instead of profiting by it abused it as the best things may be abused But I say that they ought not to insult over that Confession that we make in that regard for besides that a Doctrine is not the less found for not being so carefully observed as it deserves we can yet further say for our selves and say it to the Glory of that God whom we serve that he has poured forth a sufficiently abundant measure of his blessing on our Fathers and that if any compare their manners with those of the other Party who rejected the Reformation they will find reason enough to confess that God was in the midst of us It is true indeed that they might not see there those Pharisaical Devotions of which the hypocrites and superstitious make a vain shew They might not see there those men who publish to all the world their Mortifications and their Fasts who withdraw themselves out of the crowd to make themselves to be more taken notice of and who never enter into their secret retirements but with the greater ease to be able to mix themselves in all that that is common in the World But they may there behold a solid Piety plain and natural without Art and Affection a true fear of offending God with a free and open carriage which never sought to hide it self by distinctions and illusions but in good earnest to follow the dictates of Conscience without saying to hinder them from doing their Duty either what will become of us or what will become of our Brethren or Sisters Because they knew that those Events were in the hand of God and that poor worldly interest ought never to prevail over the love of the Truth As to the Wars that the Author of the Prejudices imputes to the Reformation it had been methinks his prudence not to have turned the Dispute upon a Matter on which he well knows that we have but too many things to say for our Justification If some Princes of Germany took up Arms to defend themselves against the assaults of their Enemies they thought that the Justice and Law of Nations authorised that defence and that being Soveraign in their States they were bound to protect their Subjects and to preserve that Trust that God had put into their hands And as for those Commotions that hapned in France in the times of the Reformation there is no person who is ignorant of their true Causes It is true that the Interest of our Religion had some part in them but it had at least the good fortune to be found joyned with that of the preserving of that great Kingdom to its just possessours against those pernitious designs which made but too great a noise afterwards and whatsoever sad Remembrances the Authour of the Prejudices has awakened by his undeserved reproaches yet we shall not fail to maintain that the blood of our Fathers was very well spent for so good a Cause Luther says he was not afraid of animating his followers to Murders and Blood by those horrible words which are to be found in his first Tome of his Works of Wittingburg Edition If we hang up Robbers on Gibbets if we punish Hereticks and Thieves with the Sword why do not we assault with all our Forces those Cardinals and those Popes and all that scum of the Roman Sodom that ceases not to corrupt the Church of God why do we not embrue our hands in their Blood It is certain that there can scarce be any passage related after a more invenomed and base manner than the Authour of the Prejudices relates that and this will appear if they well but make these following Observations 1. That he separates those words from the sequel of the Discourse to give them quite another Sence than Luther intended by them which is to speak Properly a kind of falsification more dangerous then that of corrupting the words of a Sentance 2. That he would make us imagine that those words are addrest to the followers of Luther to animate them to Blood and Slaughter which is a perfect Calumny 3. That he quotes them not as spoken upon a supposition but as spoken purely and simply which is further contrary to the Truth Behold then what the matter truly was Sylvester Prierias Master of the Sacred Palace at Rome having wrote against Luther's Doctrine concerning the Pope and in particular against his Appeal to a Council had peremptorily maintained That it was not lawful to Appeal from the Pope to a Council because the Pope was a Soveraign Judge and liable to no Appeal and that those who sued out such Appeals were cast out of the Church and Excommunicate That the Pope alone was the Infallible Rule of Truth whose decisions were certain and irrefragable without a Council where those of a Council were nothing without the Pope nor bound any person if they were not authorised by the Pope so that whatsoever should not receive the Doctrine of the Pope as the Infallible Rule
and the Elders of the People Can they deny that the Christian Emperours did not heretofore call Councils to Order the State of Religion and to provide against disorders in the Church Can they deny that our Kings have not often done the same in their Kingdome But the Senate of Zurich would of it self take Cognizance of the matters of Religion I say that that very thing was its Right for if it be the Duty of every Christian for the Interest of his own Salvation to take Cognizance of those things that the Church-men Teach and not blindly to refer themselves to their Word as I have made it appear to be in the first Part it is not less the Duty of Magistrates to do the same to bind the Church-men to acquit themselves faithfully in their Charges and to Teach men nothing that might not be conformable to the Word of God So that if the Ministers of the Church go astray from that Word and if they corrupt their Ministry by Errors and Superstitions it belongs to the Magistrate to Labour to reduce them to their Duty by the mildest and justest methods he can use Thus the Kings of Judah used it heretofore as it appears from the History of Hezechias Josias and of some others who made use of that lawful Authority that God gave them for the Reforming of their Church by the Word of God We all know that the Antient Emperors took Cognizance either by themselves of their Commissioners of Ecclesiastical Affairs and not only of those that respected the Discipline but of those also which related to the Doctrine and the very Essence of Religion it self to that degree that they frequently published under their Names in the Form of Edicts Decisions of Opinions Condemnations of Heresy and the Interpretations of the Faith which they had caused to be disputed in their Presence in Synodal Assemblies We ought not therefore to imagine that Magistrates ought not to interpose in matters of the Faith under a pretence that they are Lay-men for on the contrary they ought to interpose themselves more in those then in those of Discipline because the Faith respects every man where Discipline relates to the Clergy more peculiarly Therefore it was that Pope Nicholas the First told the Emperour Michael who was present in person in a Council where only the Fact of Ignatius Patriarch of Constantinople was treated of whom that Emperour had deposed That he did not find that the Emperours his Predecessours had been present at Synodal Assemblies unless they might possibly have been in those where matters of the Faith were Treated of which is a common Thing relating Generally to all and which belongs not only to the Clergy but the Laity also and universally to all Christians There was nothing therefore in that Action of the Magistrates of Zurich that was not a Right common to all Soveraign Magistrates within the extent of their Jurisdictions But they will say Was it not to break off the Unity of their Church with the rest to go about so to order the State of Religion within their Canton without the Participation of other Churches and were they not Schismaticks in that very thing I answer That when a Prince or a Soveraign Magistrate is in a condition to call a General Council together to deliberate about the Common Faith he would do better to take that way But when he is not as the Senate of Zurich evidently was not ought he to abandon all care of the Churches of his State They will see in the end of this Treatise that the States of Germany seeing the Oppositions that the Popes made to the calling of a general Council often demanded a National one of the Emperour Charles the Fifth They will see also that that Emperour was sometimes resolved to do it and that he Threatned the Popes to cause divers Colloquies or Conferences of Learned men to be held to labour to decide those Articles that were Controverted They will see that our Kings for the same design have sometimes deliberated about assembling a National Council in France And no body is ignorant of the Conference of Poissy under the Reign of Charles the Ninth There was nothing therefore in the Conduct of that business that did not belong to the Right of Soveraigns and nothing which they can charge with Schism in it For when a Prince or a Senate Assembles a Synod to condemn Heresies or Reform Errors and by that means takes Cognizance of matters of Religion provided that in effect that which it condemns be a Heresy or that which it Reforms be an Error he is so far from breaking Christian Unity that on the contrary he confirms it as much as he can in freeing it from a false and wicked Unity which is that of Error which cannot be other then destructive to the whole Body of the Church and which cannot be too soon broken So that we ought to Judge of their Action more by the Foundation then the Form or Manner For the Foundation being good its Action cannot but be approved When a Man is Sick with divers others as it frequently happens in Epidemical Diseases it would be Injustice in him not to provide for his own particular healing but to stay for a general one and it would be a great absurdity to say that if he did do so he violated the Rights of the Civil Society for the Civil Society does not consist in being a Communion of sickness but in being a Communion of Life On the contrary it ought to be said that in healing himself in particular he established as much as in him lay that Civil Society which he had with his diseased Companions because he encouraged them by his Example to heal themselves with him the better to enjoy in common the advantages of Life It is the same case here where a Church sees it self infected with Error and Superstition with divers other Churches she no ways violates Christian Unity in labouring to reform her self particularly for the Christian Unity does not consist in the Communion of Errors and Abuses it consists in the Communion of that True Faith and Piety It establishes therefore on the contrary that Unity because it gives others a good Example and thereby encourages them to reform themselves as it has done All that which a Prince or Soveraign Magistrate ought to observe in those Seasons is on one side to take heed that he makes a just discerning of good and evil I would say that he reforms nothing which would not be in effect an Error or a Superstition or an Abuse and that he does not give any wound to the True Religion under a pretence of Reformation and on the other side to offer no violence to Mens Consciences but to purify the Publick Ministry as much as he can by the general consent of the People that God has committed to him But this is that which not only the Magistrates of Zurich but those also of other places
the point of the Real presence and about some Questions of the Schools which we cannot yet impute to their whole Body and as for the rest they reject with us the Invocation of Saints Religious Worship of Images humane Satisfactions Indulgences Purgatory worship of Reliques the publick Service in an unknown Tongue the merit of good Works Transubstantiation the sacrifice of the Mass the Monarchy of the Pope the opinion of the Infallibility of the Church and the principle of blind obedience to the decisions of Councils They acknowledge the Scriptures to be the only Rule of Faith they carefully practise the Reading of them they own their sufficiency they believe their Authority independant from that of the Church in regard of men They distinctly explain the Doctrine of Justification and that of the use of the Law and its distinction from the Gospel they do not conceive amiss of the nature of Faith and that of good works and as for popular superstitions we can scarce see any reign among them Would to God the Church of Rome were in that condition and that we could purchase it at the price of our Blood and our Lives But alas We are very far from seeing any likely-hood of success to that wish all those points that I have set down are so many differences which we have with her and in our Judgments there are so many Errors and so many abuses in her and we are so far from any reasonable hope of their Correction that we see on the contrary that they strengthen themselves in them every day and that they discover every day more and more signs of their aversion for or contempt of a Reformation Who therefore can think it strange that upon the business of Religion we place a great difdifference between those of the Roman Church and those who are called Lutherans the one appears to us as a Body spread all over with a great many boils which all together put a stop to the Functions of Life and the others as a Body that has only one or two which do not hinder its Life or its Action In a word we do not believe that those who have imbibed the Tenets of the Roman Church where we differ from them and who practice them are in the way of Salvation as well by reason of the Quality of the greatest part of those Tenets as by reason of their number But as to the Errors which remain yet among the Lutherans we do not pass the same Judgment either as to their Quality or their number I say as to their Quality and the reason that we alledge is is very solid whatsoever endeavors they have used to elude it for although the opinion of the Lutherans about the Real presence be erroneous though we are so far from approving of it that we oppose it as much as possibly we can yet while they shall make a profession as they do to distinguish in the Sacrament the substance of bread from that of the Body of Jesus Christ we cannot say that their Error compels them actually to adore the meer creature of Bread for the same Body of Jesus Christ that is hypostatically united with the word We can very well say that they deceive themselves in imagining that the Body of Jesus Christ is in a place where it is not but we cannot tell them that they take another subject for the Body of Jesus Christ which really and in effect is not so They do not therefore deceive themselves in regard of the Object of their Adoration for they do not take the one for the other I would say they do not take the substance of Bread for the Body of Jesus Christ but they deceive themselves in regard of the place wherein they conceive the Body of Jesus Christ to be for they conceive it to be in the Bread and it is not there But this Error about the place how gross soever it be does not notwithstanding include Idolatry for as I have said they do not take one subject for another the substance of Bread for the Body of Jesus Christ But it is otherwise in the Church of Rome for if she deceives her self she does it not only as to the place wherein she conceives the Body of Jesus Christ but also as to the subject that she takes for the Body of Jesus Christ since it is in effect but the substance of Bread There is actually and really in the Sacrament but one only substance the Church of Rome does not distinguish it from the Object of her Adoration on the contrary she delieves it to be the Body of Jesus Christ and she Adores it under that Quality if she deceives her self it is manifest that in believing she adores the Body of Jesus Christ she adores that which is actually the substance of Bread It is to no purpose therefore that the Author of the Prejudices says That it is false that the Catholicks adore the Sacrament in taking that word for an external Vail That makes nothing to the Question Whether they adore or do not adore the accidents of Bread that is to say its figure colour roundness is a thing by it self whereof we do not now dispute we speak now of the substance which the Priest holds in his hands But it is yet nothing to the purpose what he further adds That although the Bread should remain there as the Lutherans hold yet we could not accuse the Catholicks of adoring it their adoration terminates upon Jesus Christ alone whom they believe to lie hid under those sensible species This is an Ordinary Fallacy of their Missionaries fit only to deceive Children I distinguish We cannot accuse those of the Church of Rome of believing that they adore the Bread or of being willing to adore it or of having an intention to adore the Bread I grant it for they believe that it is no longer Bread they believe that the substance of Bread is changed into that of Jesus Christ so that they can never be accused of believing that they adore or that they are willing to adore or that they have an intention to adore the Bread They defend themselves in that whereof no Body accuses them But if the bread remain in effect no Bread I deny that we cannot accuse them of adoring that which is actually and in the Truth of the thing Bread in believing that it is the Body of Jesus Christ and a man must be of a very bad faith not to see it For if I should imagine for example that a Tree that a Rock that a flower was a God hid under the form of a Tree a Rock a Flower and if I should adore it under that Quality of a God which my imagination gave it it would be past all doubt that I should adore a Tree a Rock a Flower in believing my self to adore God But besides that we are in regard of the Lutherans in very different Terms from those wherein the Church of Rome would
have us that we should be with her For in respect of the Lutherans the business is only about a meer Toleration which we give to those among them who desire it with a Spirit of Charity waiting till it shall please God to dissipate their Error But the Church of Rome that calls it self infallible would have us not only to have a meer Toleration for her but that we should make a profession of believing all that she believes for when she separated her self from us she Anathematised all those who did not believe all that she had decided in her Council of Trent The Matters therefore are not equal between the Roman and the Lutheran Communion in respect of us To put them into an Equality it is necessary that the Roman Church should openly put her self into the state wherein the Lutherans are that she renounce the Invocation of Saints Religious worship of Images humane Satisfactions Indulgences Purgatory the worshipping of Relliques the publick Service in an unknown Tongue the merit of good Works Transubstantiation Adoration of the Sacrament the Sacrifice of the Mess the Papal Monarchy the pretension of Infallibility the blind Obedience that she would have us give to her decisions It is necessary that she should acknowledge the Scriptures to be the only rule of faith and manners that she should carefully recommend the Reading of them to the People that she should confess their sufficiency without the help of tradition that she should believe the Authority of that Scripture independent even in respect of us on that of the Church that she should distinctly lay down the Doctrine of Justification and that of the distinction of the Law and the Gospel that she should form a Just Idea of the Faith and of good works and that she should take care to abolish all the popular Superstitions which we behold among them When she shall have done all that with some other things which the Lutherans have done also although she do retain the point of the Real presence after the same manner that they do we shall not fail to offer her the same Toleration which we yield to the Lutherans and the same conditions which we give to them which is that we should not engage our selves to believe that presence that we should always protest against it as an Error and that they shall do nothing to force us to embrace it When the Church of Rome shall be in that condition which I have set down if we do not make her these offers if we do not even make them with all the ardour imaginable we will be very well contented in that Case that they should accuse us of humane Policy and that they should tell us that we are a sort of men without any Conscience Justice and Charity But 'till then we will take God and men to witness that there is not the least equity in those invectives and that it is to oppress our innocency to ascribe that as the Author of the Prejudices has done to an interested Policy or a capricious humour which is but too well founded upon the things themselves See here what I had to say upon the Twelfth Chapter of the Author of the Prejudices It may now be Judged of what force his Accusations are We should after that pass on to his Thirteenth Chapter But as that Chapter is but a sending us to a Book of Monsieur Arnaud's Intituled The Overthrow of the Morals of Jesus Christ by the Calvinists I shall also content my self with referring my Readers to the Answer which I hope to make him It shall suffice for the present to say That the Doctrine of the Saints Perseverance as the Synod of Dort has laid it down is a Doctrine of the Scripture and that all the pretended Consequences which Monsieur Arnaud would draw from it are of the same nature of those which profane Persons draw from all the Doctrines of Religion when they would abuse them to their Ruin CHAP. VIII That our Fathers in their Design of Reforming themselves were bound to take the Holy Scripture alone for the Rule of their Faith IT it now necessary to Examine by what Principle or upon what Rule our Fathers proceeded in their Reformation But before we go any further we shall do well to weigh what the Author of the Prejudices says who has made an express Chapter upon this matter The Argument of that Chapter is framed in these words That the way which the Calvinists propound to instruct men in the Truth is ridiculous and impossible After having entred upon his subject As the matter is saith he about the promise which they make of discovering divers Truths of the Faith to the Catholicks which are in their Judgments obscured and quite altered in the Church of Rome there will be nothing more Just or more natural then in the first place to inquire into the way which they would take to perform it to the end that we may Judge by the very nature of that way what we may justly expect For if it be found that they would engage us in an infinite way and which could not come to an issue there could not be a more lawful excuse to hinder us from hearkening to them nor a more evident conviction of the rashness of their enterprise Behold here methinks Two Declarations of that Author sufficiently express concerning the means which we propound to instruct men in the Truth the one That it is a ridiculous and impossible way and the other That it is an infinite way c. and which can come to no issue for we may well perceive that that Periphrasis of expression If it be found that they would engage us in an infinite way c. made use of in the beginning of a Disputation means that it will be so found in effect and that it is as much as if it had been positively said they would engage us in an infinite way and which has no end there being no other difference between those two expressions unless that this latter is the more plain and that the other has more of the Air of the Philosophical Method of those Gentlemen After that preamble the Author goes on It is true says he that if we will hear them speak upon this subject without any more deep searehing into that which they say we shall have reason enough to be satisfied For they baldly promise to lead us to the Faith by a short an easy and a clear way without confusion without danger of wandring aside and this way say they is the Examination of the Articles of the Faith by the Scripture which is the only Rule that God has given us for the deciding of the differences of Religion and assuring us of what we ought to believe all others being subject to Error This is the Explication of the way which we propose which is to take the Holy Scripture for the only Rule of our Faith He adds But because in a
learned The one extends its use unto all that is Necessary for Instruction and the Conduct of life and the other in heaping up of general difficulties makes it unprofitable to Instruct us in the least Truths What Judgment can we make of this diversity unless this that the language of these Gentlemen changes according to the difference of Times and Interests as one has said of them elsewhere When the case is about gaining credit to their Translation of the New Testament they speak as advantagiously of the Scripture as it is possible for them to speak and when the business is to oppose a Reformation made according to the Rule of the Scripture but which notwithstanding has not the happiness of their Agreement you see what they say of that same Scripture The Scripture shall then to speak properly be only to be commended by the Intrest of their Translation and as long as that Interest shall remain shall be the Collection of the divine Teachings of our Lord The Testament that assures us of the Inheritance of our Father The mouth of Jesus Christ who although he is in Heaven speaks continually upon earth not only the nourishment of sound Souls and those who are establish'd in grace as the Body of the Son of God but even the Consolation of Sinners the light of the blind the remedy of the Sick and the life of the dead For these are the Titles that the Preface gives it but whenever that Interest shall cease those praises shall do so too and it shall be nothing but a Ridiculous way and impossible for the Instructing of men in the Truth I would therefore very fain know of these Gentlemen whether it were only upon the sight of their Translation that S. Cyprian S. Augustine and S. Gregory wrote that which the Preface relates or whether those Fathers did not consider the Scripture in it self For if it be the first they forgot to tell us that they only spake out of a Prophetick Spirit of that Translation and if it be the Second why have they entertained us with that admirable proportion of the Scripture to great and small to the strong and weak and that easy and intelligible manner wherewith it propounds to us all that is necessary for the Conduct of our life since that without the Translation of Mons it is an Infinite way which has no end a ridiculous way and Impossible to Instruct men in the Truth What can the Author of the Prejudices say to defend himself from this Manifest Contradiction which he discovers between him and his Colleague Will he say that the Scripture is in truth a good means for the Instruction of men but that it is so only with the Interpretations of the Fathers But the Author of that Preface speaks for Scripture alone separated from the Interpretation of the Fathers such as its Translation is for he excuses himself in that he had not made a collection of notes and explanations drawn out of the writings of the holy Fathers and he does not fail to say that in his Translation as plain as it is not only the Souls of the more learned but of the more simple also and unlearned may find that which will be necessary for their Instruction Will he say that he does not mean to exclude the learned from the use of the Scripture but only the more simple for the Instruction of which former he does not deny but that it would be a most proper means But besides that his Brother speaks formally of the Instruction of the more simple why has the Author of the Prejudices made it a ridiculous and Impossible way an infinite way which has no Issue a way which is of so excessive a length that one can never rationally hope to come to the end of it whatsoever diligence one should make Will he say that the Scripture ought to be joined with Tradition and that without Tradition it cannot give a perfect Instruction But the Preface says expresly that they will find in that Translation all that will be necessary for Instruction Will he say that in order to the Scriptures Instructing one the Sence of the Church ought to be added to it But the Preface says that according to Saint Augustine the Scripture lays down all that is necessary for the Conduct of our lives after a most easy and Intelligible manner and that she explains and makes clear her self Will he say that in order to the Scriptures being capable to Instruct us we ought at least to read it with Dependance upon the Church and to take it from her hand But wherefore then would these Gentlemen have the People to read their Translation since they are only private Doctors and not the Church Wherefore when the Prelats rais'd to the highest dignities have forbid the reading of it by their Ordinances have we seen Printed writings maintain on the contrary there was in those Ordinances a Threatning of the Will and Commandment of God who would that we should hear his Son and not that we should suppress his Gospel a Contradiction to the Holy Scripture which was set down in writing for no other end but to be heard and practis'd by all Nations of the world a Contradiction of all the Councils which have always taken the Scripture for the Judge of the belief of the Church and of all the Difficulties and Questions that can arise in the Doctrine of Faith or Manners a Contradiction of all the Holy Fathers who advis'd the Faithful above all things continually to read the word of God Why has one Introduc'd two Lay-men Parishoners Saint Hilary Montanus saying one to another The Bishops cannot take away from us the Gospel that Jesus Christ has given us that God spoke to all his People when he said To day if you will hear my voice harden not your Hearts a Bishop cannot take away our Eyes from us to hinder us from seeing and considering our way we should not see Jesus Christ our Saviour our Pastor and our great Bishop who goes before us in his Gospel That if a Bishop would turn us away from if an Apostle if an Angel from Heaven would stop up this way and would go about to lead and guide us in another we ought not to believe him Why has he made us see those Parishoners holding That there is nothing more contrary to the Gospel then a prohibition to read and have it that bread and nourishment is not more necessary to preserve the life of the Body then the word of God is to maintain Life in our Souls That all Christians have a natural right that cannot be taken from them of Instructing themselves by the word of God and labouring to understand it and that the Holy Scriptures were given to the whole Church and not only to the Bishops who have no right to deprive the Faithful of them That this is say they what the Divel would preach up if he were
visible and Transfigured into an Angel of light and in the shape of a Preacher in the Chair of Truth and what else would he perswade the Faithful too but that the Faithful ought to take very great heed not to read the Holy Scripture and not to meditate day and night upon the words of life that the Spirit of God has dictated to the Prophets and which God the Father has given to his Son for the Instruction of his Church and to draw it from the Corruption of the world to render it Holy and without Spot to his Father who gave it to him Jesus Christ was the Word uf God and liv'd by that Word and to make his Church live he gave it his word in an Intelligible Tongue out of his own mouth and by his Disciples Search says he and examine carefully the Scriptures for they are they which Testify of me Thus it is that they speak of it sometimes Jesus Christ gave his Scripture to the Faithful with a Commandment to read it to examine it carefully and to hear it It was the Judge of the beleif of the Church and the Difficulties and Questions that arose in the Doctrine of the Faith and Manners The Parishioners made use of them against their Bishops They encountred even their Ordinances by passages out of that Scripture they maintain'd that the use of them belonged to all Christians by a natural right and that to go about to deprive them of them was to do an action of the Devil But now a days they speak no more after that manner for they tell us on the contrary that it is a Ridiculous and Impossible way to Instruct men in the Truth an Infinite way which has no Issue and which is of so excessive a length that whatsoever dilligence we should use we can never arrive to the end and they labour to heap difficulties upon difficulties to drive them back and to make a Labyrinth full of Circles and confus'd ways that so out of a fear of those Confusions the world should take heed of entring into it For my own part I freely acknowledg That I can comprehend nothing in all that For if before one can assure ones self of one only Passage of Scripture whatsoever it be we must needs go through a thousand tedious ways and overcome a thousand Obstacles that arise from the Question about the Canonical Books about the Conformity of the Translations with the Originals about the different manner of reading the Passages and about the difference of Interpretations as the Author of the Prejudices would have it according to his ordinary Exaggeration to what purpose is it to give the publick a Translation which after the manner that it was given and receiv'd in cannot but be subject to the greatest part of those difficulties and yet notwithstanding they put it into all mens hands as well the Ignorant as the Learned as well of the simple as the more Inlightned as well to women as to men The Church of Rome has not declared it Authentick Two Bishops and a Doctor have approved it but two Arch-bishops and a Cardinal have forbidden it and yet one has not failed notwithstanding those Prohibitions to maintain that all the world ought to read them and that that forbidding them is a Violence a Novelty an unexampled Enterprise a bold Attempt upon the Liberty that God has given to the Church ransomed at the price of the Blood of his own Son that it is an usurpation and the Introducing of a Tyrannical Authority that was never excercised in the Church until this day and that every one is bound not only not to obey that Ordinance but even to have an Horror for it and to resist it as much as he can What will then become of those Difficulties and those unconquerable Confufions which hinder them according to the Author of the Prejudices so that they cannot assure themselves of one only Passage of the Scripture through the uncertaitty wherein a man is of the unfaithfulness of the Translations through the Ignorance wherein we are of the different manner of reading those Passages and through the necessity of consulting Interpreters Is it because they would expresly engage the People in an Infinite way and which can come to no Issue and in a ridiculous way and which is Impossible for the Instructing of any in the Truth or is it rather because they did not propound to themselves in that Translation to Instruct men in the Truths of the Faith but only to satisfy their Curiosity and to make them read good French The Author of the Prejudices may acknowledge therefore if he pleases that the heat of Disputation has carried him beyond the bounds of Right and Reason and the respect which he ought to have for the word of God and that in endeavouring to have troubled us he has done it for himself and his Freinds for if that which he has propounded were true they would give us a ground to accuse those who have publish'd the Translation of Mons of Rashness and Imprudence And it will be nothing to the purpose to say that they Publish'd it for those persons who were already Instructed in the Truths which the Church believes that therein they might receive a Confirmation and increase of the Faith by the Conformity which they should find the Doctrines of the Church have with it and that it was necessary for that that they should go through all the difficulties which the Author of the Prejudices has worked since the Sole Conformity of it with the Doctrines of the Church would be sufficient to assure them that it was truly the word of God I say that answer will not satisfy For besides that it is an Injury to the word of God to make the Efficacy that it has in our Souls to depend upon the Conformity which it has with the Doctrine of the Church whereas on the contrary the Efficacy of the Doctrine of the Church ought to depend on its Conformity with the word of God besides that the Author of the Preface says expresly That the Souls of the simpler sort may find that in his Translation which is necessary for their Instruction He says not those who shall be already Instructed in that which the Church teaches but he says the Simpler sort he does not say that they would be Confirmed in the Instruction which they had already but that they would find that which should be necessary for their Instruction And elsewhere he says That the word of God that is to say in his Translation for it is about the Subject of that Translation that he speaks is the Light of the Blind and the Life of the Dead Which signifies that it gives by it self the first Impressions of the Spiritual Life So that it was not in the view of the knowledge that the simple might have of the Doctrine of the Roman Church that he publish'd that Translation if we believe the
to the Emperour with great submission praying him to mitigate his Decree and not to expose them as he had done to the violence of their Enemies They wrote also to the other Christian Princes as well to inform them of what had pass'd at Ausburg as to justifie themselves against the many false accusations wherewith they were charg'd and to have them demand a General and free Council that should be held in Germany for the Reformation of the Church The Execution of this Decree of Ausburg fill'd for some time Germany with a thousand Persecutions against the Protestants by the Authority of the Imperial Chamber Behold here what the Emperour did to satisfie the desires of the Court of Rome it seems that he could have done nothing more vehemently and yet notwithstanding the Pope was not throughly contented He very much rejoyced to see the Protestants subjected to the most rigorous punishments But that Authority that Charles had taken upon him to appoint those Conferences to labour to bring those differences to an agreement the consent that he had given to the abolition of some Ceremonies and above all the promise of a Council within the prefixed term of a year were things that he could not digest judging them to be too contrary to the Soveraignty of his See And because the Emperour had press'd him about this last Article of a Council and even his Legate wrote to him that it was the general desire of all Germany he returned this Answer That having consulted the Cardinals about it divers of them had not found that a Council was a very fit means for the rooting out of the present Heresies because that those things that had been decided by former Councils or already established by the practice of many Ages ought not to be again called in question That this was a very bad precedent and could not be done without very great scandal and a manifest violation of the Apostolick See That nevertheless if the Emperour judged a Council to be absolutely necessary he might promise the Lutherans one but with this condition that they should presently depart from all their Errors and be obedient to their Holy Mother Church that they should hold her Doctrines and her Rites until it should be otherwise ordain'd by the Council to the Decrees of which they should wholly submit themselves That besides that the calling of a Council would be very scandalous and of exceeding bad example to all posterity That as to the place where it should be held he judg'd it absolutely necessary that it should be in Italy and that he did not see any City more fit for it than Rome it self which was the Seat of the Christian Faith that if notwithstanding Rome did not please him he might chuse one either in Bolognia or Placentia or Mantua The Pope went even so far as to write to the Christian Princes a Circulary Letter by which he advised them in the general of that which had pass'd at Ausburg and that for the intire rooting out of Heresie he was resolved to call a Council Notwithstanding all these Declarations consisted only in words for at the bottom his mind was wholly remote from the holding of a Council in which as Guicciardine sayes he apprehended that they might contest his Papacy with him which he had purchased by canvasings and money and that they would take cognizance of the affairs of the Florentines whom he had subdu'd and subjected to the Family of the Medici by force of Arms or as the Author of the History of the Council of Trent sayes he feared lest they should beat down that excessive Authority which the See of Rome had usurped over all other Bishops and over all Churches However it were he would not have one but he would that they should make use of Fire and Sword And it was for this that he wrote about that same time to Ferdinand the Emperour's Brother exhorting him to go himself in person to Bohemia to root out Heresie there He solicited also the Emperour and the Christian Kings to joyn their Arms with those of the Duke of Savoy against the Switz Cantons who had embraced the Reformation and his Intrigues or those of his creatures were so powerful that they enflamed a bloody War between the Reformed Cantons and the others wherein the Reformed were beaten many times which afforded great matter of joy to the Court of Rome In the year 1532. the Emperour having called the Imperial Diet to Ratisbon for the affairs of Hungary and Germany threatned by the Arms of the Turks the Princes and the other States assembled seeing clearly already that the Pope and his Court sought only to elude the Council by divers pretences solicited the Emperour that he would be pleased to call one himself by his Authority and they represented to him that it was his right in the quality of Roman Emperour that other Emperours had so used it and that he was the Head and Protector of all Christianity especially in case of the negligence and refusal of the Pope The Emperour would not hearken to this Proposition and yet nevertheless being urged by the necessity of his affairs and having a War to maintain with the Turk he granted a Peace to the Protestants who were already seven Princes and four and twenty Imperial Cities This Peace was made at the Mediation of Albert Cardinal and Arch-Bishop of Mayence and Lewis Prince Palatine of the Rhine and the Emperour made his Decree publick bearing in it express prohibitions to trouble or disquiet any person for matters of Religion only till the holding of a General Free and Christian Council which he endeavoured to have called within the term of a year or in case that a Council could not be held till a General Assembly of the States of the Empire wherein they might provide for the affairs of Religion This Decree displeas'd the Pope and all his Court extreamly who would neither have a Peace nor a Council nor any Assembly of the States to treat of Religion as it evidently appeared afterwards For after that the Emperour had set the affairs of Hungary and Austria in order and had been freed from the force of Solyman he went into Italy and having urged the Pope many times upon that subject the Pope alwayes eluded the Proposition as well by the conditions which he required that the Protestants should submit themselves to well knowing that they would not agree to them as by the default of the consent of the Kings of France and England without whom he said it was to be feared that the calling of a Council would create a new Schism in the Church Thus the Papacy of Clement pass'd away who dyed the twenty fifth of September 1534. His Successor who was Paul III. followed the same path of Clement in regard of the Protestants The first step that he made was to let his Nuntio Paulus Vergerius delcare that he was resolved to call a Council but at the
readily subject Germany to the Council of the Pope and because the Pope used also all his endeavours to stir up new affairs for the Emperour on the side of Italy Moreover a division fell out in the Council for the Pope having transferr'd it from Trent to Bolognia to have it more at his ordering the greatest part of the Bishops yielded to that transferring but many also held themselves firm to Trent and would not obey it which made a great difficulty to arise when the Emperour and the Princes of Germany came to demand as they afterwards did that the Council should be re-established at Trent because those of Bolognia stood upon it as a point of honour not to go back to find those of Trent there King Francis the First dyed in this time and Henry the Eighth King of England being dead also the Reformation was quickly after received in England under the Reign of Edward the Sixth which a little disturb'd the joyes of the Court of Rome They were yet more disturb'd by the Acts of Protestation which the Emperour had made against the Assembly at Bolognia that he had treated it as an unlawful Assembly and a Conventicle insisting that they should return to Trent with threats that if the Pope continued to neglect his duty he would himself out of his own Authority provide for the disorders of the Church They were troubled also at the Interim which the same Emperour published afterwards throughout all Germany This Interim was a certain Formulary of Religion that the Emperour had made to be drawn up to be observed until the holding of a Lawful Council He establish'd therein the whole Body of the Roman Doctrine and allowed only the Marriage of Priests and Communion under both kinds But although this Formulary was neither approved by the one sort nor the other that at Rome the Pope had censured it and the Protestants look'd upon it as the greatest of all their oppressions the Emperour did not fail to use violence to the Protestants to make them receive it And this filled Germany with an infinite number of persecutions such as those that Conquerours when they cruelly abuse their prosperity as Charles the Fifth did are wont to make the vanquished suffer But while he thus satiated himself with these violences and indignities Paul the Third dyed at Rome the tenth of November 1549. The Death of this Pope was follow'd with divers Writings which wounded his Memory in the most bloody manner in the world But letting pass his Manners and the rest of his Government wherein we are not concerned I shall only say that the evils which our Fathers suffered in all places for the Cause of the Reformation during the fifteen years of his Papacy cannot be express'd For under the name of Hereticks or Lutherans they imprisoned them they banished them they deprived them of their Estates they massacred them they burned them and not to speak of our France England Scotland Flanders Holland Brabant Haynalt Artois Spain Savoy Lorrain Poland were as so many Theatres wherein there might be every day seen some of those Tragical Executions and where they spoke of nothing but the extirpation and rooting out of these Hereticks Julius the third succeeded Paul This man freely transferr'd his Council back to Trent to make all opposition between the Emperour and himself cease but in the Bull which he publish'd he declar'd that it belong'd to him to rule and guide the Council that he remitted it to be followed and continued in the same state in which it was when it was broken off and that he would send his Legates thither to preside in his place in case he could not come thither himself in person These clauses netled the Protestants so that seeing themselves press'd by the Emperour to submit themselves to the Council they freely declared to him that they could not do it otherwise than upon these conditions to wit That they should begin to treat of matters all anew without having regard to that which had been already done That their Divines should be received and have a deliberative voice That the Pope should not pretend to preside but that he should submit himself to it and in fine that he should absolve the Bishops from the Oath by which they were ty'd to him and that without that they could not hold that to be a free Council Notwithstanding this Declaration the Emperour made his Decree by which he ordain'd that they should submit themselves to the Council promising on his part that he would give Safe-Conduct to all the World to come thither and to propose there all that they should judge necessary for the good of the Church and salvation of Souls and that he would give order that all things should be treated and determined holily and Christianly according to the holy Scripture and the Doctrine of the Fathers and that the state of the Church should be reformed there and false Doctrines and Errours taken away Thus the Council of Trent was continued whither the Pope sent his Legate and two Nuntio's to preside there in his Name with orders to begin the first Session the first day of May 1555. which was yet nevertheless prorogued to the first of September following The Elector of Saxony and the Duke of Wirtemberg both Protestants with some Imperial Cities resolved to send their Deputies thither and made them demand of the Emperours Embassadour a Letter of Safe-conduct in the same form that the Council of Basil had given it to the Bohemians with an intermission till their Divines should be arrived This demand was not without some difficulty but the Question having been agitated at Rome they thought good to agree that they should have a Safe-conduct in general terms without delaying upon that account the decision of the chief matters and before the expediting of this Safe-conduct they had determined the principal Points touching the Eucharist to wit Transubstantiation the Real Presence the Adoration of the Host the Concomitance the Custom of the Feste Dieu the reservation of the Sacrament and the necessity of Auricular Confession before the Communion They agreed only with the Embassadour of the Emperour that they should delay the decision of these four Questions Whether it was necessary to salvation that all should receive the Sacrament in both kinds Whether he that received in one took less than he that received in both Whether the Church was in an Error when she ordained that the Priests only should receive in both Whether the Eucharist ought also to be given to little children Which was already a meer Fallacy as if the Protestants had nothing to propose but only about those four Questions When the Protestant Deputies were arrived they openly complained of the form of their Safe-conduct and they demanded one in the form of that of Basil to the Bohemians but they refused it They demanded that they might be heard in full Council but they would not and they obtained with great
Prejudices had some interest to leave his Readers in the ignorance of those particular matters of fact but since he and I have not the same view of things he ought not to take it ill that I supply his defect and that I lay down that which he would not In the year 306. God having given peace to the Church after the cruel persecutions of Dioclesian the people of Carthage being assembled by the direction of some neighbouring Bishops chose Cecilianus for their Bishop in the place of Mensurius who had been dead some time before and Cecilianus afterwards received his Ordination at the hands of Felix Bishop of Aprungis This Election had displeased some of that Church through their private interests so that they formed a party against him and this party having called Secundus Primate of Numidia with a great many other Bishops to the number of Seventy they made his Ordination void and ordained one Majorinus in his place Cecilianus was upheld by a great part of the Church and kept himself in his Bishoprick Majorinus was upheld also by those of his party and the Bishops of Numidia which made them set up at Carthage Altar against Altar that is to say that each Bishop set up his Assemblies apart and so the Church of Carthage was rent But this Division did not stop at Carthage for the Bishops of Africa took part some with Cecilianus and the others with Majorinus one of these was called Donatus from whose name all that Sect came in the end to be called Donatists Each party laboured to fortifie themselves by reasons the Donatists on their side at first accus'd Felix the Ordainer of Cecilianus and afterwards Cecilianus himself of having been Traditors that is to say of having delivered their Bibles to the Pagans for them to burn them during the persecutions The others on the contrary maintained that it was a false accusation of which they had neither conviction nor proof because that Cecilianus had not been heard before his condemnation and they also accused some of those who had condemn'd him of having been themselves Traditors and to have mutually absolv'd one another of that crime in a Synod which they had held The quarrel growing high the Donatists presented a Petition to the Emperour Constantine to intreat of him some Judges because that in Africa they were all divided and parties and the Emperour commissioned for that purpose Milciades Bishop of Rome Merodes Bishop of Milan Maternus Bishop of Cologne Reticus Bishop of Autun and Marinus Bishop of Arles These Judges met together with some other Bishops of Italy all in number to nineteen and having taken an exact knowledge of that business they justified Cecilianus and confirmed him in his Bishoprick nevertheless without making void either the Ordination of Majorinus or that of his Successors but the Donatists would not acquiesce in this judgement They said that Milciades had himself been a Traditor and that he defended the Traditors They had recourse again to the Emperour who ordain'd that the cause should be search'd again and determined in a Council at Arles where the Donatists having been again condemn'd they appealed to the Emperours own person and the Emperour having taken cognizance of it himself condemned them After all this the Opinionativeness of the Donatists was so great that instead of submitting themselves to so many judgements they chose rather to separate themselves from the whole Church They made therefore a General Schism with the whole Christian World and to colour it with some appearance of reason they maintained that all the world had fallen into Apostasy through the meer Communion which it had with the Traditor Cecilianus They would no more own either any Church or Christianity in the world but what was in their party and they rebaptized all those who had been baptized in the Church since the business of Cecilianus S. Augustine and the other Fathers of Africa had fairly told them that Cecilianus was innocent that though he should not have been innocent the Judges could have done no less than to have absolved him there having been no proofs against him and that though even the Judges should have judg'd wrong yet all the world could not have been guilty of that crime since the greater part of the Churches and of the persons that compos'd them had had no knowledge of that affair that though they should have had knowledge of it they could have done no otherwise than referr'd it to Judges or lastly not being willing to refer it to Judges prudence and charity would have oblig'd them to have bore with the wicked in the external communion of the Church rather than to have broken Peace and Christian Unity for personal crimes which were not communicated to them who had no part in them All these reasons did not hinder the Donatists from remaining obstinate in their conclusion which was that all the Church had lost its righteousness by the Communion which it had with Cecilianus and that there was no more any Christianity in the World except in the party of Donatus From hence it was that the Question arose between them which of the two Parties was the Church Upon this History we must make four Observations which it may be will not be impertinent in the end The first is That the Donatists would not own that Party for Orthodox which was contrary to them whom they accused neither of any Error in the Faith nor any depravation of Worship and that the Church on its side did not accuse the Donatists of any Heresie in the Faith For as for the Question of the Validity or Invalidity of the Baptism of Hereticks neither the one nor the other made that the occasion of their breach and it was not upon that that the Donatists founded their Separation We confess both one sort and the other said Cresconius one and the same Jesus Christ born dead and risen again We have one and the same Religion and the same Sacraments and there is no difference between us about the practice of Christianity S. Augustine said also That their difference was not about the head but about the body that is to say that their dispute was not about Jesus Christ our Saviour but about his Church And elsewhere That they agreed in Baptism in the Creed and in the other Sacraments of our Lord. All the pretence of this Rupture was the personal faults of two or three Bishops which were not proved on one side nor owned on the other and whereof the greatest part of the world had no knowledge So that the Dispute concerning the Church was not between two Communions that contested one with the other about the purity of Doctrine but between two Communions which mutually acknowledg'd one another to be Orthodox yet disputed one with the other the title of the quality of the Church of Jesus Christ The second Observation that I shall make is that the opposite Party to the Donatists
the bad Fish the Vessels of Gold and Silver and those of Wood and Earth and in this confus'd notion the Church is the Field the Floor the Net and the House that the holy Scripture speaks of But as this mixture which I have spoken of may be understood two wayes either in respect of Manners or in regard of Doctrines we must note in the Third place that this notion of the Mixed Church according to S. Augustine is divided into two for he would have us sometimes conceive of it as a Body wherein the righteous are only mingled with the unrighteous that is to say with the wicked whose manners are vitious and corrupted and sometimes also he would have us conceive it as a Body where the Hereticks are mixed with the truly faithful as well as the righteous with the unrighteous In the former case the mixed Church is a pure communion in respect of Doctrine but corrupted in regard of manners and in the second it is a communion not only corrupted in regard of manners but impure also and corrupted in regard of its Tenets These two sorts of mixture are without doubt in the Hypothesis of S. Augustine the first made all the ground of his dispute against the Donatists and as for the second he often explains himself in his Books and particularly in the Psalms against the Donatists where he sayes That after Jesus Christ had purged his floor by the preaching of the Cross the righteous were as the new seed which he spread abroad over all the Earth to the end they should make another harvest at the end of the world But that this harvest grew up amidst the Tares because there are Heresies every where Haec messis crescit inter zizania quia sunt haereses ubique In that same Psalm and elsewhere in divers places he quotes the Example of the Jewish Church in which he saies that the Saints the Prophets and the righteous were mixed not only with the wicked whose manners were debauched and criminal but also with the superstitious and Idolaters that which leaves no difficulty about it for Idolatry is the greatest of all Heresies We must note in the Fourth place that S. Augustine would have us consider the mixed Church in two different States For as for that which respects mens manners he sayes that sometimes the wicked do not prevail over the righteous either in number or Authority but that sometimes also they prevail in such a manner that the good are often oppress'd under their multitude and this is that which he treats particularly of in his Third Book against Parmenianus And so in regard of Heresies he means that sometimes they grow so powerful as to infect almost all the Body and this is what he expresly shews in a Letter to Vincentius a Donatist Bishop and in that which he wrote to Hesychius Thus it is that S. Augustine has conceiv'd of the Church and according to these different notions and these different states he has spoken differently of separations from it As for that which regards the truly righteous and faithful there is no question but that he thought that we ought to have not only an internal communion of charity with them founded upon the Unity that is between all the members of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ who have all but one and the same faith one and the same piety and the same righteousness but an external communion also which consists in joyning with them in the same Assemblies in partaking of the same Sacraments in approving their faith piety good works and in one word in accounting them their brethren as far as it is possible for them to know them But this is not that which makes the difficulty all the Question is concerning the mixed Church and all the dispute is to know how according to S. Augustine the Corn and the Tares that is to say the truly faithful and the Hereticks ought to remain together in the same communion and in what case they might separate themselves We must therefore note in the Fifth place that in the Doctrine of that Father there is a certain separation that a man can never make under any pretence whatsoever without being a Schismatick and that there is another that he may lawfully make and which it is sometimes necessary that he should He has distinguish'd between two external bonds that should unite us to one another the first is that of the External and General Call to Christianity the second is that of the participation of the same Sacraments and the same Assemblies It is the first bond that S. Augustine would have to be inviolable not only in regard of the faithful between themselves but also in regard of the wicked and Hereticks and not only while we suffer them to be in the publick Assemblies but even then when we excommunicate them and deprive them of the communion of the Sacraments And thus it is that he understands that which Jesus Christ said in his Parable That the Tares ought not to be pluck'd up which the Enemy had sown among the good Wheat in the same field but that he would leave both to grow together until the harvest and it is this kind of Unity whereof he sayes that there is no just necessity of ever breaking praecidendae unitatis nulla est justa necessitas it is the Unity of the same Net that enclos'd both good and bad Fish the Unity of the same Floor that contain'd both the good Seed and the Chaff the Unity of the same Field where the Tares grew up with the Wheat the Unity of the same House where there are Vessels of Wood and Earth with those of Gold and Silver and in a word this Unity that we call the external and general call to Christianity It is therefore first of all in this sense that he means that there is a Church from which we ought never to separate our selves under any pretence whatsoever and from which all those who separate themselves are Schismaticks for he understands it of that mixed Church that Field that Floor that Net that common House out of which we must never go forth nor drive out others howsoever wicked and Heretical they may be there being none but God who can make this separation and who will in effect make it at the end of the world And as it was thus that the Donatists had separated themselves so it was chiefly upon this that he convinced them of Schism for they own'd none for Christians but those of their own Party they rejected the Baptism of all the rest they looked upon them as Pagans who had no more any shadow of Christianity and when Proselytes came over to them they made them pass through all the degrees of the Catechumeni before they would receive them and they began to make them Christians anew as if they had come out of a Society of absolute Infidels as I have noted in my Fourth
shall be shaken because many in whom grace seem'd to be resplendent shall yield to the persecutors and some of the most firm among the faithful shall be troubled The Church sayes he shall not appear Ecclesia non apparebit She will not therefore have then that visible extension which the Author of the Prejudices would have to be her perpetual mark for all Ages He further acknowledges the same thing in his Epistle to Vincentius where he treats of the state of the Church under the Arians There he teaches in express terms That the Church is sometimes obscured and covered with clouds through the great number of offences that she is then only eminent in her most firm defenders while the multitude of the weak and carnal is overwhelmed with the floods of temptation That under the reign of the Arians the simple suffered themselves to be deceiv'd that others yielding through fear dissembled and in appearance consented to Arianism That indeed some of the most firm escaped the snares of those Hereticks but that they were but few in number in comparison of the rest That nevertheless some of them generously suffer'd banishment and some others lay hid here and there throughout the Earth I pray tell me what visible extension could the Orthodox communion have then which subsisted only in a small number of the firm of whom even the greatest part had suffered exile or lay hid here and there throughout all the Earth I confess that History notes that there were yet some small flocks in some places of the East and of the West who set up their Assemblies apart as at Edessa at Nazianzen at Antioch and in some Provinces of France and Germany but what was this in comparison of the Arian communion which had fill'd the Churches and held Councils as we have so often proved We must therefore seriously profess that this visible extension is a vain and deceitful mark when they would make it perpetual to the true Church as the Author of the Prejudices would make it and that no one could abuse with greater injustice the Authority of S. Augustine than he has done We must profess also that a small handful of the Faithful a little party have right to separate themselves from the whole multitude I mean from a communion spread over all the world which has on its side the Ministry the Pulpits the Councils the Schools Titles Dignities and all that retinue of temporal splendour when it has not the true Faith For the rest that which I have handled in this Chapter about the two former Propositions of the Author of the Prejudices already sufficiently lets us see the falseness of his argument For if he would take the pains to read this Chapter with never so little application he will see all these following Propositions well establish'd there 1. That in General this Author has not compris'd the true Hypothesis of S. Augustine nor the state of his dispute against the Donatists 2. That he can draw no advantage from the divers wayes in which that Father conceived the word Church 3. That the separation which that Father judg'd to be fit to be condemned and wicked under what pretence soever it should be made is wholly different from that which is between the Church of Rome and us 4. That there is not any Christian Society from which one may not lawfully separate ones self in a certain case and manner 5. That that which is disputed between the Church of Rome and us being of this number they must consider the causes and circumstances of it rightly to judge of it and not pretend to convince us of Schism without entring upon any other discussion 6. That according to the principles of S. Augustine the Church of Rome is Schismatical in respect of us supposing that she is in error because it is she that has broken Christian Unity and that we are in respect of her in a passive separation 7. That it is absurd to make that visible extension a perpetual mark of the true Church which way soever they take it 8. That this pretended mark is contrary to the experience of our Age and does not properly agree to any one of these Societies that at this day divide Christianity 9. That it is contrary to the experience of the Ages past and to the Doctrine of the Fathers 10. That it is rejected in the sense of the Author of the Prejudices by the famous Doctors of the Roman communion 11. That it has no foundation in the dispute of S. Augustine against the Donatists 12. That it is even directly opposite to the Doctrine of that Father These are the just and natural consequences that are drawn from the things which I have handled in this Chapter I will examine in the following the other Propositions of the Author of the Prejudices CHAP. V. A further Examination of the Reasoning of the Author of the Prejudices upon the subject of our Separation THe Third Proposition of the Author of the Prejudices is already sufficiently confuted by what I have said He sayes that since our Society is not visibly extended throughout all Nations therefore it cannot be the True Church But we have shewn him that we cannot at this day rationally attribute that visible extension throughout all Nations to any of the Societies that divide Christianity and by consequence that it is a chimerical mark by which we may conclude that there is no true Church in the world since there is none which is not visibly excluded from many Nations We have shewn him also that his pretended mark does not agree either with the experience of the Ages past nor with the doctrine of the Fathers nor even with that of the Doctors of the Roman Church and that instead of having any foundation in the Doctrine of S. Augustine it is evidently contrary to him So that we have nothing to do at present but to go on to the Examination of the Fourth and Fifth Proposition They bear this sense That the Calvinists urge the principle of the Donatists far higher than ever those Schismaticks did For as for them they did not say that there was any time wherein the whole Church had fallen into Apostasy and they excepted the Communion of Donatus whereas the Calvinists would have it that there have been whole Ages wherein all the Earth had generally apostatized and lost the faith and treasure of salvation That the Societies of the Berengarians the Waldenses and Albigenses c. in which he sayes that some of us include the Church could not be that Catholick Church whereof S. Augustine speaks To establish that which he layes to our Charge concerning the entire extinction of the Church he first produces the testimony of Calvin This is sayes he that which Calvin has distinctly declared in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans where after having pretended that the threatning that S. Paul uses against those who do not remain in
Rights of that Society were so inseparably joyned to those who opposed the Reformation that that Society could not subsist without them and that separating themselves out of the motives of an ill-grounded Prejudice or in giving a Just ground to others to separate themselves from them they should have carried away all that Society with them This cannot be said For among all those persons who compose the Body of the Visible Church it is certain that there are none to how high Dignities soever they may be raised and whatsoever number of them there may be that are such Essential Parts as without which the Church cannot subsist while there are two or three remaining who may assemble together in the Name of Jesus Christ For Jesus Christ himself restrained himself to that Number When two or three of you are gathered together in my Name I will be in the midst of you Jesus Christ himself alone his Truth his Gospel his Providence and his Spirit are essential to the Church without which she can never subsist but she may without the Pope without the Court of Rome without the Council of Trent without the Bishops and without the people who follow Rome and in a word without that whole Party which refused the Reformation The Christian Society does not depend on their capricious humours nor on their Temporal Interests They are not the Soul of that Body They will be Members of it while they make profession of the True Faith or at the furthest while they do not oppose it but when they shall obstinately remain in Errors incompatible with the Communion of Jesus Christ and when they shall break by unjust Anathema's the bond of that Society We may very well say that the Body of the Visible Church is Lessened but we can never say that their withdrawing leaves the Faithful under a Dispersion The better to understand this Truth we must know That although that External Society be common to the good and the bad to the truly Faithful to Hereticks and the men of the World in a word to all those who are found to be externally mingled in the Body of the Church yet in effect the Right of that Society will not to speak properly belong to any but the truly Faithful For the wicked the Hereticks and those Worldly men who fill up their Assemblies are only associated here while they remain such in dishonouring God by the Contempt they have of his word and the Indignities they offer in receiving his Sacraments Therefore God said to the wicked in Isaiah When you come to appear-before me who has required this at your hands to tread my Courts And in the Fiftieth Psalm David assures us that God has said to the wicked What hast thou to do to Read my Laws and to take my Covenant into thy Mouth Since thou hast hated instruction and hast cast my Words behind thee It is certain then that the right of the External Society resides in the Faithful only who only are the Church of Jesus Christ his Mystical body for which he dyed the Seed which he sowed with his own hand against his harvest As to the rest they are in that Communion only by Accident and are the seed of Tares which the Enemy rising at night has thrown into the Field of the Son of God and which grows with the Wheat until the Time of the Harvest and it is also only by Accident that they are suffered there to wit because most commonly their wickedness is not known or if it be their Conversion may yet be Charitably hoped for or in fine it may fall out that in going about to pull up the Tares one must also pluck up the Wheat with it But being what they are they have not any part in the rights of that Society and of those Assemblies Therefore Jesus Christ has promised his presence to none but such as shall be assembled together in his Name And Saint Austin expresly Teaches that the Power of the Keys and that of binding and loosing was given to the Church of the Just and true Believers in opposition to the wicked to Hereticks and to the men of the World that are mixt with them And it is said of that Church only so considered in that same opposition what Jesus Christ has said in the Gospel If thy Brother sin against thee tell it to the Church and if he refuse to hear the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen man and a Publican Which lets us see that he gave only the truly Faithful the Right to be in a Society for there those only have a Right to be in a Religious Society who have the power of binding and loosing and of hearing those private complaints to Judge concerning them But according to him the truly Faithful have only that power and it is only to those that Jesus Christ has given it They are then none but those to speak properly in whom the Right of being in an External Society and of making those Assemblies resides That being so laid down who sees not that when it falls out that the Body of that mixed Church is divided into divers parties about those important matters that respect either Faith or Worship or the General Rules of Manners all the Rights of that Christian Society remain in that Party which retains true Doctrine and Piety because it is on that side that the truly Just and Faithful place themselves There it is that the true Church of Jesus Christ is assembled in his Name to which he has promised his presence for as I have before said Error Superstition and Injustice give none a Right to be in a Society nor by consequence any to make those Assemblies But they will say if the Body of the Pastors be found in the other Party if External Splendor Multitude Extent Succession Authority of Councils are found there can any one forbear acknowledging it to be the Body of the Church There are seen amongst them the Pulpits Schools Churches Bishopricks Benefices Revenues Dignities and in a word all those advantages that mark out the Body of the Visible Church A Party that is in that condition cannot suffer that any should put its Rights in Question its Assemblies pass for lawful throughout all the World and the Assemblies only of the other Party are here Treated of who finding themselves spoiled of those advantages cannot be considered otherwise then as a Sect divided from the Body as a Branch separated from the Tree or as a Ray divided from the Sun according to the comparison of the Fathers I answer That those Divisions that fall out in a mixed Church may be of two sorts for sometimes they are founded only upon personal accusations or points of Discipline or light and less important Questions the Foundation of the Orthodox Doctrine and true Worship remaining intire in both Parties Of this sort were the Divisions of the Novatians the Donatists the Luciferians as it has
Assemblies most lawful For as to that which is said in the Scripture I will smite the Shepheard and the Sheep shall be scattered abroad it would be manifestly to abuse that passage if they would conclude from it an absolute necessity of the Pastors for the subsistence of that Society For that is a Prophecy which notes not that which the Faithful ought to do when they have no Pastors but that which should befal the Disciples of Jesus Christ in the Time of his Passion when the fury of the Jews and the sad Condition wherein they should behold their Divine Master should force them to be scattered which has nothing common to the Question we are now Treating of In the Third place I say that to understand well the true use and the Necessity of the Actions of the Ministry the Church must be considered in two Seasons in her first formation and in her subsistence For in her first formation it is certain that the Actions of the Ministry were necessary for the calling of men to the light of the Gospel whereof as yet they had no knowledge and by Consequence they were necessary to the Establishment of the Christian Communion or Society amongst them which could not be without that knowledge To this end Jesus Christ employed his Apostles and Evangelists Go says he and Teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and it is that to which Saint Paul has a chief regard when he says That Christ has given some Apostles and some Prophets and some Exangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the gathering together of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the Body of Christ Those glorious Heralds by the efficacy of their word accompanied with the power of Jesus Christ called together the Church if we must so say as the Holy Assembly of God they Established the Christian Religion in the World and so united men among themselves in an External Society by the profession of one and the same Faith of one and the same Hope and Charity which inspired them so that the Acts of their Ministry were absolutely necessary for that first Establishment because their Preaching was the only means that God would make use of to draw men from the Pagan Idolatry or the Jewish Obstinacy and to give them that Faith without which they could never have had a Christian Society In this respect there is Reason to urge the force of the word Church which signifies not a rash and tumultuary Assembly made by chance or Sedition but an Assembly lawfully called for it was God himself who called it by the voice of his Apostle according to the Prophecy of David The mighty Lord the Eternal God hath spoken and called to all the Earth from the rising up of the Son to the going down of the same He has called the Heavens from on high and the Earth to Judge his People saying Gather ye my Saints together In this first Establishment the Apostles and Evangelists did three things On one hand they spread abroad the Faith every where and by this means bound men in an External Communion or Society on the other hand they set together the Christian Truths which are the Objects of Faith in the Cannon of the Scriptures and in fine they established Ordinary Pastors for the upholding and Government of the Church By the first of those things in Establishing the Faith in mens hearts they assembled called them together and put them into a Society by the second they laid as I may so speak the Fountain or the External and perpetual Magazine of the Evangelical Doctrine By the Third they provided for the Ordinary Dispensation of that Fountain setling of Ministers to distribute it by their Preaching the Sacraments and the Exercise of Discipline Of these three things there is none but the first only to which we ought to refer the Convocation of the Church and Establishment of the Christian Society But we must say that all Three serve for its preservation and increase for they are so many ways and means which the Apostles left for the preservation of the Faith and strengthning of it in those who had before received it and to propagate it to their Children and in those who had not as yet received it in which the preservation of a Society consists The first contributes much for as Lights or Torches lighted all together preserve and mutually strengthen their fire and are capable of lighting others So many faithful Christians united together confirm one another in the Faith and Piety and are fit to Communicate that Faith and Piety to those who have not yet received it The Second does not contribute less for the Faithful preserve and increase their light their Faith Piety Sanctity by the immediate Reading of the Holy Scriptures Infidels themselves may be converted this way and those that go astray be brought back to the purity of the Gospel The Third is also of exceeding great Use for the Pastors by their Preaching their Direction and their Writings by their Examples by the Sacraments they Administer and in a word by all the Actions of their Ministry confirm the Faith where it is and propagate it where it is not The Divine Wisdom has so prepared its divers means for the preservation of that Society and the Propagation of his Church That if the Actions of the Ministry do not produce that effect for which they are appointed the other means shall and supply that defect In Effect when the publick Preaching and presence of the Pastors fail the Reading of the Scripture private Exhortation of the simple Christians the writings of their Pastors either dead or absent may come to succour and make the Faith and Charity and Piety subsist and by consequence the External Society of the Church and its Assemblies How then are the Actions of the Ministry necessary They are so first By Necessity of Precept as they speak I mean as it is a means that Jesus Christ has ordained the Use whereof we cannot neglect without sin Those who contemn it resist the Order that God himself has established and make themselves unworthy of his Grace and to this those passages in the Scripture refer which recommend the Pastors to the Faithful He that heareth you heareth me and he that rejecteth you rejecteth me Obey them that have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your Souls 2. The Actions of the Ministry are necessary to the Churches well being though not absolutely necessary to its being It is not absolutely impossible for a Church to subsist without having actually any Pastors not only because sometimes Faith and Piety may subsist without their heavenly food which is the Word and Sacraments as a Body may subsist sometimes without its nourishments but also because one part of that food may come to us otherwise then from the mouth of the
noted were not one and the same Church with that of the Apostles If then he can do neither the one nor the other he ought to look to it how he means that his Church should be the True Church of Jesus Christ for it is enough as to us to find our selves conformable to the Church of the Apostles since that being as we are certain that it is the same Body that God has Established upon Earth to which Jesus Christ has promised a perpetual subsistence and without which we should very difficultly know precisely how he has Executed his promise we should no ways doubt that we were the same Church which has subsisted even down to the Time of the Reformation For when we should be ignorant of the manner how it has subsisted when we should not be able to understand that we should be notwithstanding certain that it has subsisted since the word of Jesus Christ is inviolable and none can call it in question without impiety whence it follows that we are not a new Church but the same which has always abode and which was immediately before the Reformation That way which we hold to assure our selves of this Truth is not only good solid and certain but it is yet further the only one that any Communion can or ought to hold if it would be certain with a good Conscience that it was the true Church of Jesus Christ which has always subsisted and which will always subsist I would say it ought to compare it self with the Church of the Apostles to know whether it be conformable to that and as to what respects the following Ages it ought to rest assured upon the word of Jesus Christ who has said that he will be with his until the end of the World for that certainty arises from thence that being one with the Church of the Apostles it is also one with that of all the Ages following But if he will take another way and say that Communion is the same with the Church of the fifteenth or sixteenth Age therefore it is the same with that of the Apostles because that Jesus Christ has promised that his Church shall always subsist it is evidently to expose himself to Error and Illusion and to follow a very false and deceitful way of Reasoning The Reason is evident because by this means one is liable to take that for the Church in the 15 or 16 Age which it may be is not so For in that visible Body which they call the Church mixed there are two Parties the one which is properly the Church and the other which is not the one which is the Wheat that the Son of God has sown and the other which is the Tares sown by the hand of the Enemy the one which is the good seed and the other which is the chaff But it may so fall out that the Tares should exceed the Wheat and that a heap of chaff should cover the good seed and by consequence the conformity which they pretend to have with that Church might be nothing else but a conformity with the Chaff and the Tares and not with the Wheat which would be the greatest of all Illusions But if they took the former way they would be in no danger of falling into that Error because we know that in the Church of the Apostles the Wheat surmounted the Tares the good grain the Chaff and that that which appeared to their Eyes was of Jesus Christ and not of the wicked one whence it follows that they could not be deceived in taking one Unity for another This then is the way that we hold and which by the Grace of God gives us great peace of Conscience those who follow the other ought to take heed that they go not from it See here my first Answer the second is That that which regards the Essence of the Church never ought to be confounded with that which regards only its Condition The Church as I have so often already said consists only in the truly Just and Faithful and not in that confused heap of the worldly who Assemble with them under the same Ministry and who partake of the same Sacraments That therefore which makes the Essence of the Church is the True Faith Piety and Charity and it is most true that those Vertues cannot be without the true Doctrine disintangled from all those Errors which separate us from the Communion of one only God and the Mediation of one only Jesus Christ Whence it follows That the True and pure Doctrine is the Essence of the Church But it is also true that while the Foundation of the True Doctrine remains in a Communion and there is yet left there some liberty to the Minds and Consciences of men for the choice of the Objects of the Faith and Practice of the Actions of Religion how impure soever that Communion may be whatsoever Errors may be Taught there whatsoever false Worship they may practise there how corrupted soever the Publick Ministry may be there is always a means there to separate the good from the bad and to secure one's self from this in holding to the other without falling into Hypocrisy or acting against the Dictates of ones Conscience by false shews But I affirm this to be the Condition of that Visible Communion that we call the Latin Church immediately before the Reformation I acknowledge that Transubstantiation was believed there the Real presence the Sacrifice of the Mass the merit of good Works Purgatory human Satisfactions Indulgences the Monarchy of the Pope that they religiously Worshipped the Images of God there and those of the Saints that in those days they gave a Religious Worship to Reliques that they adored the Eucharist there as being the very person of Jesus Christ that they then Invocated the Saints and in a Word that they then believed and practised all that which they now believe and practise in the Church of Rome But the foundation of Christianity was as yet there and we may truly say that in that good which there was there they had light enough to reject that which was bad That Commandment alone Thou shalt Worship one only God was enough to let a good Soul know that he ought not to adore either Saints or Angels or to call upon them or render any Religious Worship to their Images and Reliques nor to take any Creature for the Object of this Devotion The Doctrine of the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ upon the Cross and that of his sitting on the Right hand of God was sufficient to make them reject those of the Sacrifice of the Mass the Real presence Transubstantiation the Adoration of the Host Haman Satisfactions Indulgences and Purgatory For it is true that the Religion then was composed of two contradictory Parties that overthrew one another those who took things on the wrong side destroyed the good by the bad for in adoring for Example the Saints and Angels they overthrew that good Doctrine Thou
any Relation to that Religion was not of the Essence of the Church but its State the mixture of Errors and Abuses with the sound Doctrine the Corruptions of Worship the Vices of the Ministry the Superstitious Ceremonies the form of Government the Religious as they speak that is to say the divers Orders of Monks the different degrees of the Hierarchy Feasts Processions Fasts and in a Word all that which has been noted in the Objection and in which that Church was then different from the Protestant All that I say belonged to the condition of the Church then and could by consequence be changed without making either the one or the other a new Church That the Faithful found themselves insensibly overpowred by almost an infinite number of the Worldly who mingled themselves with them as Tares with the Wheat That those worldly made themselves Masters of the Pulpits the Ministry the Councils that they brought in Errors Superstitions and Abuses that they changed the form of the Government of the Church and that of the Publick Worship all that does not respect the Essence of the Church which consists only in the True Faith but its Condition so that when our Fathers Reformed those things we may well say they Changed the State of the Church in their days but not that they changed the Church nor that they made a new one and their Church will not cease notwithstanding that Change to be joyned by a true Succession of Times and Persons to that which was before A Town full of Strangers who make themselves more powerful there left desolate by those popular diseases which those Strangers brought thither and filled with those disorders which they caused does not cease to be the same Town by a True Succession of Times and Persons when those Strangers should quit it and its good Citizens be established in their Just and Lawful State as heretofore Rome sackt by the Goths did not cease to be the same Rome when it was freed from them and a River swelling with the Waters of the neighbouring Brooks that make it overflow the Fields and break over its Banks is yet the same River when those Waters go back and retire into their Ordinary Channel CHAP. III. That the Ministry Exercised in the Communion of the Protestants is Lawful and that the Call of their Ministers is so also WE come now to Justify the Right that we have to the Gospel-Ministry and to defend our Call not only against the Ordinary Objections of those of the Church of Rome but also against the Accusations of the Author of the Prejudices in Particular For that Author who thinks it meritorious to go beyond others especially in his Passions is not contented meerly to say that we are Pastors without Mission and Ministers without a Call but by a heat of Zeal obstinately adhering to him he call us Thieves and Robbers Tyrants Rebells false Pastors and Sacrilegious Vsurpers of the Authority of Jesus Christ Nevertheless as those injuries are nothing else but the Effect of his ill humour it will be no hard matter to shew him that all the Conditions that we can rationally require to make a Ministry Just and Lawful are to be found in that of the Protestant Ministers and that Thanks be to God they can reproach them with nothing on that occasion This is that which I design to shew in this Chapter and to this Effect I shall first propound some Observations which I Judge necessary for the unfolding of that Question I say then in the First place That we do not here dispute about the Call that our Fathers had for a Reformation but only of that which they had and which we have after them for the Ordinary Ministry of the Gospel For we ought to take great heed least we confound as the Author of the Prejudices has done those two sorts of Calls that we acknowledge our Fathers to have had and which the Church of Rome disputes with them For That which they had to Reform themselves that is to say to reject that which we call their Errors and Superstitions that were brought into the Latin Church and that which regards the Ordinary Preaching of the word of the Gospel the Administration of the Sacraments and the Exercise of Discipline These two Calls are wholly different The one which is that of the Reformation is of Right common to all Christians there being no one who is not Lawfully called by his Baptism to destroy Errors contrary to the Nature or Purity of the true Faith and to exhort his Neighbours to do the same thing for the Interest of his own Salvation and that of the Glory of God as I have already shewn in my Second part From whence it follows That in that Respect they can have nothing to say against our Fathers and much less against those whom they call the first Reformers since being as they were in publick Offices they had more of a Call for that then was necessary The other which is that which respects the Ordinary Preaching of the Word of the Gospel the Administration of the Sacraments and the exercise of Discipline is not common to every private man On the contrary no one ought on his own head to thrust himself in without being otherwise Lawfully called The Reason of this Difference is that the Reformation consisted in the meer Acts of Faith and Charity which are those Particular Acts that none can dispence with because no one can say that it does not belong to him to be of the true Faith or to be Charitable but the Preaching of the Word the Administration of the Sacraments and the exercise of Discipline are those Acts of Authority that no one can do in his own name but in the name of another that is to say in the Name of God or in the Name of the whole Church so that he ought to be Lawfully Authoriz'd to do them It is then this latter Call that we are concerned about in this Question 2. In the Second place we must note that we do not here any more dispute about that Extraordinary Ministry which Jesus Christ himself immediately Communicated to his Apostles to give men the first Call to the Christian Faith and to Assemble them in a Society For our Fathers did not make any new Convocation nor any new Society nor any new Church as I have shewn in the Two Foregoing Chapters They did not preach a new Testament or a new Covenant differing from that which the Apostles preached They were not qualified either as new Apostles or new Prophets or new Evangelists they did not bring with them any new Revelation to the World but they Purged and Reformed the Corrupted State of Religion and the Church by the same Scriptures that the Apostles left us they laboured to Reduce things into their Antient and Natural State and for the rest they Preached the same Gopel and Administred the same Sacraments that the Apostles left and
that a people may wholly resign themselves to the Cares of a Soveraign Power to Govern them and it may be most frequently advantageous for them to do so also to avoid the Evils that arise from the thwarting of divers private Interests which may do a prejudice on the publick But in the Church or where ones Salvation is concern'd the Faithful can never without a Crime deprive themselves to give it into the hands of another of that Care that God has Commanded them to have over all the external means they may make use of for the procuring of that Salvation for howsoever their Faith and Piety does not absolutely depend upon their Pastors yet the Functions of the Ministry when they are pure and Holy are a great help to them for that and the preservation of their Faith becomes most difficult when the Ministry is corrupted The Church therefore in that respect can never be lawfully spoiled of its Rights and he who has given them to it has not given it the power to quit them nor to transport them to another As to the way of Conquest every one may see that has less place in the Church then that of Transmission For that which in the Civil Society makes the Dominion of a Conquerer to be just is that when he enters into a Society with the people which he has Conquerr'd he is not bound to repent that he made War with them nor to seek their Favour or ask their Pardon so that the Fruit of his Conquest remains with him and without renouncing it he may become the Friend of that People that is to say be their Lord and their Friend together But it is otherwise in the Church he who makes War against it cannot enter into its Society to govern it unless he repent of his having treated it as an Enemy unless he Humble himself before it unless he beg pardon of God for what he has done by consequence unless he renounce all the advantages which he could pretend to by the Right of Arms. If he does not do that he can never enter into the Church nor by Consequence have any part in its Government and if he does he has no more Ground to say that the Church should belong to him by Conquest It is Evident therefore that the Body of the Faithful can never Lawfully either deprive it self or be deprived by another of the Right that naturally belongs to it to provide for its Support and its own Government in calling Persons to the Ministry From whence it follows That that Call in order to its being just ought to proceed from the Body of the Church and that it ought not to proceed from any else There remains therefore now nothing but the third Question which is this viz. Whether the Body of the Church be always bound to confer Calls by means of its Pastors or whether in some Case the Body of the Faithful Laity may not confer them immediately To clear this point we must plainly distinguish that Call in it self I would say into that which it has of Essential and the way of its being Conferred that is to say the Formalities practised in it That which is Essential to it consists in these three Consents which I have noted that of God that of the Church and that of the Person called The way or manner of Conferring consists on one side in some preambulatory Acts without which that Call would be very Confused and Rash and these Acts are Instruction Examination Proof of Doctrine the Testimony of a good Life and a good Conversation in regard of manners and on the other side in some Solemnities or External Ceremonies that serve to render that Call more Publick Majestick and more Authentical as Fasting Prayer Exhortation Benediction and Imposition of hands As to the Essence of a Call since as I have shewn that in supposing the consent of the person called the will of God is found included in that of the whole Body of the Church and that moreover it appears that the simple Faithful whom they Term Lay-men do not cease to be joyned in a lawful Society and to make a Body of the Church although they should have no Pastors it is evident that those Faithful people are alone sufficient to make Calls Lawful When they have Pastors they ought immediately to concur with them and to make Elections in Common if it may be done without Confusion and if it cannot they ought at least to ratify by their Approbation the Elections that the Pastors shall have made and when they cannot have any without a visible danger of dispersion it is certain that they may alone and immediately by themselves confer that Call For the Call proceeds from the Society not in as much as it has Pastors but in as much as it is a Society I would say in as much as it is a Body of the Faithful United together in the Communion of Faith Piety and Justice It is that Society that naturally makes its Order it is naturally in as much as it is a Society put in trust with the will of God in that respect and the Mistress of its own Consent When then it shall have no Pastors the Call it shall Communicate will not fail to be full lawful and sufficient and to have all that which is essential to it It is as certain also that the Pastors in the True Church have not naturally any Right to concur to Calls if they are not Faithful since that if they are not Faithful they are really without that Society and that the Right of Calls in the True Church can belong only to the Truly Faithful and not to others It ought not then to be doubted that a Faithful People alone and abandoned of all its Ministers may make a Call But they will say How can it be that Lay-men should make Ecclesiastical persons and confer a power and an Authority which they have not themselves I answer That this Difficulty is null for it is true That no one can lawfully give away that which does not belong to him either de jure or de facto and it is further true that the Office of the Ministry belongs neither de facto nor de jure to any private man nor even to divers private men taken out from the Body And therefore it is that not only no private man can thrust himself into the Ministry of his own head but even that a part it self of the Society cannot Lawfully confer a Call without the consent of the other though it have the greatest number of its side So that we may say with Reason that there is the Body in comparison of the other party But I say that the Ministry belongs to the whole Society not that all the whole Body can Exercise immediately all the Acts of it of it self but that no one Body can either Preach or Administer the Sacraments but only because it is its Authority and its consent
of their Ministers says the Author of the Prejudices some Passages of Scripture that clearly give Lay-men a Right to ordain Ministers in any case That demand is but a vain wrangling for when the Scripture recommends to the Faithful the taking diligent heed to the Preservation and Confirmation of their Faith and to propagate it to their Children it gives them clearly enough by that very thing a sufficient Right to make use of all the means that are proper for that and that are naturally appointed to it But every one knows that the Ministry is one of those means whence it follows that the Obligation that the Scripture layes upon the Faithful people in that respect includes that of creating it self its Pastors when it is not possible that they should have them otherwise for that he that ordains the end ordains also by consequence the means that are naturally appointed for that end When the Scripture commands that all things be done with Order in the Church it gives by that very thing clearly enough a sufficient Right to the Church to make its Pastors when it has none and when it can have none but by that way since it is clear that Pastors belong to that Order In fine when the Scripture teaches that the Faithful people have a Right to chuse their Pastors it teaches clearly enough by that very thing that they have also a Right themselves to instal them in their Office in a case of necessity for that Call consisting much more Essentially in Election than in Installation which is but a Formality there is no reason to believe that God would have given the people a Right to have chosen their Pastors and to have made them be install'd by other Pastors and that he has not given them at the same time that of installing them themselves when it cannot be done otherwise since naturally that which we have a Right to do by another we have a Right to do by our selves As to those who were ordained by meer Priests can the Author of the Prejudices be ignorant that the Distinction of a Bishop and a Priest or Minister as if they had two differing Offices is not only a thing that they cannot prove out of the Scripture but that even contradicts the express words of the Scripture where Bishops and Priests are the names of one and the same Office from whence it follows that the Priests having by their first Institution a Right to confer Ordination that Right cannot be taken from them by meerly humane Rules Can the Author of the Prejudices be ignorant that Saint Jerome Hilary the Deacon and after them Hincmar wrote formarly touching the Unity or as they speak the Identity of a Priest and a Bishop in the beginning of the Church and about the first rise of that distinction which was afterwards made of them into two different charges Can he be ignorant that Saint Augustine himself writing to Saint Jerome refers that difference not to the first Institution of the Ministry but meerly to an Ecclesiastical use Although says he that by different Terms of honour the custom of the Church has now brought in the Episcopacy to be above the Priesthood yet Augustine is in many things beneath Jerome Can he be ignorant that some Fathers Teach us that the Ordination of a Priest and a Bishop are but one and the same Ordination and not two which distinctly shews that they are but one and the same Office And as to the right of making Ordinations can the Author of the Prejudices deny that Saint Paul speaks of the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Can he deny that the Priests did not heretofore ordain as well as the Bishops Does not Eutychius Patriarch of Alexandria relate that Saint Mark setting up Ananias to be Patriarch of that same Church of Alexandria established also twelve Priests with him to the end says he that when the See should be vacant it should be filled by one of them and that the Eleven that remain'd should lay their hands on him and bless and create the Patriarch and that afterwards they should chuse another man and make him a Priest in the place of him who should be chosen Patriarch and that by that means the number of Twelve might remain always compleat And does not Saint Jerome more Antient then Eutychius say to the same sence that at Alexandria down from Saint Mark the Evangelist unto Heraclius and Dionysius Bishops the Priests alwayes took out one from among themselves whom they set in the highest Seat and called him Bishop after the same manner says he as an Army makes an Emperour or as if the Deacons should chuse one out of themselves and call him their Arch-Deacon Does not Cassian relate the story of a certain young man named Daniel who liv'd among the Monks of Egypt about the year 420. and who was first made Deacon and in the end Priest by his Abbot called Paphnutius who was himself but a Priest Does not Baronius himself say after Anastasius that after the Death of Pope Vigilius in the year 555. Pelagius his Successor received his Ordination at the hands of two Bishops and a Priest of Ostia named Andrew Which shews that even then the Priests were not wholly excluded the Right of Ordination They were not yet absolutely so in the seventh Century since we learn from Bede's History That the Monks and Priests of the Isle of Jovan in Scotland not only ordained Priests among them but even Bishops also and that they sent them into England and that those Bishops were under their Abbot who was himself but a meer Priest It is therefore a Right that is naturally belonging to the Priests and of which they cannot be deprived by humane Constitution and Orders which cannot hinder that Right from alwayes remaining annexed to their Office and that they may not reducs it into Act when the necessity of the Church requires it In effect William Bishop of Paris has made no scruple to say according to his Hypothesis That if there were no more but three meer Priests in the World one of them must needs consecrate the other to be a Bishop and the other to be an Arch-Bishop And to speak my own Thoughts freely it seems to me that that firm opinion of the absolute necessity of Episcopacy that goes so high as to own no Church or Call or Ministry or Sacraments or Salvation in the World where there are no Episcopal Ordinations although there should be the True Faith the True Doctrine and Piety there and which would that all Religion should depend on a Formality and even on a Formality that we have shewn to be of no other than Humane Institution that Opinion I say cannot be lookt on otherwise then as the very worst character and mark of the highest Hypocricy a piece of Pharisaism throughout that strains at a Gnat when it swallows a Camel and I cannot avoid having at least a contempt of
to our Children as well as to us it ought to be given not only to us but to our Children So that without going any further I have in that respect all the Certainty that I can reasonably desire As to the second I say that the Word Baptise equally signifying in the Original Tongue to plunge and to wash and being used divers times in this latter sence as it may appear in the Translation of Mons in the seventh of Saint Mark and eleventh of Saint Luke and there being moreover nothing in the Scripture that precisely enjoins Immersion or forbids Aspersion it is my part to believe that in the Thoughts of Jesus Christ those two wayes of Baptizing are indifferent and that so much the more as I know the Spirit of the Gospel is not so nice and punctual about forms or the manners of External Actions which is proper to Superstition So that I have further for that all the Assurance that I ought to have For the third being certain as I am by the Promises of Jesus Christ that God has alwayes Preserved a True Church in the World that is to say the Truly Faithful howsoever mixt they may have been with the Worldly I am assured also that the Baptism which was Administred not only before the Reformation but since in the Latin Church and in other Christian-Societies where the Essence of Baptism remains is good because that being made in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost it is the Baptism of the True Church although it be administred by Persons filled with Errors and Superstitions Baptism is not theirs they are only the Ministers of it That Sacrament belongs to God and his Truly Faithful ones in what Quarter of the World soever they be That same Scripture that sayes That the Promise is made to us and to our Children and to all that are a far of even as many as the Lord shall call says by a necessary Consequence that the Seal of that Promise which is Baptism and all the other Rights of the Covenant of Jesus Christ belongs to us and to our Children that is to say to the Truly Faithful The Hereticks who Administer it do not do it as a good that belongs to them under that Quality for in that respect nothing belongs to them but as a good that belongs to the True Church the Dispensation whereof they have by the part which they have yet with her For they Baptise not by that which divides them from the truly Faithful but by that which after some manner Associates and unites them with them It is therefore the Baptism of the True Church which they give and not that of Heresy it is the Church that Baptises by them and in that respect they are yet as I have said the Dispensers of its goods If the Author of the Prejudices desires yet further to see a greater Number ot proofs drawn from the same Scripture that should Establish this Truth he needs but to read what Saint Augustine has wrote in his Treatise against the Epistle of Parmenio and that of Baptism against the Donatists and he will learn there not to make any more Questions of that Nature I know not for the rest whether he as well as the others of his Communion who shall take the pains to read this work will be satisfied But I dare say at least that I have done all that was possible for me to do to set before them without Offence the Truths that are most Important for them to know It belongs to them to make a serious Reflection upon that which I have represented to them and upon the present State of Christianity which the prophaneness Impiety and Debauchery of mens Minds do every day reduce into an Evident danger of ruine if we do not bring a Remedy both on the one and the other side Nevertheless instead of having in view that grand Interest upon which the Glory of God wholly depends and the Salvation of men they apply themselves only to destroy us and their Passion prevails to that height that they do not take heed of making irreparable Breaches in Religion as that is of bringing the Use and Authority of the Holy Scripture to nothing provided they can but do us any Mischief But although they should do whatsoever they pleas'd God would alwayes be a Witness on our Side that in the Foundation of the Cause that upon which we have Separated from them is the Love which we have for the Truth and the Desire that we have to Work out our own Salvation And to let them see that it is not a false Prejudice that Corrupts us let them go through all the Christian Communions that are in the world Let them Judg in cold blood and I am assured that they will come to a serious Agreement that ours is the purest Church nd the most approaching to the Primitive one Our Opinions are the Fundamental Opinions of Religion which are great Solid and Convincing our Worship has nothing that is not Evangelical for it consists in Prayers to God in Thanksgivings in Singing of Psalms in Celebration of Fasts in Humiliation in Acts of Repentance in tears and groans when we are prest with the thoughts of our Sins and the Wrath of God our Morals consist more in Exhortations in Censures in Corrections in Threatnings on Gods side in Representations of the Motives that bind us to do good Works then in unprofitable decisions of Cases of Conscience Our Government is plain remote from the Formalities of the Bar founded as much as can be upon good Reason Justice and Charity but very opposite to the Maximes of Humane Policy and especially to Ambition Covetousness and Vanity which we believe to be the Mortal Enemies of Religion Every one in the World knows that and yet notwithstanding the Author of the Prejudices and all those who with him take false lights have not fail'd to cry out against us not only after a very uncharitable but an unchristian manner As for us we shall alwayes pray to God for those who will not Love us we shall bless them that Curse us but we shall also with Gamaliel give them this Advice Take heed that in Tormenting us you do not fight against God instead of fighting with him Let us pray on both sides that he would give us his Blessing and his Peace and that he would make us to do his Will FINIS A TABLE OF THE CONTENTS of the CHAPTERS The First Part. Wherein it is shewn that our Ancestors were obliged to Examine by themselves the State of Religion and of the Church in their Days CHap. I. General Considerations upon this Controversy The Division of this Treatise Page 1. Chap. II. That the State of the Government of the Latin Church some Ages ago gave to our Fathers Prejudices of its Corruption in Doctrine and Worship sufficient to drive them more nearly to Examine their Religion Page 8. Chap. III. That
None are ignorant how they had mingled some false pieces into the true Works of the Fathers as in those of Justin Martyr of Origen of Saint Cyprian of Saint Athanasius of Saint Hilary of Saint Ambrose of Saint Chrysostome of Saint Jerome of Saint Augustin and almost generally of all the Fathers whose names they have made use of to authorise their forgeries None are ignorant what alterations they had made in the true writings of the Fathers whether by changing their words or adding to them or sometimes in cutting off considerable clauses and whole passages entire Who sees not that these ill practises which of themselves are so odious in all sorts of matters and especially in those of Religion could not but encrease the just suspitions that our Fathers had of all that which they named Tradition 14. We might make the same judgment of that visible abuse about Reliques which was brought into the Church For on the one side the devotion of the people was so hot as to that point that it could not keep it self within any measure and on the other the Cheats about them were so multiplied that even those of the weakest understandings could not behold them without being ashamed of them That prodigious quantity of the wood of the true Cross which is scattered over the World witnesses this as likewise the Slippers and Hose of Saint Joseph the Shift of the Blessed Virgin her Coifs her Fillets her Girdles her two Combs her Cloaths her Wedding-Ring the Sword wherewith Saint Michael fought with the Devil the twelve Combs of the Apostles some of the Stones wherewith Saint Steven was stoned the Skin of Saint Bartholomew the Coals that broiled Saint Laurence Aarons Rod the Bones of Abraham of Isaac and Jacob And beyond all that the multiplication of one and the same Relique which is to be found in divers places for there is nothing more ordinary then for one to see two three or four Bodies of the same Saint as of Saint Gervase Saint Protais Saint Sebastian of Saint Pretonilla Saint Anthony and some others All which being very much recommended to the People as the true objects of their Devotion not only without any certain grounds but very often with all the appearances of falsness could not but create a vast prejudice of corruption in that Church and Religion 15. Moreover when our Fathers cast their eyes upon the four chief means that God has established in his Church for the preserving of true Faith and Piety in it which are the Scriptures the publick Worship Preaching and the Sacraments and when they considered after what manner they were altered and the use of all those means almost brought to nothing it was not possible they could do otherwise than conclude that corruption whereof we dispute For as to the Scripture instead of making that the only Rule of Faith they had joyn'd Traditions with them that is to say the most uncertain thing in the World the most subject to Impostures and the most mixed with humane inventions and weaknesses Instead of recommending the reading of that Divine word to the Faithful for their Instruction and their Comfort it could scarce be found even in the hands of some Church-men And as for the Schools they knew far better how to quote Aristotle the Master of the Sentences Albertus Magnus Saint Thomas and Saint Bonaventure then the Prophets and Apostles As for the publick Service they performed it some Ages ago in a strange Tongue unknown to the people who by this means were depriv'd of that benefit which they might justly expect So that the Assemblies were become in that respect Springs stopt up for any publick edification and their little Prayers themselves the Lords Prayer and the Creed were then read almost only in Latin and the Women and Children and People seemed to know God only by the Idea that was given them of that Tongue in which notwithstanding they understood nothing As for Preaching besides that the Pulpit in the greatest part of that time was abandoned we have yet some Books of the Sermons which they made in those days as of Jacobus de Voragine of a Menot a Maillard a Barelette a Discipulus de Tempore which did no very great honour to their Age. They treat there far oftner of the Legends of the Saints then the truths of Religion and that which was yet more deplorable instead of the Word of God they Preached almost nothing else but scandalously extravagant Opinions raw Parallels of a Saint with Jesus Christ ridiculous stories pleasant buffooneries and such like things which to speak moderatly were exceedingly remote from the natural design of the Pulpit and rendred it not only despised but after a sort odious For that which respects the Sacraments not to touch on those multitudes of unprofitable ceremonies wherewith they had loaded them we must confess that that opinion of the necessity of the intention of the Priest which was so generally taught in the School and which Eugenius the Fourth had defin'd in his Instruction to the Armenians in the Council of Florence it destroy'd almost all the benefit of those sacred Mysteries and cast mens Consciences into perpetual scruples and uncertainties For unless they could establish a revelation for every particular Christian what assurance could we have that he who administers the Sacrament to us had an intention to do that which the Church enjoyns him to do or that he had not an intention contrary to that of the Church What assurance could be given that in all that long Train of Priests Bishops and Popes that is to say the Bishops of Rome who had been from the beginning of Christianity down to this present time there had not been any in whom that intention which they make so necessary to the operation of the Sacrament had been defective Yet if one only Priest that shall happen to Baptise a Pope had not had an intention to Baptize him or if he himself was not truly a Priest by the default of the intention of him who gave him Orders or him who Baptized him If one only Bishop who confers Orders on a Pope then when he is made Priest had not an intention to do what the Church pretends to do all that which would come in consequence of that default would be spoiled the Bishops that that Pope afterwards should promote would not be lawful Bishops the Priests on whom those Bishops had conferred Orders would be no lawful Priests and the Sacraments that those Priests should administer would not be lawfully administred What could our Fathers think of such a dreadful confusion which they knew not how to undo unless by supposing a perpetual Miracle Which is that God should have so over-rul'd the intention of all those men that howsoever Wicked Athestical Hypocritical or Profane they should have been yet that not one of them nevertheless should fail in having an intention to do that which the Church enjoyns But what assurance have we
of such a Miracle or what promise can we find of it in the Scripture Not to insist here that it very ill agrees with the Doctrine of those among them who make the will of man so much Lord of all his Actions that whatsoever Grace God shall manifest towards it it remains always indifferent and free to follow that Grace or to reject it It is then very certain that hitherto our Fathers could not be very much edified in the point of the Sacraments in general but they were yet far less in the matter of the Sacrament of the Eucharist in particular For if we look only on one side they were plung'd into that perplexity about the intention where they taught one another that the Transubstantiation of the Bread into the Body of Jesus Christ was the effect of that Consecration and that they were bound to Worship the Host after the words of Consecration as being Jesus Christ himself What assurance could they have of so important a change Since it also depended upon so impenetrable a secret as that of the intention of the Priest which could only be known by God alone what assurance could they have that they were not deceived What ground had they to give a supream Worship to an Object of which none could have any certainty of Faith what likelihood they should believe it to be that which it was pretended to be and that it ought to be reckoned an adorable Object What likelihood that God would have given to his Church so doubtful an object to be the object of perpetual adoration Which on one side is so visible and so determinate that one may always say Behold it but of which notwithstanding no one can be assur'd that it is that indeed Is it any ways agreeable to his goodness and his wisdom to leave the Church to be perpetually held in suspence in that inexplicable doubt and exposed to the danger of taking the Bread for the true Son of God and the Wine for his real Blood and reduc'd to the necessity of putting that adoration daily to a hazard upon the credit of one man CHAP. IV. That such a Corruption of the Latin Church as our Fathers had conceived was no ways an impossible thing THese things were well nigh the chief Objects that stroke the minds of our Fathers and cain'd them to a more strict examination of the matters of that Religion Whether those motives were weak or strong just or unjust I leave to the judgment of every rational man to determine But some may say what did your Fathers never call to mind that so ordinary Maxim and so generally receiv'd in their days That the Church could not err at least in matters relating to Faith and the general Rules of manners and if they had so call'd it to mind could they not by that very thing easily have repell'd all those importunate prejudices of corruption which you have set before us It cannot be doubted but our Fathers did often think of it but it cannot likewise be imagined that they would not have endeavoured to search a little more narrowly upon what that Maxim was founded what construction they ought to make of it if in a word that Corruption whereof they saw such great signs had been a thing absolutely impossible 1. I say then in the first place that one of the thoughts that most naturally fell into their minds upon this matter was this That the same thing which has happened almost in all human affairs might very well befall the Christian Religion in the space of about five hundred Years wherein it had been in the hands of the Romans Every one might observe it to be chang'd by the succeeding Age to be rendred so as it could not be known and to become quite another thing than it was at first according as they degenerated from their Original That inclination that men had to alter the first institutions of things to add to them or diminish from them to give to them new Forms and new Customs Reigned at least as much in our Western Parts as among other Nations It Reigned also so universally that there was nothing reserved from its Dominion either in their Languages or their Discipline or their Professions or in the Governments of the People or in their Laws or in the Distribution of Justice or in one word in any of those things that depend in any manner whatsoever on the management of men It had been then a kind of Miracle if Religion had been spared and its Truth its Worship and Customs regarded and kept with so great care that nothing should be altered in that either by additions or diminutions And we cannot say that Religion being so Heavenly and Divine a thing is also above all those accidents For it is most true that it is Divine in it self and consequently inviolable de jure and of right but there is none that sees it not in effect too often violated through the rashness of men and our Fathers were not ignorant that as perfectly holy as it was yet it was found to be as much or more exposed to the passions and disorders of the Soul of man in all other things 2. But besides that general Inclination which never fails to change things from their natural state our Fathers could not but know also that all men did very much lean towards superstitions and errours in the matters of Religion They saw the proofs of this in those Chimaera's wherewith the false Religions had filled the World Chimaera's that were yet so much the more strange as those people who believed and authorised them as the Greeks and Romans did appear as to every thing else to have minds exceedingly inlightened and refin'd which made our Fathers clearly see that blinde love that men always had for errours in the matters of Religion And without doubt that very thing carri'd them out to suspect that that pretention to Infallibility was null and vain and that there might very well be Corruptions in the State of the Church of those times for what likelihood was there that that ill inclination should have had no place among those of the Latin Church that it was wholly extinguish't beyond a possibility of returning or that the Enemy of our Salvation would not make use of it for our destruction or that having made use of it it should remain so long without any effect during the course of so many Ages 3. The example of the Church of Israel whereof the Bible teacheth us the History confirm'd our Fathers in those thoughts That was the very Church of God as well as that of the Christians That Church was purchased by the Blood of Jesus Christ as well as ours altho' that Blood had not yet been shed God not only kept his Chosen and his truly Faithful under that Ministration but he had not any other Church nor any other Ministry in all the World for the Salvation of his Children Whence it
eyes of God We may say that this confusion is the source of all their Errors and the foundation of all their Fallacies which they make on this matter We ought therefore in order to our judging aright of a Separation to represent this Distinction to our selves and to form within our selves a just Idea of it For in the first place it is without all doubt that we never ought to separate our selves from the Communion of the truly Faithful who alone are the Spouse of Jesus Christ and his Mystical Body If such a Separation should go so far as to break the Internal Bond of that Communion which consists in having the same Faith and Christian Holiness we could not make it without separating our selves at the same time from Jesus Christ himself and by consequence depriving our selves of all hopes of salvation since there is no Name under Heaven given by which men may be saved but only that of Jesus Christ If it should not go so far as to break the bond of Internal Communion but only of the External that is to say no longer to acknowledge others for our Brethren and Members of the same Body nor to frequent the same Assemblies with them this is a True Schism which offends against the Laws of Charity and which the Authors shall especially answer for before the Judgement-seat of God And such were the Schisms of the Novatians the Donatists the Luciferians and many others which were founded meerly upon personal interests or at least upon light and frivolous pretences It is further beyond doubt that we ought not to break that External Communion which it has with the worldly and profane that are mixt in a Religious Society while they make a profession of the true Faith practising a sincere Worship and submitting themselves to that Rule of Manners which the Gospel layes down to us although otherwise their Lives and Actions should very ill answer their Profession I confess that every Church well ordered ought to have its Laws for the repressing of the Vicious and leading them back to repentance and that when it cannot come to that end by the way of Exhortation and Censure it has a right absolutely to cut them off from the body of that Society But besides that those kinds of Excommunications ought never to fall upon a whole people or upon a whole multitude for fear of involving the innocent with the guilty they never ought to be used but in respect of impenitent sinners only obstinate in their crimes and publickly maintaining them For the rest we ought to agree that an exact discerning of the good and the wicked will not be made till the last day and that till then God would have us suffer that mixture without partaking with the sins of the wicked and without approving them but yet without breaking under that pretence the bond of External Communion The Reason of this conduct is that it would not be possible for one to deprive ones self of the communion of the wicked without depriving ones self at the same Time of that of many righteous as St. Augustine has very well demonstrated against the Donatists So that it would not be a sufficient reason for forsaking the communion of a Church only to alledge a general depravation of manners even when it should be true that it did reign therein But it is no less certain that when it falls out that one party of the Church considered in the second respect that is to say in as much as it is a mingled Body of good and bad should confirm it self in Errors and in practices contrary to the service of God and the salvation of men and that not only it rejects the instructions given it upon that occasion but would even force all others to have the same sentiments and to practise the same Worship the Separation of the other Party is just necessary and indispensable It is just for every where where there can be nothing else but an unjust Communion there is Justice in a Separation from it But there can be nothing else but an unjust Communion with a Party which essentially destroyes the True Worship of God which shuts up it self in Errors directly contrary to mens salvation and which through an intolerable Tyranny would constrain all those who live in it to make a Profession of the same Errors It is then just for a man to separate himself from it But I say further that that Separation is necessary and indispensable for divers Reasons The First of all is because of the visible danger whereby a man would insensibly expose himself to let his Faith be corrupted and his Worship be violated by the commerce which that same Communion would force him to In effect when a man is in those Assemblies and sees himself under one and the same Ministry with persons infected with Errors and engaged in a false Worship and who would force all others to be there too what caution soever he should use it is impossible that he should preserve himself in Purity or at least that he should not be in continual danger of corrupting himself or falling into hypocrisie in making a profession to believe that which he does not He ought therefore to separate himself Secondly He ought to do so by reason of the inevitable danger to which he would expose his children For if it should be true that Adult persons might live in communion with such a Party as I have suppos'd without being infected with its poyson or without being hypocrites which it is no wayes possible for them to do it would not be conceivable that their children could be exempted from that danger by ordinary wayes whatsoever care they should elsewhere take of their education It would be therefore to prostitute and destroy them and by consequence for a man to destroy himself for every one ought to answer before God for the salvation of his children as his own But besides these two interests which impose an indispensable necessity on him it is 3. further certain that a man could not without a crime nor even without a manifest contradiction own those for his brethren whom he believes God does not own for his children and who are not in a condition to become such A Religious Society is a Mystical Family into which to judge of it according to its natural appointment one ought to admit those only who may be charitably and rationally judg'd to be in a state of Adoption towards God and at the farthest such as are apparently in a state of Conversion or of Repentance and in regard even of these latter there ought to be some Time suspended before the giving them external pledges of that Communion till their Conversion or their Repentance appear more fully They suffer the wicked to be there when their birth or their hypocrisie have externally introduc'd them only by accident to avoid troubles and scandals And therefore it was that the Ancient Church acknowledg'd
but three sorts of persons only to be in its Communion the Faithful the Catechumeni and the Penitents but as for those who taught false Doctrine or practis'd a false Worship it never had any Union with them Not only the Ancients had no Communion with them but to shew how necessary and indispensable they judg'd a separation from them to be they went so far as to refuse their Communion with the Orthodox themselves when either by surprise or weakness or some other interest they had receiv'd Hereticks into their Communion altho' as to themselves they had kept their Faith in its Purity We find in the Life of Gregory Nazianzen that his Father who was also called Gregory and who was Bishop of Nazianzen before him having been deceiv'd by a fallacious Writing and having given his Communion to the Arians all the Monks of his Diocess with the greatest part of his Church separated themselves from him altho' they well knew that he had not changed his mind nor embraced Heresie And even the Orthodox of the Church of Rome refused to hold Communion with Pope Felix as Theodoret tells us altho' he intirely held the Creed of the Council of Nice because he held Communion with the Arians This I mention not absolutely to approve of that carriage but only to shew how far their aversion went heretofore which they had for holding Communion with Hereticks Those who are prepossess'd against all sorts of Separation in the Matters of Religion ought to remember that the obligation that lyes upon them to hold Communion with those with whom they are externally joyn'd is not without its bounds and measures We are joyn'd together under certain conditions which are principally the profession of a pure faith or at least such as is free from all damnable Errors a Worship freed from all that which is opposite to the essence of Piety in a word a Publick Ministry under which we may work out our own salvation While these conditions remain they make the Communion subsist but when they fail the Communion fails also and there is a just ground for a Separation provided we observe these necessary Cautions They cannot say in this case that we separate our selves from the Church nor that we forsake her Communion or that we break her Unity For the forsaken party being truly such as we suppose it ought not to be any more looked on as the Church of Jesus Christ but only as a party of the worldly who were before mingled with the Truly Faithful and who through their obstinacy in their Errors and false Worship had discover'd themselves and had themselves torn off the vail which as yet confounded them after a manner with the others The Orthodox in the first Ages did not in the least break the Unity of the Church when they would not hold Communion with the Valentinians the Marcionites the Montanists the Manichees and the other Heterodox of those times as I have noted already no more than those who with so much constancy and resolution refused to hold Communion with the Arrians We ought not therefore presently to condemn all kind of Separation and since there are such kinds of it as are necessary just and lawful as there are such as are unjust and rash it would be the extremity of folly to judge of all after the same manner without any difference or distinction The Roman Church her self which has sometimes cut off whole Nations as France and Germany from her Communion which may have been seen to have been so often divided into divers parties whereof one has excommunicated the other would not it may be freely suffer that we should treat of matters with this confusion So that disputing at present about our Separation with her we shall demand no unjust or unreasonable thing when we tell them that we ought to examine of what nature that Separation is to consider the reasons and wisely to weigh the circumstances for if our Fathers separated themselves upon light grounds and without having any sufficient cause if they were even under circumstances which ought to have bound them to have remained united with the other Party which was not for a Reformation we shall agree with all our hearts to condemn them but if on the contrary the reasons which they had were just sufficient and necessary if there was nothing in the circumstances of times places persons that could hinder them from doing that which they did it is certain that instead of condemning them we should bless them we should think our selves happy in following their footsteps and as for the reproaches and venomous accusations of the Author of the Prejudices and such like we should bear them with patience looking on them as the effect of a blind passion Let us therefore begin to make that Examination by the Causes of our Separation Every one knows what the matters that divide us are that they are not either Points of meer Discipline such as that for which Victor Bishop of Rome separated his Church from those of Asia who should keep the Feast of Easter on the fourteenth day of the Moon nor meerly Questions of the School which consist in nothing but terms remote from the knowledge of the Vulgar as that which they call trium Capitulorum which raised so many troubles in the Times of the Emperour Justinian and Pope Vigilius nor in meer personal interests such as we may see in the Schisms of Anti-Popes nor purely in personal Crimes or Accusations as in the Schism of the Donatists nor even in a general corruption of Manners altho' that was extreamly great in the time of our Fathers The Articles that separate us are points that according to us essentially disturb the Faith by which we are united to Jesus Christ points which essentially alter the Worship that we owe to God which essentially deprave the sources of our Justification and which corrupt both the external and internal means of our obtaining Grace and Glory In a word they are such Points as we believe to be wholly incompatible with salvation and which by consequence hinder us from being able to give it the Title or the Quality of a true Church of Jesus Christ to a Party which is obstinate in the profession and practice of them and which would force us to be so too I confess that we cannot say that our Controversies are all of that importance there are some undoubtedly which are of lesser weight and force which it was fitting for them to reform themselves in but which notwithstanding would not have given alone a just cause of Separation In this rank I place the Question of the Limbus of the Antient Fathers that of the Local Descent of Jesus Christ into Hell that of the distinction of Priests and Bishops to be of Divine Right that of the keeping of Lent and some others of that nature where there might have been seen Error and Superstition enough to be corrected but which would not have
shalt worship one only God in believing the Sacrifice of the Mass and Transubstantiation they annihilated in effect the Sacrifice of the Cross and they removed as much as in them lay Jesus Christ from the Right hand of his Father But those who took things in a good sence destroyed on the contrary the evil by the good for in adoring one only God they taught others not to pay any Religious Worship to Creatures in placing their confidence in the Death of Jesus Christ for their sakes they taught Learned to reject the Sacrifice of the Mass all humane Satisfactions and in seriously believing that Jesus Christ was in Heaven they were dis-abused about his corporal presence on the Altars In fine they could each in particular very well do what our Fathers did altogether when they Reformed themselves for their Reformation wrought nothing but what the same Doctrine which they had Taught them One only God and one only Jesus Christ made them reject all that they rejected Besides it is certain that the greatest part of those things which we believe contrary to the true Faith were then Taught and received and practised in the Latin Church more by force of Custom then any publick Authority that could impose any necessity on mens Consciences even according to the principles of the Church of Rome at this day which leaves private men liberty enough to reject them And when they should come to be even publickly determined with all the necessary formalities which they have not been yet there would always remain to every private man a natural right to examine and reject them since the Authority of Men how great soever it be can never bind the Consciences of the Faithful We do not therefore Question but that God has always preserved under that Ministry a great number of persons who have made that Separation of the good from the ill and it is in those that the Church may subsist But besides those how many simple people were there whose own simplicity and ignorance hid them from those Errors that then reigned in the Ministry They knew enough to believe in one only God the Father Son and Holy Ghost their Creator and Father and in one only Jesus Christ their Redeemer Born Crucified and raised again for them and to practice without Superstition all the Actions of Christian Piety that those Doctrines inspired into them but they did not know enough to believe the Sacrifice of the Mass Transubstantiation the real presence humane Satisfactions the merit of good Works and a multitude of other things that did not enter into them Their knowledge was bounded with the Articles of the Creed the Lords Prayer and the Ten Commandments which they received with all the submission of their hearts and which they laboured to practise the best that they could and we ought not to doubt that that knowledge alone plain and disintangled from all Error which they had furnished them with a sufficient direction for their Salvation without their being bound to make a more express rejecting of those Doctrines they did not understand But supposing that they had a knowledge of them I say that we ought carefully to distinguish two sorts of Times the one in which the falseness of a Doctrine or Worship is not so palpable discovered and open to mens Eyes that their should be only a voluntary blindness or an ill Prejudice that should hinder us from acknowledging and understanding how that Doctrine and that Worship are contrary to the True Faith and Piety and the other in which that falseness and contrariety are so openly or publickly manifested that one cannot be ignorant of them or not see them without shutting voluntarily ones Eyes For in the second of those Times every one is bound for the integrity of his Faith and Religion and the preservation of his Soul earnestly and publickly to reject those Errors to avoid them with an aversion to withdraw from those Assemblies where they are either taught or practised and not to take part how little soever or if any do they have no excuse for their crime and this is the Time wherein we are at this day But as to the former it is enough not to be corrupted with them without any absolute necessity of testifying publickly that strong aversion In the second Time they ought to look on those kinds of things as they are in Effect because they are fully discovered and they may be seen in all that have them to be opposite to the glory of God and Salvation of men But that Obligation can never be so strong in the first Time because there one has neither the same light nor the same helps nor the same easiness to own them to be such as they are not only meer natural Light dictates this Distinction but Jesus Christ himself has very well established it in the Gospel If I had not come says he and spoken unto them they had not had Sin but now they have no Cloak for their Sin which evidently establishes those two seasons I spoke of the one wherein the Manifestation of good and evil is not yet so throughly made that one can acknowledge them in their greatest Latitude and the other wherein it is so that one cannot without a crime know it confusedly But I say that before the Reformation they were in that first Time in regard of that which we call the Errors and Superstitions of the Church of Rome they were neither so well Examined nor so clearly discovered as they have been since the Faithful then could not openly believe and practise them for that could not be done according to us in any Time without destroying the true Faith and Piety but they could look upon them with a greater indifference bear them with far less Pain nor cease for all that from frequenting their Assemblies from holding their peace and contenting themselves with keeping their own Righteousness See here after what manner we believe that the Essence of the Church was preserved before the Reformation How corrupted soever the Ministry was the Foundation of Christianity remained there and God had yet his remnant there according to the Election of Grace that is to say his Truly Faithful It was those alone in all that great mixt body who were the Church for they only were in Communion with God and his Son they alone enjoyed the benefits of the Gospel Covenant to them only how small a number soever they were pertained all the Rights and advantages of the Church of the External Society of Assemblies of the Ministry of the Holy Scriptures of the Sacraments Government and Discipline according to the inviolable Maxim of Saint Paul All things are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the World or Life or Death or things present or things to come all are yours and ye are Christs and Christ is Gods All the rest then which were without in that mixed Body which they Call the Latin Church and which had