visible p. 63 64. Rome not always the principal Seat of the Church p. 63. Avignon was for 70 Years where the Pope and the whole Court recided ibid. Several Popes Hereticks p. 64. Two Popes at once contending for the Chair and this for above 40 Years together and at one time 3 Popes p. 64. The Church of Rome compared with it self in reference to several Doctrines p. 65. What the Church of Rome now holds and what the Church of Rome hath held ibid. Her being the mother-Mother-Church and the Pope being Christ's Vicar ibid. Concerning the Apocryphal Books ibid. Scripture and Tradition p. 66. Scripture in unknown Tongues ibid. Merit p. 67. Indulgences ibid. Purgatory p. 68. Prayers in an unknown Tongue ibid. Praying to Saints p. 68 69. Image-worship p. 69. Sacraments the Number of them ibid. Transubstantiation p. 70. Communion in one kind ibid. Solitary Masses p. 70 71. Auricular Confession p. 71. Extream Vnction ibid. Priests Marriage ibid. In all these Particulars Rome is not now what it hath been The Fourth Note Amplitude or Multitude and Variety of Believers THE Scriptures first gave us the Notion of a Church p. 73. A true Christian Church professes the true Christian Faith. p. 74. Instead of this the Church of Rome have invented several Notes and Characters of a Church which are not to be met with or are not plainly delivered in Scripture ibid. Of which this Amplitude or Multitude c. is one ibid. What Bellarmine understands by this Note p. 75. In Answer to him I. It is shewed this cannot be a Note of the true Church ibid. 1. Whether you consider the Members thereof under either the Notion of a great Multitude or 2. a great Multitude of Believers ibid. Satan's Kingdom more numerous than the Kingdom of Christ. ibid. The Worshippers of Mahomet exceed the Members of Christ's true Church in number since the Romanists make themselves the only Catholicks p. 76. The Kingdom of Christ not to be distinguished from the Kingdom of Antichrist by this Note ibid. This Note therefore no true Character of a Church p. 77. The several Places of Scripture whence Bellarmine pretends he fetches this Note of his ibid. This is so far from being a Note of the Church that it is no more than the variable State and Condition of it p. 78. This acknowledged by the Cardinal himself in his Explication of this Note ibid. The present State of the Church not to be compared with what it shall be before the End of the World. p. 79. Many plain Prophecies brought for the Proof of this ibid. The Cardinal's Citation of Vincentius Lirinensis for the confirming this Note considered p. 80 81. II. Supposing this to be a true Note of the Catholick Church it doth not advantage the Church of Rome as to that her pretention of being the true Catholick Church ibid. 82 to 85. III. Supposing again this Note to be true it doth the Reformed Churches a very great Service in demonstrating them to be true Parts of the Catholick Church p. 85. This demonstrated by two Arguments p. 86 87. 1. That in the first Ages of Christianity the Catholick Church then was more ours than now it is the Romanists p. 86. That there is a great Agreement between the antient Church of Rome and the present Church of England ibid. This is evident by comparing the Doctrine and Worship of each together ibid. 2. That upon computation the Churches subject to the Roman See exceed not the Reformed Churches in Amplitude or Multitude of Members p. 87 to 91. The Conclusion p. 92. The Fifth Note Succession of BISHOPS IN Examination of this Note Three Things are inquired into I. How far this Note may be necessary to any Church p. 94. True and Lawful Pastors necessary to the Constitution of the Church and this Pastoral Power Originally from Christ ibid. Power of Ordination entrusted with Bishops the chief Governors of the Church and ordinary Successors of the Apostles p. 94 95. The Government of the Church of England by Bishops and its Succession not interrupted in the Reformation ibid. 1. Obs Tho Succession of Bishops be necessary to the compleat constitution of a Church yet it may be doubted whether it is indispensable to the very being of it so as to unchurch every place that wants these 2. Obs It is not necessary for every Church which firmly presumes upon this Lawful and Orderly Succession even from the Apostles should be able to produce the Records of its conveyance thro' every Age and in every single Person by whom it hath past p. 95. The Antients contented themselves in delivering down to us the Succession of Bishops in the greater Sees and Mother-Cities As of Rome Alexandria Antioch Jerusalem c. ibid. 3. Obs Some irregularities and uncanonical proceedings in times of great Schisms or publick Disturbance have been interpreted for no interruption of this Authentical Succession p. 97. II. How far the Succession of Bishops may be granted to the Church of Rome p. 98. Little left upon Record of many of the first Bishops in the Church of Rome excepting their bare Names ibid. If Heresie breaks the Succession this is chargeable upon the Church of Rome p. 99. If Schismatical Intrusions can dissolve the order of Succession this chargeable likewise on the Bishops of that Church viz. Felix the 2. and Vigilius ibid. 1. The Case of the Roman Succession extreamly changed since the first time p. 101. No Supremacy to be found in the Church of Rome for more than the first 500 Years p. 101 102. 2. The Church of Rome not very favourable to the Order of Bishops ibid. The Divine Right of Episcopacy disputed in the Council of Trent ibid. 3. Their Catechism makes this no distinct Order but only a different degree of the same Priesthood p. 103. III. How insufficient a proof this will afford them of any great advantage ibid. 1. Succession is no sufficient evidence of the Truth of the Doctrine of any Church p. 104 105. 2. An unintterrupted Succession of Bishops is no warrantable ground of the Claim of Superiority over another Church which hath not so clear evidences thereof p. 105 106. The Cardinals Testimonies out of St. Augustine Irenaeus Tertullian and Epiphanius examined p. 107 108. His Inference from these citations about Succession considered p. 109 110. The Conclusion The Sixth Note Agreement in Doctrine with the Primitive Church THis is acknowledged a True Mark of a Church p. 113. The Infallibility of the present Church is to be laid aside till it be first known whether it agrees with the Primitive Church or not p. 114. The True Chuch only to be discovered by the True Faith. p. 115. Those matters of Faith in Controversie betwixt us are to be determined by the Doctrines and Practices of the Primitive Church p. 116. The Church of Rome waving Particular Controversies that may be made plain and evident to most capacities delights rather to run out into General Controversies
meant by it p. 234. 2. Holiness of Mind and Manners What understood by it ibid. II. Neither of these kinds of Holiness can be properly called a Note of the True Church ibid. Not the first because it appertains to its Essence and Constitution shews what a Church is and belongs to every Church whether Greek Abyssine Roman or English p. 235. Not the Second kind and that for Three Reasons 1. Because of that general admission of men of all Nations and Conditions upon their profession of the common Christianity into the bosome of the Christian Church p. 236. 2. Because many men live sometimes with more and sometimes with less Morality p. 237. 3. Because a man must first understand the Nature and Doctrine of the Christian Church or he cannot know what Sanctity is and what that is in the Life of any man which he is to take for the Holiness of a Christian p. 238. III. If Holiness of Life were a Note of the true Church the Roman Church would not from this concession derive any great advantage p. 239. Other Churches as famous as that of Rome for their Faith and manners ibid. In latter Ages the goodness of Morals in several of that Communion to be ascribed not so much to Popery as its cause but to those Principles that are common to all Christians p. 240. The Reformation not free from bad Men tho this proceeds from the Men not from the Cause ibid. Luther herein misrepresented by Bellarmine and others p. 241. Great complaints of Corruptions in the Romists Writers in the Latin Church p. 242. Many in the Romish Church Infamous for their Impieties p. 243. Reflections on Pope Gregory the Great who is said to be the last of the good and the first of the bad p. 244. On Pope John the XII p. 245. On St. Dominick ibid. On the Austerities and Mortifications of their several Orders p. 246. Many things in the Roman Church which by helping forward an ill life do in part deface this mark of Sanctity p. 248. The Eleventh Note The Glory of Miracles BEllarmins Explication of this Note and the grounds upon which he builds it p. 250. In answer to this Three things are laid down I. That meer Miracles withou any other consideration are not a sufficient Note of any Church or Religion whatever p. 252. The Miracles of the Primitive Church compared with those that are more peculiarly appropriated to the Church of Rome p. 253. The several Circumstances considered which recommend the Primitive Miracles viz. 1. That they were highly beneficial to Human Nature p. 254. The Miracles of the Church of Rome very many of them defective herein p. 255. 2. The Primitive Miracles of great importance and significancy and the design of them plainly laid down before-hand in the Prophecies of the V. T. p. 256. This applied to those of the Church of Rome p. 257. Miracles in the most comprehensive sense of the Word are no proof of the Truth and Divinity of that Doctrine they would advance p. 258. This Instanced in those of Jannes and Jambres and of Apollonius Tyaneus p. 259. Photius his Censure of those of Apollonius Tyaneus p. 260. Miracles whether supposed in a Heathen or a Heretick not acknowledged by the Fathers to be a good proof that either of them are in the right p. 261. This apparent from St. Origen ibid. St. Cyprian ib. St. Irenaeus p. 162. St. Austin p. 263. II. Miracles of the Church of Rome no proof or confirmation of those Doctrines Practices wherein the Reformed Church differs from them p. 264. Here three Things are considered 1. That there is no ground throughout the whole Scriptures to expect any Miracle for the Confirmation of any particular Doctrine whatever p. 265. This evident from the Mosaic dispensation ibid. The Christian Institution p. 266. The following Ages of the Church ibid. 2. Many of those Doctrines for which these Miracles are alledged are so far from being asserted or warranted in the Holy Scriptures that they are rather contrary to them ibid. This Instanced in Transubstantiation p. 266 267. Adoration of the Host p. 266 267. Worshipping of Images p. 266 267. Praying to Saints departed p. 266 267. Purgatory c. p. 266 267. Miracles for the advance or support of those Doctrines justly suspected p. 268. 3. No ground of certainty as to matter of Fact of most of those miracles which the Romanists make the Glory of their Church p. 269. The Story of the Bones of Babylas considered ibid. Those of Gâ—rvatius and Proatsius revealed by Vision to St. Ambrose reflected on p. 270. The fabulous Stories of later Ages amongst them condemned by several Writers of the Church of Rome p. 271. 1 Persons St. Bernard reflected on p. 273. St. John Damascen p. 274. Some Miracles wrought in confirmation of Transubstantiation considered p. 273 c. III. We of the Reformed Religion as we do not pretend to the Working of Miracles in our Age so if we did we could pretend to prove nothing by them but what hath been already sufficiently proved by the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles p. 280. The Twelfth Note The Light of Prophecy TWO Things to be understood by the Light of Prophecy 1. That Divine Revelation whereby a man is enabled to foretel such or such contingent Events will come to pass p. 285. 2. Or the Testimony that is given by the fulfilling of Prophecies to some Doctrine that was designed to be confirmed by it p. 286. In the latter sense it may be admitted as a mark or rather an Argument of that Doctrine the Profession whereof makes the Church p. 287. Great caution must be used in laying down the fulfilling the Predictions as an Argument to prove the Truth of Christianity ibid. Two Things here Examined I. Whether this be a Note of the Church The Cardinal offers three Arguments to prove it p. 288. The first of them disproved and the Prophecy of Joel applied by St. Peter Acts 2.16 to the Church explained and vindicated p. 289. His second Argument that none knows future Contingences but God only considered p. 290. His third Argument from the 18th of Deut. examined and overthrown p. 291. The foretelling of a future contingent Event no certain Note of true Doctrine ibid. There have been true Prophecies among Heathens the famous Acrostic of the Sybilla Erythroea the Books of Hystaspes the prediction of Balaam which shew the gift of Prophecy not to be confined within the Communion of the Church p. 292 293. Light of Prophecy no Note of the Church because separable from it there having been true Prophecy out of the Church and because it hath not alwayes continued in the Church p. 294. II. If it was a Note the Cardinal hath not sufficiently proved it belongs to his Church and no others p. 295. His Instance of Agabus and the Old Prophets may serve any Christian Church as well if not better than his ibid. His Instance of Gregory Thaumat Bishop
omitting Personal Contests but inserting whatsoever concerns the common Cause of Protestants or defends the Church of England with an exact Table of Contents and an Addition of some genuine Pieces of Mr. Chillingworth's never before Printed viz. against the Infallibility of the Roman Church Transubstantiation Tradition c. And an Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist with his Confutation of the said Motives An Historical Treatise written by an AUTHOR of the Communion of the CHVRCH of ROME touching TRANSVBSTANTIATION Wherein is made appear That according to the Principles of THAT CHVRCH This Doctrine cannot be an Article of Faith. 40. The Protestant's Companion Or an Impartial Survey and Comparison of the Protestant Religion as by Law established with the main Doctrines of Popery Wherein is shewed that Popery is contrary to Scripture Primitive Fathers and Councils and that proved from Holy Writ the Writings of the Ancient Fathers for several hundred Years and the Confession of the most Learned Papists themselves 40. The Pillar and Ground of Truth A Treatise shewing that the Roman Church falsly claims to be That Church and the Pillar of That Truth mentioned by S. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothy Chap. 3. Vers 15. 4o. The Peoples Right to read the Holy Scripture Asserted 4o. A Short Summary of the principal Controversies between the Church of England and the Church of Rome being a Vindication of several Protestant Doctrines in Answer to a Late Pamphlet Intituled Protestancy destitute of Scripture Proofs 4o. An Answer to a Late Pamphlet Intituled The Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England concerning one Special Branch of the King's Prerogative viz. In dispensing with the Penal Laws 4o. A Discourse of the Holy Eucharist in the two great Points of the Real Presence and the Adoration of the Host in Answer to the Two Discourses lately Printed at Oxford on this Subject To which is perfixed a Large Historical Preface relating to the same Argument Two Discourses Of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead The Fifteen Notes of the Church as laid down by Cardinal Bellarmin examined and confuted 4o. With a Table of the Contents Preparation for Death Being a Letter sent to a young Gentlewoman in France in a dangerous Distemper of which she died By W. W. 12o. The Difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in opposition to a late Book Intituled An Agreement between the Church of England and Church of Rome A PRIVATE PRAYER to be used in Difficult Times A True Account of a Conference held about Religion at London Sept. 29 1687 between A. Pulton Jesuit and Tho. Tenison D. D. as also of that which led to it and followed after it 4o. The Vindication of A. Cressener Schoolmaster in Long-Acre from the Aspersions of A. Pulton Jesuit Schoolmaster in the Savoy together with some Account of his Discourse with Mr. Meredith A Discourse shewing that Protestants are on the safer Side notwithstanding the uncharitable Judgment of their Adversaries and that Their Religion is the surest Way to Heaven 4o. Six Conferences concerning the Eucharist wherein is shewed that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation overthrows the Proofs of Christian Religion A Discourse concerning the pretended Sacrament of Extreme Vnction with an account of the Occasions and Beginnings of it in the Western Church In Three Parts With a Letter to the Vindicator of the Bishop of Condom The Pamphlet entituled Speculum Ecclesiasticum or an Ecclesiastical Prospective-Glass considered in its False Reasonings and Quotations There are added by way of Preface two further Answers the First to the Defender of the Speculum the Second to the Half-sheet against the Six Conferences A Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the new Exceptions of Mons de Meaux late Bishop of Condom and his Vindicator The FIRST PART In which the Account that has been given of the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition is fully Vindicated the Distinction of Old and New Popery Historically asserted and the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in Point of Image-worship more particularly considered 40. The Incurable Scepticism of the Church of Rome By the Author of the Six Conferences concerning the Eucharist 40. Mr. Pulton Considered in his Sincerity Reasonings Authorities Or a Just Answer to what he hath hitherto Published in his True Account his True and full Account of a Conference c. His Remarks and in them his pretended Confutation of what he calls Dr. T 's Rule of Faith. By Tho. Tenison D. D. A Full View of the Doctrines and Practices of the Antient Church relating to the Eucharist wholly different from those of the Present Roman Church and inconsistent with the belief of Transubstantiation Being a sufficient Confutation of CONSENSVS VETERVM NVBES TESTIVM and other Late Collections of the Fathers pretending to the Contrary 40. A BRIEF DISCOURSE Concerning the NOTES OF THE CHURCH With some REFLECTIONS on Cardinal BELLARMIN's Notes LICENSED April 6. 1687. JO. BATTELY LONDON Printed for Ric. Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVII PAge 11. l. 15. for Character r. Charter and p. 14. l. 8. r. Charter p. 16. l. 12. after Ancient and Apostolick Church add Which is the same with his second Note concerning Antiquity which must refer to the Antiquity of its Doctrine for an Ancient Church tho founded many years since if it have innovated in Doctrine cannot plead Antiquity and a Church founded but yesterday which professes the Ancient Faith may p. 18. l. 6. f. first r. fifth p. 22. l. 14. f. now r. more A BRIEF DISCOURSE Concerning the Notes of the CHURCH c. IF Cardinal Bellarmin had not told us That this is a most profitable Controversie Controv. T. 2. L. 4 de Notis Ecclesiae I should very much have wondered at that pains which he and so many other of their great Divines have taken to find out the Notes of the Church For is not the Catholick Church visible And if we can see which is this Church what need we guess at it by marks and signs and that by such marks and signs too as are matter of dispute themselves Cannot we distinguish between the Christian Church and a Turkish Mosque or Jewish Synagogue or Pagan Temple Cannot we without all this ado distinguish a Christian from a Turk or a Jew or a Pagan And it will be as easie to find out a Christian Church as it is to find out Christians for a Christian Church is nothing else but a Society of Christians united under Christian Pastors for the Worship of Christ and where ever we find such a Society as this there is a Christian Church and all such particular or National Churches all the World over make up the whole Christian Church or the Universal Church of Christ But this will not do the Cardinal's business Though the Christian Church is visible enough yet not such a Church as he
next to the Bishop of Rome because that was New Rome †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Constantinop Can. 3. so that it was the Imperial City of Rome which gave the Honour of being the first Bishop in the Church and not a Divine Institution or a Succession from St. Peter and when Constantinople by the Emperor's removing thither became the next great City the Bishop partook of the Honour of the City And in the Fourth General Council at Calcedon had for that Reason equal Priviledges conferred upon him with the Bishop of Old Rome ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Calced Can. 28. as the Fathers expresly declare To which I shall add the famous Case of Appeals which was challenged about the Year 418 by Pope Zosimus over the African Church not by Divine Right but by a pretended Ecclesiastical Canon which was found afterwards to be forged and the Power of the Church of Rome to receive Appeals or to judg the Causes of other Churches was fully disowned and disclaimed * Concil Carthag 6. And this with the Exemption of the Churches of Milan Ravenna and Aquileia from the Jurisdiction of the Church of Rome tho they were so near Neighbours to it even in Italy it self is enough to give full Satisfaction to any reasonable Man what a different Opinion the Primitive Church had of the Church of Rome from what it now has of it self concerning an Universal Supremacy and of its being the Mother and Mistress of all Churches The next most peculiar Doctrine of Popery is Transubsiantiation which as it was formerly owned by Valentia (a) De Transub l. 2. c. 7. and Cusanus (b) Exercit. l. 6. Ser. 40. and a great many of the School-men Scotus Durandus and others (c) Vid. Pref. ad Johan Major not to have been the Doctrine of the Primitive Church so it has been lately proved at large by one of their own Communion (d) A Treatise written by an Author of the Church of Rome touching Transubstantiation tho if for that reason it may be thrown out from being an Article of Faith by the Members of the Roman Church they will leave but very few proper to themselves according to the Principle of that Gentleman to wit the making not the present but the Primitive Church a Rule of their Faith which if they will universally follow it will lead them quite out of the Roman Church as well as out of that single Error of it we have such excellent Treatises of late * See Discourse of Transubstantiation Transubstantiation no Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers The Doctrine of the Trinity and Transubstantiation compared 1. par about this which prove it beyond all Exception and beyond all Answer to be no Doctrine of the Primitive Church that I shall add nothing about it but only these two Observations First That it appears not by any Liturgy or Eucharistick Form that was ever used by the Church no not by the Roman Canon it self which is much ancienter than this Doctrine and therefore not so conformed to it That the Church ever used any Prayer to this purpose at the Eucharist that the Substance of the Sacramental Elements should be changed or done away and the Flesh and Blood of Christ substituted instead of them under the Species or Accidents but only that they might be made the Body and Blood of Christ by the Spirits coming down upon them so that it was only a Spiritual and Sacramental not a Substantial Change of them that was ever prayed for or ever believed for if the Church had always had this Faith it would surely have sometimes prayed in it Secondly I observe that in those Times when this Doctrine came first into the Church which was a little before Berengarius it was so new and raw that it was not fully digested nor perfectly understood even by those who then held it as appears by that blundering Recantation which was drawn up for him after the Examination of no less than three Popes and five Synods wherein he is made to say That after Consecration the true Body and Blood of Christ is not only Sacramentally but sensibly and truly handled and broke by the Hands of the Priests and ground by the Teeth of the Faithful †Post Consecrationem verum Corpus Sanguinem Christi sensualitèr non solùm Sacramento sed veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Grat. de Consec dist 2. cap. This sensible and true handling and breaking and grinding Christ's Body is so strange and dreadful a thing that the Glossator observes this upon it That unless you do understand these Word of Berengarius in a sound sense * Nisi sanè intelligas verba Berengarii in majorem incidas haeresin quam ipse babuit Glos Ib. that is contrary to what the Words signify and mean you will fall into a greater Heresy than that of Berengarius himself by which it appears that this Monster of Transubstantiation as a great Man ‖ Perrone See the excellent Preface to a Discourse on the Holy Eucharist in two great points of their own afterwards calls it was so unformed and mishapen a thing at that time that it was a sign it was then but new come into the World and had need of being farther licked into a better shape If Transubstantiation were then but new those other Doctrines which have issued from it and are its proper Production could not be old such as Adoration of the Sacrament Communion in one kind Solitary Masses and the Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass And therefore I shall not say any thing of them since their Date will be owned to be as late as that of Transubstantiation and tho they may not follow from it yet they cannot be maintained or believed without it so that what has been said against the one takes away the very Foundation of the other As to the Number of the Sacraments tho the Council of Trent has declared this to be exactly Seven and made it an Article of Faith to believe so yet no Man sure will have the confidence to say That this Number was determined by the Primitive Church when they can bring no Author who makes any mention of such a Number till 1100 Years after Christ and Bellarmin thinks it unreasonable we should require them to shew this either in the Scriptures or the Fathers †Non debere adversarios petere ut ostendamus in Scripturis au◠Patribus nomen Septenacii numeri Sacramentorum Bellar. de effect Sacram. l. 2. c. 24. tho if it be an Article of Faith which must be believed upon pain of Damnation there ought to be something to shew for it one would think out of one of them Was the Necessity of Auricular Confession a Doctrine of the Primitive Church when in the time of Peter Lombard he tells us * In his enim etiam docti
69. which I presume is the best that his Friend Bellarmine could direct him to and which hath nothing further in it than a pretty high Flight which several of the Fathers would take when they mention the Holy Sacrament and what may be well enough defended by those that reject Transubstantiation to the uttermost The Cardinal gives us another Miracle from Paschasius de Corpore Dom. c. 14. which our late learned Reasoner is very fond of too ‖ Consens Veterum p. 97. The Story is of a certain Godly Priest that was in great dis-tress to see with his bodily Eyes the Shape of him whom he certainly believ'd actually present under the Species of Bread and Wine At length he obtain'd what he so long desir'd and beheld the Body of Christ in Human Shape but in the Figure of a Child which he had also most vehemently desired Now as to this beside the Authority of the Book out of which this is taken let us consider to what purpose this Miracle was wrought or the Story of it told in this place The Cardinal is upon the Proof of Christ's Bodily Presence in the Sacrament and this Bodily Presence is so receiv'd by those of the Roman Communion that they believe that very Body which was slain upon the Cross was buried was rais'd again and went up into Heaven that that very numerical Body is substantially and intirely under the Species of Bread and Wine the Substance of which is perfectly vanish'd Let me therefore ask Mr. Sclater of Putney because his Friend the Cardinal cannot now answer for himself Did our Blessed Saviour die an Infant and rise again an Infant and does he now sit at the Right Hand of God in the Figure of a Child or in his Infant-state If not and I hope he will say it is blasphemous to think so how then did this Godly Presbyter see the Body of Christ as he supposed it transubstantiated under the Species of Bread and Wine The Substance of the Bread and Wine was gone into that Body that had been crucified What! was there Transubstantiation upon Transubstantiation and the proper Body of our Saviour gone into the Substance of a Child's Body It may be this made him in love with those Liturgies he quotes †Consens Veterum p. 28. wherein the Priest is blessing God for vouchsafing by him to change the immaculate Body of Christ and his precious Blood c. To change it into what perhaps from that of a grown Man to that of a Child or Infant Well but the Cardinal is something more wary in the Story than the venturesom Gentleman of Putney For he tells us the Priest had desir'd to see him in this Shape If so and if he was thus far indulg'd what kind of Argument is this for Transubstantiation What Conviction is this that the very self-same Body that hung upon the Cross and is at the right Hand of God is brought down under the Species of Bread and Wine But the Author adds in Bellarmin That it pleaseth God to work Miracles upon a twofold account sometimes to confirm the doubting and sometimes for the Consolation of those that fervently love him * Bellarm. de Saer Euchar. ubi supr This we are to suppose then was not to confirm the Godly Priest in his Faith he needed not that but to give him great Consolation But what Are we to suppose so Godly a Presbyter as this was to be more ravish'd in the view of his Saviour under the shape of a smiling playing Babe than in that very Form wherein he finish'd the great work of our Salvation upon the Cross and wherein he is now triumphing Above in the Accomplishment of what he undertook Let him believe it that can make the Doctrine of Transubstantiation the Reason of his Conversion from the Church of England to that of Rome and can strengthen his Faith in it more firmly from some Rabbinical Prophecies and such a Story as this is †Consensus Veter p. 21 22. and so on and p. 97. I would have examined a Third Story of St. Anthony of Padua but I find this done so learnedly and so effectually to my Hands by a most ingenious Pen (a) Reflections on the Rom. Devotions p. 326 327 c. that I had rather refer the Reader thither than needlesly swell the bulk of this Note Considering therefore how little likelihood of Truth there is in many Stories of this kind or where as to matter of Fact some of them may have been possibly true yet how reasonably they may be accounted the Tricks and Impostures of Evil Spirits I cannot but close this Head with an Expression of St. Austin to the Donatists upon the same Pretensions they had to Miracles August de Vnitate Eccles c. 16. Removentur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominum vel portenta fallacium spirituum Away with these either Fictions of Lying Men or Illusions of deceiving Spirits For certainly they are neither the Note nor can be the Glory of any true Church And therefore III. Lastly We of the Reform'd Religion as we do not pretend to the working of Miracles in our Age so if we did we could pretend to prove nothing by them but what hath been already sufficiently prov'd by the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles We most humbly and thankfully adore the great Condescentions of Divine Grace that hath been pleas'd in his first planting of Christianity so fully and so unquestionably to confirm all the necessary Articles of our Belief with such strong and convincing Miracles The Report of these Miracles we most firmly believe We do without the least haesitancy own the Almighty Power of God in them and entirely embrace all that Faith which they were design'd to confirm and establish We know of no other Doctrines that we have any Obligation to receive than what are deliver'd to us in the Holy Scriptures and so effectually seal'd to us We have nothing new to put off or back with the pretence of Miracles but are always ready to reject both the Doctrines when they are propos'd and the Miracles when they are offer'd in Defence of them We have no need to follow cunningly devis'd Fables since we have a more sure Word of Prophecy to which by God's Grace we will take heed And therefore all Miracles at this time of the Day are superfluous to us for if the Doctrine be not propos'd to us before-hand in the written Word ten thousand Miracles could not warrant it if it be to be found there they may save the trouble of a Miracle because that Word of God hath been sufficiently confirm'd in that Way already This Word of God is the sure Rule of our Faith the great Character of our Hopes and if the hearty Belief of this and humble Conformity of Life to it will not secure us at last we are contented to lose all the Rewards which this Gospel hath made us to expect And therefore
this Testimony of Pliny Tertullian tells us that the Heathens would not hear the Cause of Christians whom they knew to be guiltless but condemned it at all Adventures and that the best Emperors favoured Christianity and that 't was persecuted by the worst All this however it may serve the common Christianity does not make for the purpose for which the Cardinal does produce it The same may be said as to what he mentions of the Efficacy of the Prayers of the Christian Souldiers from the Epistle of M. Aurelius and if St. Antony St. Hilarion and St. Martin were reverenced by the Pagans I do not so much as imagine what Service this will be to the Cause the Cardinal hath undertaken to defend or what Prejudice 't will be to ours So that hitherto here is nothing said to the purpose in hand nothing said but what the Protestants may as well apply to themselves as the Church of Rome His next Set of Witnesses are Jews if we examine them we shall only find that he hath wisely made choice of two great Names but that neither of them speak one Word to the purpose His Authors are Josephus the Historian and Philo Judaeus two incomparable Authors they are and by no means to be excepted against Here 's the Mischief that neither of them have a Syllable that makes for the Defence of the Church of Rome or the Prejudice of the Reformed However let us hear them speak And first let us hear what Josephus the elder of the two hath to say It is this that Jesus was a wise Man Jofeph Antiq. Jud. l. 18. c. 6. if it be lawful to call him a Man that he was the Effector of wondrous Works c. and that he was the Christ or Messias By the way the Cardinal makes Josephus speak Non-sense as he reports his Testimony For he says not only that Josephus does affirm Christ to be more than a Man but that he was truly the Messias Now Josephus would never speak at this rate to affirm that Christ is the Messias is to affirm that Christ is Christ for the Messias and Christ are the same Josephus affirms that Jesus lived at that time which he mentions and that Jesus was the Christ or Messias But to let this pass I grant that Josephus affirms that Jesus was the Christ what is this to the Church of Rome any farther than it concerns our common Christianity I would fain know why the Cardinal produceth this in behalf of his Church or what reason can be assigned why Protestants may not as well apply it to their own The common Christianity is concerned in such a Testimony and so far the Roman Church is also But set aside that Consideration and take the Church of Rome as the Cardinal does as distinct from and opposed to other Christians that are not of her Communion and I dare say I will produce Testimonies as pertinent as this of Josephus out of any Page of Homer's Iliads or the Commentaries of Julius Caesar For what Coherence is there between these two Propositions Josephus confesseth that Jesus was the Christ Therefore the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church And yet this is in truth the Cardinal's way of arguing Let us hear next what Philo Judaeus hath to say in behalf of the Christians of the Church of Rome Now it would be to me a wonderful thing to find Philo say any thing in behalf of those Christians when he never once mentions the Name of Christian in all his Works Yet the Cardinal hath the Confidence to affirm that Philo hath written a famous Book of the Praises of those Christians who lived in Egypt under St. Mark the Evangelist After this his positive Affirmation that Philo had written such a Book as being sensible that Philo hath no Book that bears any such Title he adds the Testimony of some of the Ancients that Philo meant the Christians and not any Sect of the Jews as the Centuriators would have I do not think it worth my while to examin his Antient Writers which he quotes for his Opinion Philo Judae de vitâ Contemplativâ I will for once take it for granted that Philo means the Christians of whom he gives so good a Character under the Title of Therapeutae Let it be so What is this to the Business Because those Christians in Egypt were good Men and such as Philo describes them must therefore the Church of Rome be the Catholick Church The next Witnesses which the Cardinal produceth are Turks He tells us that in the Alcoran 't is said that Christans are saved that Christ was the greatest of Prophets and had the Soul of God and that the Sultan of Egypt reverenced St. Francis whom he knew to be a Christian and a Catholick To what purpose all this is produced I do not understand I am sure it cannot serve that of the Church of Rome as she stands separated from other Christians And if it be a Testimony in behalf of our common Christianity then all Christians are concerned in it as well as that of the Church of Rome The Alcoran will do the Cardinal no Service unless he could have produced some Testimony peculiar to the Roman Church or that might have justified the Worship of Images Adoration of the Host the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or some of those Doctrines and Practices peculiar to that Church The last Set of Witnesses produced by the Cardinal he calls Hereticks A Man would think the case very desperate that needs such Witnesses But yet I find the Church of Rome does not disdain such as these when they speak of her side But in the present Question we shall find they do that Church no Service The Substance of what the Cardinal alledgeth is what follows viz. That an Arian King honoured St. Benedict a Catholick That Luther when an Heretick owned that in the Papacy were many good Things nay all that was good e. g. The true Scripture Baptism c. That Calvin calls Bernard a pious Writer and yet he was a Papist That another Protestant acknowledgeth Bernard Dominic and Francis to be Holy Men To which he adds a Passage of Cochlaeus who reports an Article of Agreement wherein the Protestant Helvetians write that they would dismiss their Confederates Quiet as to their true undoubted and their Catholick Faith. From all which I see not what he can collect for the Interest of the Church of Rome We do honour every Man that is good in the Church of Rome but this does not infer that we justify all her Doctrines We own that they have the true Scripture and Sacraments but this does not justify their addition of Apocryphal Books to the Canon of the Scriptures nor of more Sacraments than were owned to be strictly so in the Antient Church We will allow that there have been pious and holy Men of that Church and are not scrupulous in calling them by the Name by which they are commonly
known and distinguished from others Much good may do them with such Witnesses as Calvin and Luther who did to the last bear Testimony against the Corruptions and Innovations of that Church III. I shall examin the Question a little farther and more especially the Testimony of the Jews I might make many Remarks upon what the Cardinal affirms that whereas Catholicks neither praise nor approve the Doctrine or Life of Heathens or Hereticks yet these speak well of them I do not think the Romonists the more Catholick for this that they speak well of none but of themselves and will allow Salvation to none but those of her own Communion I could name a certain Lord of this Kingdom who was upon his Death-Bed urged to declare himself of the Church of Rome from this Argument of Bellarmin viz. That they of the Church of Rome denounced Damnation to all out of her Communion whereas we Protestants allowed Salvation as possible to some of them But he answered the Priest that urged this That he thought it safest to dye in the Communion of that Church that was most Charitable A Man would think that Charity which is an inseparable Note of a Christian and made so by our Blessed Saviour Joh. 13.35 might have been allowed to have been a Mark of the true Church also That they do not commend Heathens the Cardinal affirms roundly and yet 't were no hard matter to prove that many Catholicks have done it and that they might very well do it For why may not Heathens be commended for their Justice their Fortitude their Temperance Gratitude c. He tells us likewise the same of Hereticks that the Catholicks neither commend their Life or Doctrine Indeed they have little Reason to expect it from them who are resolved to speak well of none but those of their own Party and Way And yet because the Cardinal lays so great a stress upon the Confession of Adversaries and condescends to receive the Testimony of Hereticks as he is pleased to call us when it makes for his purpose I shall at least produce on our own behalf as many Confessions from those he calls Catholicks as he hath produced of ours on the behalf of his Church and those also both with respect to our Lives and Doctrines And tho it be true that they of the Church of Rome have blackned Luther and the other first Reformers as Men of flagitious Lives yet there will be found among them some who have given a better account of them I might give in a very fair account of J. Huss and H. of Prague from a Contemporary of their own Church who knew them well and conversed with them before they died For Martin Luther whatever the Romanists say of him now yet certain it is that Erasmus who I hope will pass with C. Bellarmin for a Catholick who lived in his time gives a better account of him In his Letter to the Card. of York speaking of Luther Erasm Ep. l. xi Ep. 1. he says Hominis vita magno omnium consensu probatur jam id non leve prejudicium est tantam esse morum integritatem ut nec hostes reperiant quod calumnientur His Life was then approved by all Men and so entire were his Manners that his Enemies could find nothing to reproach him with Epist l. v. Ep. 38. Again in a Letter to Ph. Melancthon Martini Lutheri vitam apud nos nemo non probat i. e. All Men among us says he approve the Life of Martin Luther The same Erasmus says of Oecolampadius Ep. l. vii Ep. 43. Maldodat in Mat. vii 15. that he meditated of nothing but of heavenly things Maldonat the Jesuit an allowed Catholick and fierce Enemy to the Calvinists says of them that there appeared nothing in their Actions but Alms Temperance and Modesty But their Doctrine is of greatest Concernment in this present Question Let us see if any of our Adversaries of the Church of Rome have made any Confession in favour of our Doctrine And here I will not enlarge 't will be enough to produce a few more Testimonies and those more pertinent than what the Cardinal hath produced on the other side The Doctrine which our first Reformers preached was not so absurd as 't is by some represented Many of the Church of Rome have spoken much in favour of our Doctrines Erasmus did so of many of those Doctrines which Luther taught The Things says he Epist l. xxii Ep. 10. ibid. which Luther urgeth if they were moderately handled in my Opinion come nearer to the Evangelical Vigor And speaking of the Eucharist he adds that were he not moved by so great a Consent of the Church he could embrace the Opinion of Oecolampadius He adds that he found no place in the Holy Scriptures where the Apostles are said to have consecrated Bread and Wine into the Flesh and Blood of the Lord. The same Erasmus elsewhere does profess that he wisheth that what Luther writes of the Tyranny Covetousness and Filthiness of the Court of Rome had been false Hist Counc Trent l. 1. Cardinal Mattheo Langi Archbishop of Salzburg told every one that the Reformation of the Mass was honest the Liberty of Meats convenient and a just Demand to be discharged of so many Commandments of Men but that a poor Monk should reform all was intolerable The Doctrine was not so obnoxious as to offend the most moderate and considering Men of the Roman Church many of them have upon occasion frankly declared on our side It hath been proved that St. Gregory the Great was no Friend to private Masses or Transubstantiation and 't is well known that he renounced that Title of Vniversal Bishop which is now claimed by the Popes of Rome Seâ— Bp. Morton's Appeal l. i. A learned Writer of our Church hath long ago produced many Witnesses of the Church of Rome that have born Testimony to the Doctrine of Protestants E. g. The Doctrine of Purgatory was not for along time universally believed in the Church says Polydore Virgil. Some before Luther taught that Papal Indulgences were but a kind of Godly Cheat says Gregory de Valentia The Worship of Images was condemned by almost all the Fathers says the same Polydore Virgil The Authority of a Council is superior to that of the Pope say the Councils of Constance and Basil Marriage of Priests is not prohibited by Legal or Evangelical Authority but by Ecclesiastical says Gratian Venerable Bede owns two Sacraments on which the Church is founded For many other things disputed between us and them we appeal to the Learned and Moderate Men amongst them and doubt not to defend our Doctrines by Confessions of those of their own Church Such are they of the number of Sacraments the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome c. We make no doubt but to produce many Catholick Authors speaking on our side For Communion in both kinds we have the Testimony of the Council of
Constance and Trent that 't was the ancient Practice For the Doctrine of Transubstantiation See a Treatise of Transubstantiation by one in the Communion of the Church of Rome Printed 1687. one of the Communion of the Church of Rome hath given us an Account lately he proves from many Doctors of the Church of Rome that it is not ancient viz. from Peter Lombard from Suarez Scotus the Bishop of Cambray Cardinal Cusanus Erasmus Alphonsus à Castro Tonstall and Cassander And that 't is not taught in the holy Scriptures he proves from the Testimonies of Scotus Ockam Gabriel Biel and Cardinal Cajetan and after all that it was not the Doctrine of the Fathers of the Church It would have been very fit I should here have made an end having considered every thing which the Cardinal hath offered as to this Note of the Church But there is a late Writer I will not call him Author hath taken the Confidence to produce the Testimony of the Jewish Writers in behalf of the Church of Rome Mr. Sclater's Consenf Vet. and which is most surprising of all he quotes the Rabbins in Defence of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which they are as far from asserting as he is from understanding them The Cardinal was too learned and modest to attempt any thing of this Nature but this Gentleman advanceth higher than he thought fit to do What he offers speaks nothing so lowdly as the Writers Effrontery and Ignorance not to say something worse Tho he thought fit to desert his Mother the Church of England yet it little became him to fly in her Face and suborn a Rout of Jews against her His Discourse is so weak that I shall bestow very little time and pains about it I shall however say something to it that he may not think any Part of his Pamphlet unanswered and do heartily wish him Repentance for his Folly and that he may learn Modesty for the future And for my better proceeding in this matter I shall do these things First I will briefly shew the true use and value of the Testimony of Jews as to the Christian Religion Secondly I shall shew the gross Ignorance not to say Dishonesty of this Writer in this Matter Thirdly I shall prove that the Jewish Writers are so far from serving the Church of Rome that they bear witness against it and that also in this very matter of Transubstantiation First I shall consider how far the Testimony of the Jews is useful to Christianity And several such there are that serve the common Christianity 1. The Jews as to matter of Fact confess that there was such a Man as Jesus that he wrought wonderful Works They do in their Talmud and elsewhere mention several of those Names which are mentioned in the New Testament and are there mentioned to have been at the same time in which they are placed there This is an useful Testimony and serves the common Christianity and saves us the labour in our Books against the Jews of proving these Matters of Fact. 2. They are also good Witnesses as to the Number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament which were deposited in their Hands This is owned by Cardinal Cajetan who affirms that this is one Advantage we receive from the Obstinacy of the Jews Cajetan in Rom. xi v. 11. that tho they believe not in Christ themselves yet they approve the Books of the Old Testament and therefore those Books cannot be supposed to have been invented by the Christians to have served their turn This Testimony of theirs serves indeed the common Christianity but is so far from serving the Church of Rome that it is a good Evidence against the Council of Trent who have receiv'd those Books for Canonical which the Jews never received into the Canon of Scripture 3. They are good Witnesses of the Promise of a Messias which is reckoned among the Fundamental Articles of the Jewish Faith. And this is an other Advantage that Christians receive as Cajetan well observes in the Place mentioned before from the Obstinacy of the Jews Abravenel C. Fidei c. 1. They agree that such a Promise was made and that therefore it cannot be supposed either a Forgery of the Christians or a vain Belief peculiar only to them 4. They are good Witnesses where they interpret those Texts of the Old Testament of the Messias which belong to that matter and which are by the Writers of the New Testament applied to that purpose And the more ancient Jews do thus The Chaldee Paraphrasts and other of the more ancient Jewish Doctors do apply those Texts to him which the Christians also understand to be spoken of him Of which were it not too great a Digression it would be easy to produce very many Proofs This serves the common Christianity greatly and in our Disputes against the Jews affords us very great Advantages 5. Nor do I deny but that some of the Catholick Doctrines of the Christian Religion I mean such as have been always believed from the first Beginning of Christianity may receive some Confirmation from the Writings of the most antient Jewish Doctors But to produce them as Witnesses as this Writer does to a Doctrine never received by the antient Church is the most extravagant thing imaginable Secondly I shall shew the gross Ignorance not to say Dishonesty of this Writer in this matter His Author from whom he borrows all his Rabbinical Learning is Galatinus He tells if we will believe him that he was always accounted a very learned Man Preface to Consens Veterum It would have been more to his purpose to have vouched for his Honesty After this he falls into a Fit of Devotion he is of a sudden transported with Admiration that the Hebrew Writers long before Christ's time take Mr. Sclater's word for that should have such Notions But the Wind bloweth were it listeth c. He might have staid till he had been sure of the matter of Fact and then 't would have been time enough to admire at it But the Reader is to know that Mr. Sclater was mightily inclined to believe in this matter with the Church of Rome or else Galatinus could never by his Arguments have prevailed upon him This appears from his own Words after he had drawn up his Evidence from Galatinus P. 27. he tells his Reader that Galatinus thought and I 'le assure you 't is hard to say what a Jew that professeth himself a Convert to the Church of Rome does really think these Prophecies and Interpretations he might have called them Dreams and Figments argumentative not only against the Jews but a Confirmation also of the Christian Religion against all Hereticks c. But if you ask Mr. Sclater what confirms him in this Belief you 'le find him not hard to believe I am confirmed says he by the Title-page of his Book Of so great force is the Title-page of Galatinus his Book with Mr. Sclater of
things as Marks of Distinction only without any further Design of lessening their Natures and Qualities by them p. 31. 4. It does not follow that because the Name Catholick in that time when it was for the most part conjoined with the Catholick Faith was a sure Note of a true Church it must always be so even when the Name and the Thing are parted p. 32. The worst of Hereticks laid claim to it p. 33. The Rule to know the True Church by proved from Lactantius and St. Austin ibid. 5. It doth not follow that because the being called after the Names of particular Men in that Age when all so called were for the most part corrupt in the Faith was a sure Hand of Schismaticks and Hereticks that it must always be so p. 33 34. III. The Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the Catholick Faith or Religion neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church p. 34. This justified by comparing her Doctrine in several Points with that delivered by Christ and his Apostles p. 35. For Instance that Angels and Saints are to be prayed unto and worshipped this contrary to Scripture ibid. The worshipping of Images contrary to the second Commandment which they make the same with the first p. 36. The Scripture commands all Persons indifferently to read the Scriptures the Church of Rome allows not this Liberty to the Laity but upon License ibid The Scriptures forbid Prayers in an unknown Tongue and the Church of Rome enjoins such and no other p. 37. Purgatory contrary to Scripture ibid. The denying the Cup to the Laity contrary to the express Instistitution of our Saviour p. 38. The Scripture saith that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament even after Consecration is Bread and Wine the Church of Rome says the Bread and Wine is Transubstantiated into the natural Body and Blood of Christ. p. 39. The Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Scripture derogatory to Christ's own Priestly Oblation whereby he once offered himself a compleat Sacrifice of Expiation p. 40. In all these Particulars the Church of Rome a Corrupter of the Christian Faith and Doctrine and consequently deserves not the name of Catholick ibid The Second Note ANTIQUITY THis Mark and Character of a true Church is not proper to the Church of Rome alone nor in truth doth it belong to it To prove this three things are here offered I. That the Plea of bare Antiquity is not proper to the Church but common to it with other Societies of false Religion p. 41. The Notes of a thing must be proper to that of which they are a Note and not common to it with other things p. 42. 1. Because what is proper to a thing is inseparable from it and did ever belong to it since it had a being and can at no time be absent from it ibid. 2. Other Societies have laid claim to this Note and it could not be denied them and therefore no proper Note of a Church ibid. This shews that bare Antiquity cannot be a Note of Truth p. 44. Antiquity and Priority widely different p. 45. A twofold Antiquity one in respect of us the other absolute and in it self ibid. The Church of Rome will not be tried only by the Scriptures which is the true Antiquity p. 46. Error almost as ancient as Truth for which reason several wicked Doctrines running down to Posterity have made use of the plea of Antiquity to give them countenance and support p. 47. II. The present Church of Rome vainly pretends to true Antiquity i.e. to ancient Truth p. 48. Wherein true Antiquity doth consist ibid. The present Church of Rome not ancient by reason of that alteration they have made in the ancient Creed p. 49. Cardinal Bellarmin's Ratiocination against this charge consisting of 6 things to be observed in all Changes of Religion none of which he says can be shewn in the Church of Rome since the Apostles time ibid. His reasoning built upon very false grounds this considered and largely answered in four Particulars p. 50. 1. As being contrary to all History and Experience there having been great Changes in Religion the Authors and the beginnings c. of which cannot be known p. 50. 2. Neither do the Examples they alledg for this their reasoning serve to no other purpose but to shew the falseness of it as in the case of the Nestorian and Arrian Heresies p. 51. 3. Supposing them true they would uphold the greatest Impieties ibid. The Heathen Gods and their Oracles supported by this Argument p. 52. 4. The Roman Church it self an instance of this there being an acknowledg'd change in it and yet they cannot tell who first began it viz. Communion in one kind ibid. Two instances out of Polydore Virgil when and by whom they were brought into the Church of Rome p. 53. 1. Their grand Article of Faith the Papal Authority brought in by Victor and carried on by the following Bishops ibid. The present Definitions of the Catholick Church and the Power of the Pope to depose Kings not challenged till Gregory VII i.e. 1000 Years after Christ ibid. 2. It is known when Images crept into the Church p. 55. A little more than 100 Years since unwritten Traditions were decreed to be a part of the Rule of Faith i. e. of the Word of God. ibid. III. That the Religion of the Church of England by Law established is the true Primitive Christianity p. 56. The Third Note DURATION THree things are here considered I. What is to be understood by the term Duration p. 58. Duration includes 3 things 1. A Being of a Church from the beginning p. 58 2. The continuance of that Church to the end p. 58 3. The continuance of that Church from the beginning to the end without interruption p. 58 Bellarmine's Application of the first of these to the Church of Rome yet deficient in the latter Branches p. 59. II. How far Duration is a Note of the true Church p. 59. This is no Note by which a true Church is to be found out or distinguished from the false ib. For four Reasons 1. The nature of the thing will not permit that it should be a Note p. 60. 2. That cannot be a Note of the true Church which doth not inseparably belong to the Church in all seasons and cases p. 61. 3. That which is a Note must be proper to the thing which it is the Note of and not common to other things as well as that p. 61 62. Common to false Churches as well as true ibid. 4. If it be a Note of a true Church then those could not be true Churches which have not not had that Duration ib. This unchurches the 7 Churches of Asia p. 62 63. III. The Church of Rome hath no just and sufficient title to this Character p. 63. This proved as to 1. Place 2. Persons 3. Order 4. Doctrine these being the things by which a Church doth exist and is made
of Infallibility Church-Authority and resolution of Faith and Judge of Controversies c. p. 119. The Reformation never did decline the Judgment of the Primitive Church for its Justification p. 120 121. Luther and Calvin misrepresented by Cardinal Bellarmine p. 122. The Apostolick Church founded and governed by the Apostles over all the World is the true Standard of the Christian Church ibid. The Scriptures the only Authentick Records of the Apostolick Church and the only certain account we have of the Faith and Doctrine of the most Primitive Church p. 123. Several Doctrines Examined by Antiquity 1. Supremacy not allowed of by the first Council of Nice nor that of Constantinople nor Chalcedon p. 125. 2. Transubstantiation acknowledged by many of the Schoolmen not to have been the Doctrine of the Primitive Church ibid. This Doctrine brought into the Church a little before Berengarius and not throughly understood even then by those who held it p. 126. Berengarius his Recantation and the Gloss upon it p. 127. The Number of the Sacraments not declared to be seven by the Primitive Church nor mentioned by any Author till 1100 Years after Christ ibid. Necessity of Auricular Confession questioned by Learned Men in the times of Peter Lombard p. 128. Purgatory not mentioned by any Antient Writers p. 128 129. Indulgences received very late into the Church ibid. Prayers and Oblations for the Dead an Antient Practice but no Doctrine of the Primitive Church ibid. Prayers in an unknown Tongue never the Practice any where of the Primitive Church ib. Worship of Saints and Angels and of Images of no Antient date in the Church ibid. All these Doctrines of the Roman Church which distinguish it from the Reformed that they were not Doctrines of the Primitive Church is further proved 1. From their Expurgatory Indices p. 130. 2. From the Correcting or rather Corrupting the Fathers and the counterfeiting so many false ones and obtruding Spurious Authors upon the World. p. 131 132. 3. From that little esteem and regard they too often have for Antiquity when ever it makes against them p. 133. 4. From the Determinations and Decrees of the Present Church which are the only things they stick to and which they prefer a thousand times before Antiquity or the whole sence of the Primitive Church The Seventh Note The Union of the Members among themselves and with the Head. UNity no proper Character of a true Church because found upon Societies of different natures and contrary designes p. 137. It is a good mark when 't is a duty as 't is a duty when the terms of Vnion are so ibid. Wherein this Vnity consists according to Bellarmine p. 138. Hereupon three things are endeavoured 1. That the Vnity here offered is no true Note of the Church forasmuch as Vnion with the Pope as Head of the Church hath no Foundation in Scripture Reason or Antiquity p. 140. 1. Scripture p. 141 142 143. 2. No Foundation of it from Reason p. 144 145. 3. Nor any Colour from Antiquity p. 145 to 149. The Cardinals Argument for the necessity of this Vnion from Experience considered p. 149. 2. The Vnion which they pretend to among themselves as Members no certain Note of the Church p. 150. 1. This is no more than what any Society may have as well as the true Church and any other Church as well as the Roman p. 151. 2. As there may be this Vnion out of the true Church so its may not be within it ibid. II. If Vnity were a true Note of the Church yet the Roman Church hath it not which is probably true of the first and most certainly true of the second branch of the Cardinals Vnity p. 152. 1. It is probable that there is not now nor hath been for many Ages any true Pope for the Church to be Vnited to ibid. 2. Neither is there that Vnion in all points of Doctrine amongst the Papists or such a Vnion of their Members as shall prevent the breaking away of some from the Communion of the rest p. 153. Not that wonderful agreement as the Cardinal pretends in the Sacred Writers of their Church nor in the Decrees of their Lawful Councils nor in those of their Popes p. 154. Several Disputes between the Canonists and Schoolmen in many material points of Doctrine between the Thomists the Scotists and Occamists between the Franciscans and Dominicans about the conception of the Blessed Virgin the Jansenists and Molinists p. 155 156. Bellarmin's Answer to all this viz. They differ not in those things that belong to Faith considered p. 156 157. The Cardinals difference between the division of Hereticks from the Church and a division from Heresie considered p. 158. If there be in the Church of Rome a certain rule for ending Controversies viz. The Sentence of the chief Pastor or a definition of a General Council ibid. 1. Why were not these the means of composing those Controversies that carried us away from them ibid. 2. How could those be certain means of composing Controversies concerning which even in their own Church there were the greatest Controversies of all p. 159. This largely shewn from the Learned Launoys Epistle to Nicholas Gatinaeus upon this Question p. 160 161 162 163. III. That that Vnity which is indeed a Note of the Church we Protestants have and that in a much greater degree than they p. 164. The true Grounds and Notions of Church-Vnity represented ibid. 1. Vnity of Submission to one Head our Lord Jesus Christ ibid. 2. Vnity of professing the Common Faith once delivered to to the Saints grounded upon the Authority of Scriptures and summarily expounded in the Antient Creed p. 165. 3. Vnity of Sacraments in the Church ibid. 4. Vnity of Obedience to all Institutions and Laws of Christ p. 165. 5. Vnity of Christian Affection and Brotherly kindness ibid. 6. Vnity of Discipline and Government ibid. 7. Vnity of Communion in the Service and Worship of God. p. 166. Some tho' not all of these necessary to the being of a Church viz. The acknowledgment of our Lord the profession of one Faith and admission into the state of Christian Duties and Priviledges by one Baptism ibid. Those particular Churches which keep Vnity in all these respects better than others do have the mark of Ecclesiastical Vnity in a higher degree than those others have p. 167. The Church of Rome as she holds one Lord one Faith one Baptism is part of the Catholick Church and so far maintains Catholick Vnity ibid. Wherein she departs from Catholick Vnity Purity and Charity shewed in several instances p. 167 168. The Church of England not chargeable on the same account ibid. 168 169. Vnity of Communion in the Church of Rome is Vnity of Communion among themselves but not Catholick Vnity of Communion because the terms of it are many of them unlawful and unjust p. 170. The Contrary to which the true Case of the Church of England ibid. 171. The Conclusion p. 171
172. The Eighth Note Sanctity of Doctrine THat this Note as well as the others is far from performing what is promised for it by the Cardinal is sufficiently made evident by four Particulars p. 173. I. What is here meant by Sanctity of Doctrine p. 174. Tho' that is the best and purest Church which hath the least of Error and Corruption in its Doctrine and Discipline yet that which is the best is not the only true Church p. 157. II. That Sanctity of Doctrine i.e. a pure profession of true Religion without any mixture of Error is no true Note or Character whereby a man may distinguish the true Church from all false Churches p. 176. That this can be no true Note of the true Church made evidently appear from the consideration of those necessary Properties of all true Notes by which Things are to be known and distinguished p. 177. These are Four. 1. Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies p. 177 to 180. 2. Every true Note ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of things of which it is a Note and not common to Things of another kind p. 181. 3. Every true Note ought to be more known than the Thing which it notifies p. 182 183. 4. Every true Note ought to be inseparable to the Thing which it notifies p. 184 to 188. III. In what sense this may be a Note of the true Church p. 189. That is a true Church which professes all the Essential Articles of Christian Faith and receives all the Essential parts of Christian Worship and Discipline p. 190. The Church of England willing to be tried by this p. 192. IV. According to the Principles of the Church of Rome the true Church is not to be found by this Note in which soever of the two Senses we understand it ibid. This clearly made out in Four Particulars 1. The Church of Rome decryes mens private judgment of Discretion as utterly insufficient to make any certain distinction of Truth from Falshood in matters of Religion p. 194. 2. Shee allows no sufficient Rule without the true Church to guide and direct our private Judgment of Discretion p. 195. Which is the true Church not to be resolved by Principles of Nature but those of Revelation p. 196. No other Rule while we are out of the Church to direct us in this Enquiry but only that of Scripture ibid. This the Church of Rome tells us is insufficient and that for two Reasons 1. Because the Scripture is not full enough as to all Doctrines of Faith and Manners And therefore there are certain unwritten Traditions in the Church of equal Authority with it by which its defects are supplied p. 197. 2. Because it is not clear enough the Sense of it being so obscurely expressed that we can never be certain what it is without the interpretation of the true Church p. 198. These considered and answered 3. The Church of Rome resolves all certainty as to matters of Faith into the Authority of the true Church which indeed is the Fundamental Principle of Popery p. 199. A short Dialogue upon this Argument between a Papist and Protestant p. 200 to 202. 4. The Church of Rome gives Authority to the true Church to impose upon us a necessity of believing such Things as before they were not obliged to believe p. 203. to the End. The Ninth Note Efficacy of Doctrine BY Efficacy of Doctrine Two Things understood Either 1. The power which the Word of God hath in the hearts of particular men to dispose them to believe aright and to live well Or 2 That Success which it hath in drawing Multitudes outwardly to profess and embrace it p. 209. The first too inward and the second which is that which the Cardinal understands by it too uncertain a thing to be a Note of a True Church ibid. Many other things besides Efficacy of Doctrine which have and may convert whole Nations to the Christian Religion such as hopes and fears outward force necessity p. 210. An Instance hereof in the Conversions wrought by Charles the Great p. 211. The difference between such Conversions and those which were made in the first Ages of the Church p. 212. In answer to the Cardinal upon this Note Three things laid down I. That the prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a True Church p. 213. This appears 1. From what our Saviour hath said in this matter ibid. 214. 2. From the Consideration of the Temper and Constitution of Mankind p. 215. to 217. 3. From plain matter of Fact. p. 218 219. Error hath such an influence often up n mens minds that they have rejected Truth and preferred the most gross and impious Opinions before it ibid. This apparent from the Histories of all Ages ibid. More particularly in the Case of Arianism p. 219. And in that of Mahomitanism p. 220. The Conversions wrought by those if the Greek Church whom the Church of Rome accounts Hereti ks p. 221. The Efficacy of the Reformed Doctrine ibid. II. That the Prevalency of the Doctrine professed in the Church of Rome is no Note of its being a True Church p. 222. And that for these reasons 1. Because of that great mixture of Errors which there is with the Truth which it professes p. 223. 2. Because the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is so much altered from what it formerly was ibid. 3. Because it hinders those who embrace it from throughly examining it p. 224. 4. Because Art and Force have sometimes been made use of to make it prevail p. 225. III. The Arguments the Cardinal makes use of to prove this to be a Note of the True Church proved to be Insufficient p. 226. 1. His Arguments from the Scriptures considered ibid. 2. His Arguments from the prevalency of the Christian Doctrine in the beginning of the Church examined p. 227. 3. His Arguments from the particular Instances which he gives of Conversions wrought by those of the Church of Rome reflected on p. 227. I. The Conversion of the English by Austin the Monk considered p. 228. Four Things alledged in answer to it ibid. 2. The Conversion of the People of Franconia by Kilianus replied to p. 228 229. 3. The Conversion of a great part of Germany by Vinofrid otherwise called Boniface considered ibid. The Conversion of the Vandals of the Danes of the Bulgarians Slavonians c. Ascribed to other Causes than the naked Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine ibid. The Barbarous Cruelties that were used by the Spaniards in the Conversion of the Indians p. 230. The Instance of Heraclius the Emperors Letter to Dagobert King of France concerning the method he made use of for the Conversion of the Jews p. 231. The Conclusion The Tenth Note Holiness of LIFE IN this Argument it is shewn I. What the Notion of Holiness is p. 233. Holiness is of Two kinds 1. Holiness of Calling and Dedication What
of Caesaria of Anthony an Aegyptian Monk of John an Anchorite are nothing at all to his purpose p. 296. Neither are the Testimonies concerning St. Benedict St. Bernard and St. Francis. p. 297 298. The Nature of the Predictions Prophecies brought to prove the Truth of the Gospel The Church of Rome can pretend to few such p. 299 to 302. The Predictions of Philip Nereus and of St. Rose p. 303. Of Hieronimus Savanorola p. 304. Of Johannes de Rupe Scissa p. 305. Of Luther and Melancthon and John Huss p. 306 307. The Thirteenth Note The Confession of Adversaries THE Cardinal roundly affirms the force of their Truth is so great that the Enemies of it are constrained to bear Witness to it p. 309. I. Whether such a Testimony be indeed a Note of the Church It is not because the Church may be and was without it in its Infancy the Christian Religion being called Heresy by its Adversaries p. 310 311. Our Saviour rather makes it a signe of the contrary so doth Tertullian and others p. 312. II. If it was a true Note whether peculiar to the Church of Rome exclusively to other Christians that are not of her Communion p. 313. The Witnesses he produces nothing to the Purpose Pliny's Testimony is in behalf of the Christians in general and the same may be said as to what he mentions of the Efficacy of the Prayers of the Christian Souldiers p. 314 315. Josephus his Testimony makes as little for him or his Church p. 316. Neither is there any advantage arising to them from that of Philo the Jew p. 317. His other Witnesses both Turks and Hereticks trifling and insignificant p. 318. The Cardinal affirms that whereas the Catholicks neither praise or approve the Doctrine or Life of Heathens or Hereticks yet these speak well of them p. 319. Vncharitableness a true Character of the Church of Rome ibid. Catholicks have commended the Lives both of Heathens and Hereticks p. 320. And also our Doctrines p. 321 to 324. Slater's Consensus Veterum reflected on ibid. The Testimony of the Jews how far useful to Christianity p. 324. The Jews as to matter of Fact confess there was such a man as JESVS who wrought wonderful Works ibid. Their Testimony as to the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as to the promise of the Messias and as to the Interpretation of those Texts appropriated to the Messias p. 325. Mr. Slaters Ignorance of the Jewish Writers discovered from p. 326 to 330. The Jewish Writers great Enemies to the New Doctrines of the Roman Church p. 133. The Fourteenth Note The unhappy End of the Churches Enemies WHat Bellamine means by an unhappy end p. 335. This intended by him not barely as a Note of a Church but of that which is the only true Church p. 336. The Instances he produces of unhappy Deaths are for the greater part of them Impertinent ibid. The unhappy end of those who defend it must be a Note of a false Church if the unhappy end of those who oppose it be a Note of the True. p. 337. From God's Judgments against particular Persons nothing can be concluded against that Church of which they are Members ibid. This therefore no Note of the True Church as being contrary 1. To Scripture p. 338 339. 2. To Daily Observation and the History of the foregoing Ages p. 340 341. 3. To the Principles of Reason p. 342. This proved in five particulars p. 342 343 344. Supposing it to be a Note of the true Church the Protestant will be found to be the True Church rather than the Church of Rome p. 344. This will be evident by comparing the Deaths of their prime Members and Zealous Champions and then considering on which side we find the greater number of such as are unnatural and not common to men p. 345. Protestant Bishops and other Eminent Pastors amongst them without number have died the most happy Deaths ibid. The number of those who have met with unhappy ends very few p. 346. Five only mentioned by our Adversary Luther Zuinglius Oecolampadius Carolostadius and Calvin ibid. The Death of Luther misrepresented by them p. 347. Sleidans Account of it and Father Pauls Thuanus quite different from that of his bitter Enemies p. 348 349. Zuinglius his Death another Instance of Bellarmines p. 350. Oecolampadius his Death falsly related by the Cardinal ibid. And Carolostadius his being killed by the Devil exposed as a notorious Forgery by Petrus Roquinus p. 351. The Story of Calvin's Death largely considered and proved to be so lewd a Calumny that any man but an Advocate for their Church might be ashamed to own it p. 351 to 359. No mention made by the Cardinal of any unhappy Ends of those Princes and Secular Powers who have been great Defenders of the Protestant Faith. p. 360. Several dismal Ends of Cardinals in the Church of Rome but especially of their Popes p. 360 361 362. The unhappy Deaths of several of their Princes particularly five Successively together in France p. 363. The Advantage therefore on this account on the Protestant side ibid. Conclusion The Fifteenth Note Temporal Felicity THis Note even in the Cardinal's Opinion liable to many exceptions and therefore at once to prevent them all he tells us roundly that Catholick Princes never adhered unto God heartily but that they most easily triumphed over their Enemies p. 368. I. This cannot be esteemed a Note of the Church 1. Because God hath no where promised it in all the Holy Gospel p. 369. 2. Because for several Ages together the Church could not pretend to any such thing as Temporal Felicity p. 370. 3. Because of those miseries which the Church of God must endure in the Dayes of Antichrist p. 371. II. The Historical Passages which the Cardinal produces for this Note do not prove what he intends p. 372. Great Partiality made use of in the choice of these Instances p. 373. The Story of Rhadagaisus and his Son's Death the defeat of the numerous Army of the Goths by Honorius considered ibid. The various Successes of the Holy-War did at last conclude to the Advantages of the Infidels p. 374. The Story of the Albigenses and the successes of both sides impartially related wherein these Hereticks seem clearly to have the advantage p. 375 376 377. The Victory of Charles the V. no such mighty Miracle as pretended p. 378. Many Examples of Infidels and Hereticks alledged who have been as prosperous and succesful in the World as any Catholicks can pretend to p. 379. The History of Uladislaus King of Poland and Hungary upon his rupture of the Peace with Amurath the Second p. 380. The Vnfortunate Battel of Mohatz related p. 381. The Prosperous Reign of Queen Elizabeth notwithstanding all the attempts both of Forreign and Domestick Enemies p. 381. to 387. The Author of the use and great moment of the Notes of the Church reflected upon p. 388. 389. The Recapitulation and Conclusion to the
whole Work. p. 390. FINIS Books Printed for and Sold by Richard Chiswell Dr. CAve's Lives of the Primitive Fathers in 2 Vol. Folio Dr. Cary's Chronological Account of Ancient Time. fol. Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity fol. Sir John Burlace's History of the Irish Rebellion fol. The Laws of this Realm concerning Jesuits Seminary Priests Recusants the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance explained by divers Judgments and Resolutions of the Judges with other Observations thereupon By William CawleyEsq fol. Dr. Towerson's Explication on the Creed the Commandments and Lord's Prayer in 3 Vol. fol. Bishop Nicholson on the Church-Catechism 40. Mr. John Cave's seven occasional Sermons 40. Bishop Wilkin's Natural Religion 80. His Fifteen Sermons 80. Mr. Tanner's Primordia Or the Rise and Growth of the first Church of God described 80. Spaniards Conspiracy against the State of Venice 80. Dr. Cave's Primitive Christianity in three parts 80. Certain genuine Remains of the Lord Bacon in Arguments Civil Moral Natural c. with a large account of all his Works By Dr. Tho. Tenison 80. Dr. Henry Bagshaw's Discourses on select Texts 80. Mr. Seller's State of the Church in the three first Centuries Dr. Burnet's Account of the Life and Death of the Earl of Rochester 80. Vindication of the Ordinations of the Church of England 80. History of the Rights of Princes in the Disposing of Ecclesiastical Benefices and Church-lands 80. Relation of the present state of the difference between the French King and the Court of Rome to which is added the Pope's Brief to the Assembly of the Clergy and their Protestation published by Dr. Burnet 80. Dr. Cumber's Companion to the Altar 80. Dr. Sherlock's Practical Discourse of Religious Assemblies 80. Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation 80. A Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet in answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob about Catholick Communion 80. Sir Rob. Filmer's Patriarcha or natural Power of Kings 80. Bishop Wettenball's Method and Order for private Devotion 125. Valentine's Private Devotions 40. Dr. Spencer de Legibus Hebraeorum Ritualibus earum Rationibus fol. Dr. John Lightsoot's Works in English in 2 Vol. fol. Sir Tho. Brown's Vulgar Errors with all the rest of his Works fol. Patris Simonii Disquisitiones Criticae de Variis per diversa Loca Tempora Bibliorum Editionibus Accedunt Castigat Opusc Is Vossii de Sibyllinis Oraculis 40. The Case of Lay-Communion with the Church of England considered 40. Two Letters betwixt Mr. R. Smith and Dr. Hen. Hammond about Christ's Descent into Hell. 80. Dean Stratford's Disswasive from Revenge 80. Dr. Hez Burton's first Volume of Discourses of Purity and Charity of Repentance and of seeking the Kingdom of God. Published by Dean Tillotson 80. Sir Thomas More 's Vtopia newly made English by Dr. Burnet 80. Mr. Seller's Devout Communicant assisted with Rules Meditations Prayers and Anthems 12â— Dr. Towerson of the Sacraments in General Of the Sacrament of Baptism in particular 80. The History of the COVNCIL of TRENT in which besides the Ordinary Acts of the Council are declared many notable Occurrences which hapned in Christendom for 40 Years and particularly the Practices of the COVRT of ROME to hinder the Reformation of Their Errors and to maintain Their Greatness Written by Father Paul of the SERVI To which is added the Life of the Author and the History of the Inquisition Books lately Printed for Richard Chiswell Dr. Burnets History of the Reformation of the Church of England in 2 Vol. Fol. A Collection of Sixteen several Tracts and Discourses Written in the Years from 1678 to 1685. inclusive by Gilbert Burnet D. D. To which are added A Letter written to Dr. Burnet giving an Account of Cardinal Pool's Secret Powers The History of the Powder-Treason with a Vindication of the Proceedings thereupon An Impartial Consideration of the Five Jesuits dying Speeches who were Executed for the Popish Plot 1679. 40. A Dissertation concerning the Government of the Ancient Church more particularly of the Encroachments of the Bishops of Rome upon other Sees By WILLIAM CAVE D. D. Octavo An Answer to Mr. Serjeant's Sure Footing in Christianity concerning the Rule of Faith With some other Discourses By WILLIAM FALKNER D. D. 40. A Vindication of the Ordinations of the Church of England in Answer to a Paper written by one of the Church of Rome to prove the Nullity of our Orders By GILBERT BVRNET D. D. Octavo An Abridgment of the History of the Reformation of the Church of England By GILB BVRNET D. D. Octavo The APOLOGY of the Church of England and an Epistle to one Signior Scipio a Venetian Gentleman concerning the Council of Trent Written both in Latin by the Right Reverend Father in God JOHN JEWEL Lord Bishop of Salisbury Made English by a Person of Quality To which is added The Life of the said Bishop Collected and written by the same Hand Octavo The Life of WILLIAM BEDEL D. D. Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland Together with Certain Letters which passed betwixt him and James Waddefworth a late Pensioner of the Holy Inquisition of Sevil in Matters of Religion concerning the General Motives to the Roman Obedience Octavo The Decree made at ROME the Second of March 1679. condemning some Opinions of the Jesuits and other Casuists Quarto A Discourse concerning the Necessity of Reformation with respect to the Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome Quarto First and Second Parts A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an Unknown Tongue Quarto A Papist not Misrepresented by Protestants Being a Reply to the Reflections upon the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented Quarto An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the several Articles proposed by the late BISHOP of CONDOM in his Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church Quarto A Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the Exceptions of Monsieur de Meaux late Bishop of Condom and his Vindicator 40. A CATECHISM explaining the Doctrine and Practices of the Church of Rome With an Answer thereunto By a Protestant of the Church of England 80. A Papist Represented and not Misrepresented being an Answer to the First Second Fifth and Sixth Sheets of the Second Part of the Papist Misrepresented and Represented and for a further Vindication of the CATECHISM truly representing the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome Quarto The Lay-Christian's Obligation to read the Holy Scriptures Quarto The Plain Man's Reply to the Catholick Missionaries 240. An Answer to THREE PAPERS lately printed concerning the Authority of the Catholick Church in Matters of Faith and the Reformation of the Church of England Quarto A Vindication of the Answer to THREE PAPERS concerning the Unity and Authority of the Catholick Church and the Reformation of the Church of England Quarto Mr. Chillingworth's Book called The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation made more generally useful by
of Christ Now so far as Bellarmin's Notes belong to every true particular Church so far we allow them and let the Church of Rome make the best of them She can for we doubt not to make our claim to them as good and much better than hers but he has named very few such the 6th the Agreement and Consent in Doctrine with the Ancient and Apostolick Church and the 8th the Holiness of its Doctrine are the cheif if not the only Notes of this nature and these we will stand and fall by many of his other are not properly the Notes of a true Church any otherwise than as they are Testimonies of the truth of common Christianity which is professed by all true Churches and if they are Notes of the Church so every true particular Church has a share in them Such as his 9th the efficacy of Doctrine The 10th the Holiness of the lives of the first Authors and Fathers of our Religion and I suppose the Holiness of Christ and his Apostles give Testimony to the truth of common Christianity and therefore to all Churches who profess the common Faith once delivered to the Saints The 11th the Glory of Miracles which also proves the truth of Christian Religion and I hope a little better than Popish Miracles do Transubstantiation The 12th is the Spirit of Prophesy which as far as it is a good Note belongs to the Religion not to the Church Other Notes he assigns which I doubt will prove no Notes at all as 13 14 15. because they are not always true and at best uncertain His third and fourth Notes are not Notes of a Church but God's Promises made to his Church as of a long Duration that it shall never fail and Amplitude or Extent and multitude of Believers These Promises we believe God will fulfil to his Church but they can be no Notes which is the true Church For the first of these can never be a Note till the day of Judgment That Church which shall never be destroyed is the true Church but a bare long continuance is no Mark of a true Church for an Apostatical Church may continue by the patience and forbearance of God many hundred Years and be destroyed at last and then this Argument of a long Duration is confuted And as for Amplitude and Extent that is not to distinguish one Christian Church from another that the most numerous Church should be the truest but to distinguish the Christian Church from all other Religions and then I doubt this Prophecy has not received its just Accomplishment yet for tho we take in all the Christian Churches in the World and not exclude the greatest part of them as the Church of Rome does yet they bear but a small proportion to the rest of the World. And now there are but three of his fifteen Notes of the Church left The first concerning the Name Catholick which makes every Church a Catholick Church which will call it self so Tho Catholick does not declare what a Church is but in what Communion it is and is no Note of a true Church unless it be first proved that they are true Churches which are in Communion with each other For if three parts in four of all the Churches in the World were very corrupt and degenerate in Faith and Worship and were in one Communion this would be the most Catholick Communion as Catholick signifies the most general and universal but yet the fourth part which is sincere would be the best and truest Church and the Catholick Church as that signifies the Communion of all Orthodox and Pure Churches His first Note is the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome from the Apostles till now This is a Note of the Roman Church and the Succession of Bishops in the Greek Church is as good a Note of the Greek Church And any Churches which have been later planted who have Bishops in Succession from any of the Apostles or Apostolical Bishops by this Note are as good Churches as they So that this is a Note common to all true Churches and therefore can do the Church of Rome no Service His seventh Note indeed is home to his purpose That that is the only true Church which is united to the Bishop of Rome as to its Head. If he could prove this it must do his business without any other Notes but that will be examined hereafter But it is like the Confidence of a Jesuit to make that the Note of the Church which is the chief Subject of the Dispute The Sum is this There can be no Notes of a true Church but what belong to all true Churches for tho there is but one Catholick Church yet there are a great many true particular Churches which make up this Catholick Church as homogeneal Parts which have all the same Nature But now very few of the Cardinal's Notes belong to all true Churches and those which do so signifie nothing to his purpose because they are common to more Churches than the Church of Rome And as for the Catholick Church that is known only by particular Churches for it is nothing else but the Union of all true Churches in Faith and Worship and one Communion as far as distinct Churches at a great distance from each other are capable of it And therefore there is no other way to know which is the Catholick Church but by knowing all the true Churches in the World which either are in actual Communion with one another or are in a Disposition for it whenever occasion is offered For it is impossible that all true Christian Churches all the World over should ever joyn in any visible and external Acts of Communion and therefore tho we know and believe that there is a Catholick Church because we are assured that all true Churches in the World are but one Church the one Body and Spouse of Christ yet it is next to impossible to know all the Parts of the Catholick Church without which we cannot know the whole Catholick Church because we cannot know all the particular true Churches all the World over Nor indeed is there any need we should For we may certainly know which is a truly Catholick Church without knowing the whole Catholick Church For every Church which professes the true Catholick Faith and imposes only Catholick Terms of Communion and is ready out of the Principles of Brotherly Love and Charity that cement of Catholick Communion to communicate with all Churches and to receive all Churches to her Communion upon these Terms is a truly Catholick Church which shews how ridiculous it is to make the Catholick Church our first Inquiry and to pretend to give Notes to find out the true Catholick Church by before we know what a true Particular Church is But the Mystery of this will appear more in what follows 3dly For another Mystery of finding the true Church by Notes is to pick out of all the Christian Churches in the World
Reform'd They call us the Reformed therefore we are Reformed is as good an Argument as we call them Catholicks therefore they are Catholicks In this Sense are those Words of St. Austin cited by Bellarmine Contr. Epist Fundam c. 4. to be understood That should a Stranger happen in any City to enquire even of an Heretick where he might go to a Catholick Church the Heretick would not dare to send him to his own House or Oratory Not that that Heretick did believe that those that there were call'd Catholicks did hold the true Catholick Doctrine for then he could not have believ'd his own but looking upon it as a bare name of Distinction he directed him to that Assembly of Christians that were so called St. Austin seems here to suppose a Case as if a Traveller entring into a City where both Popish and Reform'd Churches were allowed and should chance to meet a Protestant and of him enquire the way to a Catholick Church and he direct him to a Popish one or a Papist and of him enquire the way to a Reform'd Church and he direct him to a Protestant one It would not therefore follow that either the one or the other did believe either Church to answer and correspond with its Name that the Popish was Catholick or the Protestant Reformed but that they were Words of vulgar use whereby they might be known from one another but not the true Church from the false IIII. It does not follow that because the Name of Catholick in that time when it was for the most part in conjunction with the Catholick Faith was a sure Note of a true Church it must always be so even when the Name and Thing are parted It was not long before the Christian Church became miserably torn and rent asunder divided into many and some very great Bodies all pretending to Catholicism By what Mark now is the Catholick Church to be known Not by the Name surely when all Parties laid claim to it and the grossest Hereticks such as the Manichaeans themselves as St. Austin tells us who had the least to shew for it coveted and gloried in it Have never any Hereticks or Scismaticks been styled Catholicks Nor ever any Orthodox styl'd Hereticks The Greek Church is call'd Catholick and yet the Church of Rome will have her an Heretical one The Donatists appropriated to themselves that ample Title and yet St. Austin thought them no better than Shcismaticks The Arrians call'd themselves Catholicks and the Orthodox Homousians and Athanasians but neither the one was the more nor the other the less Catholick for what they were call'd Truth is always the same and the Nature of things remains unalterable let Men fix on them what Names they please By this Rule then is the true Church to be known not because it bears the Name of Catholick for that a Church may do and yet be guilty of Schism and Heresie but because it professes the true Faith and then tho it be in name Heretick it is in reality Catholick This is Lactantius's Rule to discern the true Church by the true Religion That Church alone Instir lib. 4. c. ult Sola Catholica est quae verum cultum retinet says he is Catholick that retains the true Worship of God. And St. Austin in his Disputes with the Donatists where the true Church was appeals to the Scripture as the only Infallible Judg Non audiamus haec dico haec dicis sed audiamus haec dicit Dominus c. Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam Epist 166. de unit Eccl. c. 2. Amongst many others to this purpose he hath these Words I say this and thou sayest that but thus saith the Lord. 5. Again does it follow that because the being called after the Names of particular Men in that Age when all so call'd were for the most part corrupt in the Faith was a sure Brand of Schismaticks and Hereticks it must ever be so May not Names and Titles be unjustly and maliciously impos'd If the Churches of the Reformed must go for Hereticks and Scismaticks meerly because they are distinguish'd by the Names of those Men that were the first and most eminent Instruments in that blessed Work as of Lutherans Calvinists Zuinglians the like Is there not the same Reason that the several Orders in the Church of Rome that go under the Names of their particular Founders as the Benedictines Franciscans Dominicans Jansenists and Molinists and others be esteemed so too If there be any Difference the advantage of Reason is on our Side since the Reformed assume not those Names to themselves and tho they deservedly honour the Memories of those Men and with thankful Hearts embrace the Reformation God was pleas'd by their Ministry to make in the Church yet do they by no means affect to be call'd after their Names They own no Name but Christian or Catholick when it signifies Persons adhering to the true Catholick Faith The others are Nick-names fasten'd on them by their Adversaries out of Scorn or Malice to represent them to the World as far as they are able as so many Schismaticks from the Catholick Church and as having other Leaders than Christ and his Apostles But those in the Church of Rome that are denominated from their particular Founders give themselves those Appellations seem to prefer them before that truly Catholick one of Christian which while with some neglect they leave to the Common People they glory and pride themselves in the other so that if this Note of an Heretick is valid it turns with great Force against themselves who are really guilty of it and not against us whom they will make guilty of it but are not III. The Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the Catholick Faith or Religion neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church Whether she is guilty of this or no will be best seen by comparing her Doctrine in several Points with that delivered by Christ and left upon Record by his holy Apostles for tho the Church of Rome will not allow the Scriptures to be the whole and a perfect Rule of Faith and Manners yet they acknowledg them to be the Word of God and granting that they must acknowledg that all those Doctrines and Practices that are forbidden by them are Corruptions and Depravations of it Let us then bring their Faith to the Touchstone How readest thou The Scripture says See Discourse of the Object of Religious Worship 1685. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Mat. 4.10 Which Words evidently appropriate all kinds and all degrees of Religious Worship unto God they being an answer to the Devil's Temptation who requir'd but the lowest Degree the Devil acknowledging that the right he had of disposing of the Kingdoms of the World to be only derivative not natural they were delivered to me At the same time confessed himself not to be the Supream God and consequently cannot be suppos'd
consistent with the Pains and Fire of Purgatory which Bellarmin tells us is hotter than Hell it self is past my Apprehension The Chuch of Rome says that Souls are to continue in Purgatory till they have made full satisfaction for their Sins and are throughly purged from them and that whoever says that there is no Debt of temporal Punishment to be pay'd either in this World or in Purgatory before they can be admitted into Heaven is accursed Concil Trid. Sess 6. Can. 30. The Church of Rome says the Cup is not to be administred to the Laity and gives many reasons for it lest the Blood of Christ should be spilt lest the Wine kept for the Sick should fret lest Wine may not always be had or lest some may not be able to bear the smell or taste of it Whether these are sufficient Reasons or no the Council of Trent enjoyns all to believe them so under an Anathema Concil Trid. Sess 21. Can. 1. 2. The Council of Constance acknowledges that our Saviour instituted the Sacrament in both kinds and that it so continued in the Church of Rome many Centuries and yet with a Notwithstanding to both these it sacrilegiously robs the People of the Cup. Concil Const Sess 13. The Church of Rome says that the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist by the Priests pronouncing these Words Hoc est corpus meum is transubstantiated into the natural Body and Blood of Christ the Species or Accidents only of the Bread and Wine remaining and hath made it an Article to be believed by all under an Anathema Concil Trid. Sess 13. de Real Praes c. 1. Cornel. a Lapide tells us that it was the Opinion of some of their grave Divines that this Change is made after so powerful and effectual manner that if Christ had not been incarnated before the force of this Charm would have incarnated him and cloath'd him with Human Nature The Church of Rome says that in the Sacrifice of the Mass Christ is offered as often as that is celebrated and that tho' therein he be unbloodily offer'd yet is it a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins both of the Living and Dead Concil Trid. Sess 22. Cap. 1. And declares the Person accursed that denies any part of this Ibid. In all these Particulars you see and several other might be instanc'd in the Faith and Doctrine of the Church of Rome bears a manifest repugnance to the Gospel of Christ Now if the Holy Scripture may be allow'd so much as to be a Rule of Faith and Manners in those things it particularly treats of the Church of Rome contradicting that Rule in those things must be condemned for a Corrupter of the Christian Faith or Doctrine And having thus made it evident that she holds not the true Catholick Faith 't is as evident that she is not and consequently deserves not to be called a Catholick Church THE END LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard 1687. The Second Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ. ANTIQUITY Secunda Nota est ANTIQVITAS Bellar. L. iv c. v. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR Apr. 5. 1687. JO. BATTELY IT is a shrewd sign that a Church is in an ill Case when the most learned and witty Defenders of it commend it to the World by such Marks and Characters whereby they say it may be known as are neither proper to it alone nor in Truth belong to it But more truly and evidently belong to them whom they oppose That this is the Case of the present Church of Rome in that Famous Note of ANTIQUITY which Bellarmin and others make a Mark of the true Church I will clearly and distinctly demonstrate by shewing these three Things I. That the Plea of bare Antiquity is not proper to the Church but common to it with other Societies of false Religion II. That true Antiquity is not on the side of the present Roman Church But III. That it is truly on Ours I. It is confessed by all even by them who make Antiquity a Mark of the Church that the Notes of a Thing must be proper to that of which they are a Note and not common to it with other Things Which quite destroys this Note of Antiquity upon a double Account First Because that which is proper to a Thing is inseparable from it and did ever belong to it since it had a Being and can at no Time without the destruction of its Being be absent from it This every Fresh-Man in Learning knows and by that may know that Antiquity is not a Note proper to the Church because it did not always belong to the Church For there was a Time when the Church was New. Which was objected to it by the Adversaries of our Religion and the Defenders of the Church answered the very same to them then that we do to the Romanists now as will appear in the second Thing I have to observe Secondly That other Societies have laid claim to this Note and it could not be denied them and therefore 't is not a proper Note whereby the true Church may be certainly known being common to it with others that are not of the Church 1. For first the Samaritans claimed it against the Jews as appears from the Womans Discourse with our Saviour Joh. iv 20. Our Fathers worshipped in this Mountain c. They had done so for many Ages before they worshipped in Jerusalem For here God appeared unto Abraham who here also built an Altar when he came first out of Chaldea Gen. xii 6 7. Here Jacob likewise built an Altar when he came out of Mesopotamia Gen. xxxiii 20. Here there was a Sanctuary in the Days of Joshua who gave his last Charge to Israel and made a Covenant with them in this Place Chap. xxiv 25 26. Here the Patriarchs were buried v. 32. Nay here-abouts was Shiloh Judg. xxi 19. where by the order of Joshua the Tabernacle and the Ark of God were setled long before it was brought to Jerusalem Josh xviii 1 2. which was all this time in the Hands of the Jebusites To which Plea the Jews could not make an Answer but by maintaining this Principle That not the Antiquity of Place but the Authority of God's Precept was to be their direction in this Case And God it appeared by the Holy Books had chosen Jerusalem to place his Name there 2. Thus the Jews themselves argued against Christ that he did not follow the Tradition of the Elders which had been derived to them from ancient times Mark vii 1 c. and against Christians whom they called the Sect of the Nazarens Acts xxiv 5. as much as to say Hereticks newly sprung up from Jesus of Nazareth 3. And thus the Pagans argued against them both particularly against the Christians saying to St. Paul at Athens May we know what this New Doctrine whereof thou speakest is Acts xvii 19. And in after-times calling it a Novel Religion a
those Bishops who should so do without Exception Forerunners of Antichrist is as plain a Proof that the Bishops of Rome to his time did not look on themselves as having a Primacy over all Churches And 't is manifest that in the time of the Council of Nice the Church of Rome was not thought to include the Catholick Church or to be any more than one part thereof This I say is manifest from the Sixth Canon of that Council viz. Let the ancient Customs be preserved for the Bishop of Alexandria to have Jurisdiction over Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis because the Bishop of Rome hath a like Custom c. Which is as much as to say that the Bishop of Alexandria had then the same uncontroulable Power in his large Jurisdiction that the Bishop of Rome had in his And therefore that Council knew nothing of this Bishop's having any Power over the Alexandrian and much less over the whole Catholick Church Nor is any thing more certain than that the mere Superiority of Honour which the Roman Church had was founded on no Divine Right but only on that Cities being the Seat of the Empire For as the Second General Council viz. that of Constantinople decreed in its Third Canon That the Bishop of Constantinople should have the priviledg of Honour next to the Bishop of Rome upon the account of its being the Imperial City and therefore called New Rome So in the Twenty eighth Canon of the Fourth General Council viz. that of Chalcedon it was ordained that for the same Reason the Bishop of Constantinople should have equal priviledges with the Bishop of Rome So that 't is a plain Case that whosoever shall undertake to prove from any Sayings of the Ancients for the first 500 Years at least that the Church of Rome and the Catholick Church were reputed to be the same and consequently that whatsoever they said of the Amplitude of this is to be understood of that Church must necessarily make as sad work of it as Bellarmin hath here done And therefore it is apparent too that no Service can be done to the Church of Rome by this Note as to her pretension of being the true Catholick Church From whence it will likewise follow that no prejudice can from thence accrue to the Reformed Churches But this is not all For 2. This Note were it a true one would be Destructive to that her Pretence and do the Reformed Churches great Service viz. in demonstrating them to be true parts of the Catholick Church This also may be concluded from what hath been said but it will be made more evident by these following Considerations 1. If the Church of Rome had as Ample a Spread over the World for some of the first Ages as Bellarmin contends for this would far more redound to the Advantage of our Churches of the Reformation were Amplitude a distinguishing Property of the Church than to the Advantage of the present Church of Rome because that Church then was more ours than now it is the Romanists For there can scarcely be a greater Disagreement in Doctrine and Worship between any two Christian Churches than there hath for a long time been between the same Church as she was then and is now But the Agreement is as great between the Ancient Church of Rome and our Churches and especially between Her and the Church of England This our Adversaries could not but see would they impartially compare the Doctrine and Worship of each together And the only Quarrel they have with us is that we will not admit more into our Creed than the Christians of the First Ages did into theirs And that we worship God only by the alone Mediation of Jesus Christ as they did That our Laity partake of the Communion in both kinds as theirs did And in short that we believe the Holy Scriptures to be a compleat Rule of Faith as it was every where believed to be by the Primitive Catholicks and that we will not receive into our Worship the Roman Novelties those things which were utterly unknown to both the Roman and all other Churches in those Ages Now whereas the Cardinal would have it observed for the better explaining the meaning of this Note That if one Province alone should retain the true Faith it might properly be called the Catholick Church so long as its Faith is one and the same with that which at one time or other had prevailed in the whole World We desire no greater Advantage to our Church and all other in Communion with Her since these and those Churches which in the Primitive Times were extended all over the then known parts of the World are agreed in much more than all the Fundamental Points of Faith. 2. It hath been estimated upon Computation that the Churches subject to the Roman See exceed not much the Reformed Churches in Amplitude or Multitude of Members Especially since Italy Spain See the Preface to Brerewood's Enquiries and Portugal are detained in the Romish Religion not by Choice or Judgment but by Ignorance and the Tyranny of the Inquisition But who can be ignorant that the Church of Rome bears not the least proportion upon those Accounts with these Churches considered in Conjunction with that part of Christendom which agreeth with them as in all the main Points of Christianity so in refusing Subjection to that Church and in most of those Doctrines and Practices which we condemn in Her as contrary to Holy Scripture or as not founded thereon and yet made necessary to Salvation by Her and not taught by the Primitive Church So that should all the Churches which deny that of Rome to have any Authority over them deal with Her as she hath dealt with them and pronounce Her to have nothing more left Her than the mere Name of a Church this Her Note would be an unanswerable Objection against Her being A true Church as well as The true Church on supposition that as she holds of two Parties of Christians rejecting Communion with and unchurching each other but one of them can be a true Church That so large a part of Christendom I say agrees with the Reformed Churches in all the Grand Articles of Faith and in the Chief of those wherein they are at Varience with the Church of Rome as makes the whole an incomparably greater Body of Believers than all those together who own that Church for their Mother is so notorious that 't is impossible our Adversaries should dispute it The Cardinal indeed tells us on this Note That Besides all Italy and Spain and almost all France which the Church of Rome possesseth And besides Germany England Poland Bohemia Hungary Greece Syria Aethiopia Egypt in which many Catholicks are found even in the New World viz. America She hath Churches without the mixture of Hereticks And we can Reply That Besides England Scotland and Ireland in which Protestancy is the National Religion and in the two former of which the Number
into the Doctrines of the Primitive Church which will have as many Inconveniences in it I fear as they are apt to object against searching to this end into the Scriptures so he must examine all the particular Doctrines that are controverted between both Churches to see which are most agreeable to the Faith of the Primitive for he cannot know this in the Lump and by the Gross and to tell him as they sometimes do that 't is impossible for their Church to have departed from the Faith of the Primitive and that the present Age could not alter from the Doctrine of the foregoing and so upward this is not to make the Primitive Faith a Note of the present Church but to prevent all enquiry about this Note and to make it wholly useless and insignificant He that will therefore make use of this Mark to know the true Church by must be supposed and allowed to inquire into the Doctrine of the Primitive Church about all those particular Controversies and Matters of Faith that are in difference between us and must not have his Enquiry stopt and precluded by any general Pretences of the Infallibility either of Oral Tradition or of the present Church but must freely and impartially examin the particular Doctrines that are controverted that so he may bring every one of them to the Touchstone of the Primitive Faith and try whether they are agreable to the same or no and according as he finds this that is whatsoever Church he finds to hold the same Doctrine with the Primitive in all the particular Points of difference That he must conclude to be the true Church from this Note given of it Our Adversaries do not usually care to enter into particular Points of Controversy wherein they are very sensible they shall be sooner foiled and bafled and therefore they generally wave those which are capable of being made more plain and evident to most Mens Capacities and they chuse rather to dispute and wrangle about more general and intricate Matters in which there is some more room to cavil and to amuse and perplex themselves and others with seeming Difficulties so that tho particular Controversies may be made very plain and it appears often in them as clear almost as the Light on which side the Truth is as Whether Prayers ought to be in a known Tongue Whether the Communion ought to be in both kinds Whether the Scriptures are to be read by the People and the like yet to avoid those and to prevent the Disadvantage of such manifest and particular Points they carry the Dispute off to other things and run into the general Controversies of Infallibility and Church-Authority and Resolution of Faith and a Judg in Controversies and the like and here they think there is more room for Cavil and Sophistry and they can hereby lead Men if not into Scepticism and Doubtfulness yet into a Maze and Labyrinth where they shall not so easily get out Which way of theirs seems to me just as if a Person in a plain Controversy about Weight or Measure which were otherwise easy to be determined should to avoid that think fit to run into the perplext Dispute What was the true Standard of Weights and Measures or everlastingly wrangle about that Question Whether Matter consisted of Divisible or Indivisible Parts and because he could raise Difficulties here and keep up a long and intricate Controversy about those Matters would not be brought to yield that a Pound was heavier than an Ounce or an Ell longer than an Inch. I cannot but think that some of our particular Controversies may be almost as clearly decided as those two and that the running into some general ones is as remote and sophistical as the other We must therefore according to this Note of the Church not be foreprized or prevented with any general and more perplext Dispute but we must fairly examine all the particular Doctrines of the Church and see whether they are agreeable with those of the Primitive Church or no before we can find out the true Church at present not that the true Church we are to look for is confined to any particular Place or Country but like a great Homogenial Body every Part of which is of the fame nature with the Whole wherever the true Primitive Faith is profest in all the Parts of it there is a True Church and all particular Churches being united together in the same Bond of Faith do make up the Catholick Church over all the World. If there were but one Particular Church upon the whole Earth that did profess this True Faith that alone might be called the Catholick Church because that alone had that Catholick Faith which did properly make and constitute the True Church But this Faith being common to a great many Particular Churches this makes them to be all true and all Catholick as to Faith but as to Place 't is ridiculous to call any one Catholick and as absurd as to call a Part the Whole in that sense no Church is Catholick in the other every Church is that holds the Whole Christian Faith We are not therefore to seek for any Particular Church that shall usurp to it self the Name of Catholick in exclusion to all others but for any Church that maintains the true Catholick Faith profest by the Primitive which upon that account is a True Church and acknowledged so by this Mark which is here given of it To find out such a one and to distinguish it from others we must very carefully enquire into all the particular Doctrines and Points of Faith which are held by it and see whether they are agreeable to the Faith and Doctrine of the Primitive Church and according to this Method and saving to our selves all the forementioned Advantages of it we are very willing to have the Difference adjusted between us and the Church of Rome and to have it decided by this Note whether we or they are the True Church that is whether we or they in all Matters of Controversy between us do most agree with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church And here is a very large scope offered to me and what has taken up a great many Volumes on both sides so that to most People Scripture one would think should be a shorter and an easier and therefore a better way to know the True Church by but since our Adversaries are not willing to leave the Case to that we are ready to accept of the Primitive Church to be Judg between us and as has been often offered before by Bishop Jewel and others we shall be very willing to stand to its award and decision for however some few Divines of the Reformation before they were so well acquainted with Antiquity and when they could not so well distinguish what was genuine from what was spurious and corrupted by your Church were at first especially more jealous and distrustful than they need to have been of it and unwilling to
have also divided from them For 't is very idle to say that tho we were Members of that Church when we first began to differ from it yet that by our Divisions we cut our selves from her Communion and therefore that the Unity of her Communion is not affected by our Departure For thus we may as well excuse all the separations from ours or from any other Church viz. that by separating from us they no longer belong to us We are very confident that in all Points of Doctrine of any great moment we of the Church of England do agree much more together than those of the Church of Rome and as for them who have gone out from us they as little break the Unity of the rest whom they are gone from as Luther's departing from the Church of Rome broke the Unity of those who still remained in it So that either the Church of Rome must renounce her pretence to Unity upon this account that Sects and Parties have not broken away from her or she must set up this wise Note of the true Church that all her Members are united except those that are divided from her which is a Mark that will fit any Society in the World. But the Cardinal does here offer a difference between the Division of Hereticks from the Church and a Division from Heresy That in their Church they have a certain Rule for ending Controversies viz. the Sentence of the chief Pastor or the Definition of a general Council and therefore Dissension does not arise among them from the Doctrine of the Church but from the Malice of the Devil Now in answer to this not to be importunate with that Question That if these be the ways of compounding Controversies how comes it to pass that their Controversies still remain I would know 1. Why were not these the means of composing those Controversies that carried us away from them Our Fathers were once of their Communion and those means were not sufficient to retain them in it To say this arose from the Malice of the Devil is to say in effect that the Devil was in 'em which is a little too Magisterial for a Controvertist though he were a Cardinal Unless he resolves to ascribe it to the Devil that they were taken off from an implicit Faith and a blind Obedience to the Church of Rome For it seems to be some Peoples Opinion when Men begin to judg a little for themselves the Spirit of Heresy comes in and then away they go But from hence I gather that the Sentence of the Pope or of a plenary Council is no certain Rule for ending Controversies nor certain means of preventing Divisions if some other means be not used to keep Men from trying the Spirits and proving all things What they are the Cardinal knew very well but mentioned them not nor shall I need to do it In the mean time when whole Countries went off from that Church as soon as they had a little considered what they had believed upon her Authority I need not say whether the Separation was caused by the Doctrine of that Church or by the Malice of the Devil but leave the World to judg But 2. How could those be certain means of composing Controversies concerning which even in their own Church there were the greatest Controversies of all What deference is to be given to the Sentence of their chief Pastor has always been a great Dispute amongst them and the best if not the greatest Part of their Church do not think him infallible Nor is it yet agreed what is requisite to make the Sentence of a general Council decisive nor of those Councils that have contradicted one another which they are to follow And that cannot be a certain Rule for deciding Controversies which is it self controverted So that they have neither that Union of Members among themselves nor those certain means of Union which they pretend to have Which I shall farther shew from a Learned Writer of their own the Famous ‖ Ep. par 8. p. 353. Launoy who in an elaborate Epistle to Nic. Gatinaeus wholly overthrows the pretence in Question For whether or no there be such an Union in the Church of Rome as will serve the Cardinal's turn I will leave the Reader to judg by this short and faithful account of that Epistle First then He proves unanswerably by numerous and apposite Testimonies of every Age That from the Apostles Times till the Council of Trent the constant universal Doctrine concerning the Church was this that it is the Society of the Faithful without ever inserting into the Definition of it any thing relating to its being united to the Pope or any other Bishop as to a Visible Head. Nay P. 400.415 Secondly That all the most Learned Lovers of Antiquity and Godly Opposers of Novelty in the Roman Communion both in the Time of the Council of Trent and ever since have retained that Notion of the Church and stuck to the Ancient Definition And Thirdly P. 415.419 That Canisius and Bellarmin have egregiously innovated in their Doctrine by adding to the ancient Definition such things as are repugnant to all Antiquity and mean while that they opposed each other Canisius making it of the nature of the Church to be under a * Uno summo post Christum capite Monarch and giving no place in his Definition of it to other Governours to whom the Church also is to be united Whereas Bellarmin makes an Aristocracy wherein one is Chief at least †Esse caetum hominum c. colligatum sub regimine legitimorum pastorum ac praecipue unius Christi in terris Vicarii Romani Pontificis De Eccl. l. 3. c. 2. a tempered and limited Monarchy essential to the Church going in this matter against Antiquity against Canisius and against himself in that he elsewhere makes Antiquity a Note of the true Church and says 't is a Demonstration of the Novelty of a Doctrine when the first Authors can be named and pointed to which is his own Case and Canisius's as to this Doctrine He reflects upon both of 'em P. 418 419.428 for ill Logick in these Definitions and shews how they destroy each other He censures the Followers of Canisius sharply and judiciously and then remarks that tho Bellarmine have greater Authority amongst Divines yet Canisius's Definition is more generally received and that for four Reasons because there is more Court-Flattery in it because it is put into Catechisms which the other is not and so sticks by virtue of an early Impression because some Men are mad upon Novelties and lastly others insufferably Ignorant as to the Holy Scriptures and Ancient Tradition the Principles of true Theology Fourthly He thinks they have done harm to the Church and that for these Reasons 1. Because P. 430. for want of Logick they have confounded the Nature of the Church with the State of it 2. They have neglected St. Paul's
Doctrine Which I doubt not to make appear performs as little as either of the former In order to which I shall endeavour to shew I. What the Cardinal means by Sanctity of Doctrine II. That according to his Notion of it Sanctity of Doctrine is no certain Note of the true Church III. In what Sense it is a certain Note by which any honest Enquirer may distinguish a true Church from a false one IV. That neither in this nor the Cardinal's Notion of it the true Church can be found by any honest Enquirer according to the Principles of the Church of Rome I. What it is that the Cardinal here means by Sanctity of Doctrine To which in short I answer That which he means by it is the Profession of the true Religion both as to Doctrine of Faith and Doctrine of Manners without any mixture of Error For so he explains himself The true Church is not only Catholick and Apostolick and One but also Holy according to the Constantinopolitan Creed but its evident the Church is said to be Holy because its Profession is Holy containing nothing false as to Doctrine of Faith nothing unjust as to Doctrine of Manners And a little after By this Note saith he it 's evident that no Church but ours is a true Church because there is no Sect either of Pagans or Philosophers or Jews or Turks or Hereticks which doth not contain some Errors that have been exploded and are manifestly contrary to right Reason By which it 's evident that he excludes all sorts of Errors from that Profession of Religion which he here sets up as a Mark of the true Church And therefore after he had given a brief Enumeration of the Errors of all other Sects as well of Pagans and Jews and Mahometans as of Christians He thus concludes But as for our Catholick Church it teaches no Error no Turpitude nothing against Reason no not excepting Transubstantiation though many things above Reason therefore she alone is absolutely Holy and to her alone appertains what we say in our Creed I believe the Holy Church In which Words he expresly points and directs us to his Catholick Church by this Mark or Note That it teaches no Error c. By which it is evident that Sanctity of Doctrine in the Cardinal's Sense consists in an unerring profession of the true Religion without any so much as the least intermixture of Error Now tho it is certain that that is the best and purest Church which hath the least of Error and Corruption in its Doctrine and Discipline yet it is as certain that that which is the best Church is not the only true Church For the only true Church is the Catholick Church which consists of a great many particular Churches whereof some are more and some less pure from Error and Corruption and yet all of 'em true Churches For all particular Bodies and Societies of Christians that are true parts of the Catholick Church are true Churches as being Homogenious Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently partaking of the same common Nature with it But when we are discoursing of the Notes of the true Church that which we mean by 'em is such certain Marks and Characters by which an honest Enquirer may distinguish such Societies of Christians as are the true Churches of which the true Catholick Church consists from such as are not and therefore that can be no true Note of the true Church which doth not distinguish it from all false Churches and whose contrary is consistent with the being of a true Church I proceed therefore II. To shew that Sanctity of Doctrine according to Bellarmin's Sense of it that is a pure profession of true Religion without any intermixture of Error is no true Note or Mark or Character by which any honest Enquirer can certainly distinguish the true Church from all false Churches And this I doubt not will evidently appear if we consider what are the necessary Properties of all true Notes by which things are to be known and distinguished and they are these four 1. Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies 2. It ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of Thing of which it is a Note and not common to Things of another kind 3. It ought to be more known than the Thing which it notifies 4. It ought to be inseparable to it The three last of which Bellarmin himself owns to be necessary Properties of every true Note Cap. 2. though the first he did not think meet to take notice of for a Reason best known to himself if therefore this Note according to Bellarmine's sense of it hath neither of these Properties belonging to it it can be no true Note of the true Church and that none of 'em do belong to it I doubt not but I shall make it evidently appear 1. First Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies Thus every true Note of a true Man for instance ought to be common to all human kind and so every true Note of every wise Man ought to be common to all wise Men and by the same Rule every true Note of the true Church ought to be common to all true Churches For seeing the true Church is nothing else but only a Collection of all true Churches whatsoever is a certain Note of the true Church must necessarily belong to all true Churches in the World. And indeed since the end of our enquiry after the true Church is that we may communicate with it and since we can no otherwise communicate with the true Church but by communicating with some particular Church that is a true part of it the proper use of the Notes of the true Church is to direct our Enquirers whether this or that Church be a true part of it or which is the same thing whether by communicating with this or that particular Church we do communicate with the true Catholick Church And therefore unless the Notes of the true Catholick Church are such as do appertain to all true Churches they can never give us any certain direction in what Church we may communicate with the true Catholick Church for seeing we can communicate with the true Catholick Church in none but a true Church no Note can give us any certain direction where to communicate with the Catholick Church but what directs us to a true Church and no Note can certainly direct us to a true Church but what belongs to all true Churches If therefore not to err in its Profession be a certain Note whereby to find the true Catholick Church it must necessarily belong to all true Churches and consequently that can be no true Church which in any instance whatsoever errs in its Profession and indeed seeing all the true Churches in the World are only so many simular parts of the true Catholick Church and the
Church it is agreed of all sides that it is only to the true Church And therefore I must be certain which is the true Church before I can be ascertained which Church is infallible Seeing therefore that every true Note is inseparable to the Thing which it notifies before I can be certain that I have found the true Church which Christ hath promised to continue to the end of the World by this Note of not erring I must have very good assurance not only that my Church doth not err at present but also that not to err is always inseparable to it both for the time past and the time to come Seeing therefore there is no one Church now in being of which we can be rationally assured as to this matter the necessary Consequence is that by this Note no Man can certainly discover which is the true Church And now having proved that according to the true Properties of the Notes of the true Church this of Sanctity of Doctrine as Bellarmin explains it is no true Note for an honest Enquirer to seek the true Church by I proceed III. To enquire in what Sense this is a true Note of the true Church In short if by Sanctity of Doctrine we understand professing all the necessary and essential Articles of Christian Faith and admitting all the essential parts of Christian Worship and Discipline this wherever it is is a certain Note of a true Church for nothing can be a certain Note of a true Church but what is essential to it as a true Church for whatsoever is accidental to it is separable from it and whatsoever is separable from it it may have or not have and yet be a true Church notwithstanding that therefore which doth not appertain to it as it is a true Church may appertain to a false Church as well as a true But to say that that is not a true Church which hath all the essentials of a true Church is a downright Contradiction If therefore we would have such Notes of a true Church as we may certainly depend upon we must fetch 'em from the Essence of a true Church and consequently we must first state what a true Church is before we can be certain what are the true Notes of it Now what it is that is necessary to constitute a true Christian Church may be easily collected by considering what is necessary to make a true Christian for a true Christian Church is nothing but a Society of true Christians And seeing that Christianity consists of Doctrines of Faith and Laws of Worship and Discipline he only is a true Christian that owns and receives Christianity in all these parts of it that is who acknowledges all the Essentials of true Christian Faith Worship and Discipline And consequently that must be a true Christian Church or Society of true Christians which professes all the Essential Articles of Christian Faith and receives all the Essential parts of Christian Worship and Discipline whereever therefore I find a Religious Society of Men professing all the necessary Doctrines of true Christian Faith worshiping the one God through the one Mediator communicating in the true Christian Sacraments and submitting to the true Christian Discipline duly administred by true Christian Pastors and Governours there I am certain I have found a true Church if that be a true Church which hath all the Essentials that constitute a true Church Wherefore before we can know whether this or that be a true Church we must be rightly imformed what a true Church is and before we can state what a true Church is we must learn what the true Faith and Worship and Discipline is because these are the Essential Ingredients of which a true Church is composed And when we have learn'd what these are by them we may certainly discover whether this or that be a true Church or no. If therefore by Sanctity of Doctrine we understand the publick profession and admission of all the Essentials of Christian Faith Worship and Discipline it is not only a certain Note of a true Church but the only certain Note of it because there can be no certain Note of a true Church but what is Essential to it and there is nothing Essential to it but what this Note comprehends Where-ever this is there is the entire Essence of a true Church and if there were but one Church upon Earth that had it that would be the only true Church in the World and if there were ten thousand Churches agreeing in it there would be ten thousand true Churches So that whereas all other Notes are separable from a true Church and consequently may direct us to a false Church instead of a true this is no more separable from it than a true Man is from the Human Nature And if I had found a Church that hath in it all the other Notes of Bellarmin excepting this I should still be to seek for a true Church as on the contrary if I had found a Church that wants all the rest but this I should nevertheless sit down fully satisfied of its Truth and seek no further And thus I have given a brief Account in what Sense Sanctity of Doctrine is a certain Note of the true Church and by this our Church is willing to be tryed by any honest and ingenuous Enquirer whose Business it is to seek for Truth and not for Gain and Preferment and if upon Examination he cannot find in it as I am sure he may if he examine fairly all the Essentials of that Faith and Worship and Discipline which the Scripture teaches and the Primitive Ages profess'd and embraced in God's Name let him seek farther abroad but if after he hath missed of it in the Church of England he should happen to find it in the Church of Rome imports him as much as his Soul is worth to enquire into one Point more viz. whether he sought it by his Reason or by his Interest And now I proceed IV. And Lastly To shew That according to the Principles of the Church of Rome the true Church is not to be found by this Note in which-soever of the two Senses we understand it for if by Sanctity of Doctrine we mean with Bellarmin an unerring profession of the Truth without any the least intermixture of Error before we can be certain we have found thē true Church by it we must be very well assured concerning the profession of that Church which we take to be the true Church that it is in all particulars true without any the least Ingredient of Error Or if by Sanctity of Doctrine we only mean the profession of all the Essentials of Christian Faith Worship and Discipline before we can be certain that we have found the true Church by it we must be very well assured not only that there are such Essential Principles and what they are but also that they are true for unless we certainly know that there are such Principles and what
an unerring Profession But till I am certain one way or t'other whether she be the true Church or no I can never be certain whether her Profession be true or false till I am certain that she is the true Church there are some Articles in her Profession of which as her own Doctors confess I cannot be certain that they are true and till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any one Article in her Profession is false and if I cannot be certain whether she errs in her Profession or no till I am certain whether she be the true Church or no to what purpose should I enquire whether or no she be the true Church by this Note of an unerring Profession If supposing her to be the true Church she hath Authority from God to oblige me upon pain of Damnation to believe to Day that which I was not obliged to believe Yesterday to what end do I enquire whether those things which she commands me to believe are true or false If she be the true Church as for all I yet know she may be I am sure what ever she commands me to believe must be true and therefore till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any thing she commands me to believe is false For how can I be certain that any one thing she imposes is false when for all I yet know she is the true Church which the God of Truth who can neither impose himself nor authorize any other to impose on me that which is false hath authorized to impose it and if till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any thing she imposes is false How can I ever be cartain by this Note of an unerring Profession whether she be the true Church or no For if any thing she professes or imposes be false by this Note she cannot be the true Church but whether any thing she professes be false or no I can never be certain till I am first certain whether she is or is not the true Church THE END ERRATA IN the Seventh Note Pag. 137. the first cum Capite in the Title is to be blotted out P. 147. line 17. for Arian r. Asian P. 148. l. 6. f. Complaint r. Complement LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Ninth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The Efficacy of the Doctrine Nona Nota est Efficacia Doctrinae Bellarm. L. iv c. 12. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR June 8. 1687. Jo. Battely BY Efficacy of Doctrine must be meant either that power which the Word of God has in the Minds of Particular Men to dispose them to believe aright and to live well or else that success which it has in drawing Multitudes outwardly to profess and embrace it The former of these is too inward a thing to be the Note of a true Church No Man being able to know what the Word of God has done in anothers Heart but instead of that apt rather to be deceived in what it has done in his own The Second which must be that the Cardinal means can as little be a Note by reason of its Uncertainty and if we cannot be sure of the Note we shall be less so of that which we are to find out by it If indeed there were nothing which could or did move Men to relinquish Heathenism Judaism or Turcism for our Religion but the pure Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine it would be a very good Note of the excellence of the Doctrine it self but according to the Cardinal 's own Principles it could be no Note that that were the true Church which preached it since he will not allow the sincere preaching of Truth to signify any thing Lib. iv 2. And we shall have much less reason to rely on this Note if we consider how many other things there are besides the Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine which have and may convert whole Nations to it Let us therefore at present grant in general the matter of Fact to be true that such Conversions as the Cardinal speaks of were made by the Church of Rome yet how shall we know that they were made purely by the Efficacy of its Doctrine and that no other means such as Force c. were used Is it enough that he tells us so The Bishop of Meaux tells us that in the late great Conversion in France not one of the Persons converted suffered Violence either in his Person or Goods That they were so far from suffering Torments Pastoral Letter p. 3 4. that they had not so much as heard them mentioned and that he heard other Bishops affirm the same Now if those Reverend Prelats were out as most people think they were in a matter of Fact of which they might be Eye-witnesses why may not the learned Cardinal be so too in his Relation of Conversions made so many hundred years since If he be out his Note falls to the ground and if it cannot be made plainly to appear to us that he was not out his Note as far as it is founded upon those Histories which he produces wants that certainty which should give us satisfaction Historians who wrote in those obscure times and were perhaps themselves Converters being most of them Monks might vain-gloriously ascribe much to the Efficacy of their own Doctrine and the Centuriators themselves whom he so often quotes might not be very curious to search or accurate to relate the chief motives of their Conversions because they wrote before the Cardinal had made Efficacy of Doctrine a Note of the true Church and little dream't what odd use some Men would make of their History But notwithstanding these Neglects and Disadvantages I do not doubt but that if we look'd back into the Writers of those Times nay even into the Centuriators themselves we should find some other things besides Efficacy of Doctrine concurring to the Conversions which were then wrought An instance whereof to pass by at present the particular examination of those mentioned by the Cardinal we have in those Converons wrought by Charles the Great to whose victorious Arms they were more to be ascribed than to any thing else besides For not to mention that the Clergy were not then in any great capacity of doing much by the Efficacy of their Doctrine the Bishops being so ignorant that they were to be commanded to understand the Lord's Prayer and could hardly be brought to make some few exhortations to the People but instead of that turned Souldiers to shew that they were willing to do somewhat towards the propagating their Religion such was the Zeal of that Prince rather to defend and increase the Kingdom of Jesus Christ Mezeray in the Life of Charles the Great than to inlarge his own Empire that Peace could never be
obtained of him upon other ther Terms than that those who were conquered by him having left their Idol-worship should embrace the true Krantzius Praef. ad Metrop sincere and eternal Religion of Christ And to engage them to continue firm to it he sometimes took Hostages of them and finding them begin to apostatize which they as often did as they thought themselves able to make head against their Conquerors he was forc'd to set up a kind of Inquisition to keep them in aw which Mezeray tells us lasted in Westphalia till the 15th Century Now when the Swords of victorious Princes as it happened in this case had made way for the preaching of the Gospel when the receiving of it was often made one of the Terms they who were conquered must necessarily submit to the Monks had very easy work what-ever Doctrine they had preached might have been efficacious under such Circumstances So that when there is with the Christian Doctrine a concurrence of many other things which have so strong an influence upon humane Nature 't is hard nay impossible for us to know which of them does the work When different Medicines proper for the same Distemper are administred at the same time 't is not easy to say which of them works the Cure. There is indeed a wonderful Efficacy in the Christian Doctrine but we can never be sure that the Conversion of a Nation is effected by that when Hopes and Fears and outward Force and necessity are in conjunction with it All which is so far from detracting from the honour of our Religion and the Conversions it made in the Primitive Times that it sets iâ— it a better Light and makes it shine the brighter Men were converted then not to a conquering but persecuted Church The Secular Power was against them that preached this holy Doctrine Much might be lost and nothing in this World got by it There were no rewards to encourage Men to receive it but a thousand Difficulties and Dangers to deter them from it And then indeed the Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine was in its greatest lustre it wrought all alone and had nothing to put in with it for a share in the Conquests it made The simplicity of its Preachers cleared them from all suspicion of Fraud The little or no Interest they had in the Government makes it plain that they could not use force and every thing concurred to demonstrate that 't was purely the Efficacy of their Doctrine by which they prevailed But to proceed a little more particularly to answer what the Cardinal has discoursed upon this Subject First I shall endeavour to shew in the general That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church Secondly I shall instance in such particulars as do more particularly affect the Church of Rome in this matter and do make it evident that the Prevalency of the Doctrine professed in that Church is no Note of its being a true Church Thirdly I shall shew the Insufficiency of those Arguments with which the Cardinal endeavours to prove the contrary First That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church will appear if we consider 1. What our Saviour has said in this matter 2. The Nature of Mankind 3. Matter of Fact. 1. Altho our Saviour sufficiently understood how much his Doctrine was likely to prevail in the World yet he is so far from making this to be a Note of his Church that he gives as plain intimations of the Prevalency of Error and does often bid us take care how we are imposed upon on thereby Take heed saith he that no man deceive you for many shall come in my Name Mat. 24.4 5. saying I am Christ and deceive many For there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets Verse 24. and shall shew great Signs and Wonders insomuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very Elect. When he foretells so general a Defection he cannot be supposed to have thought the prevalency of any Doctrine to have been the Character of his true Disciples He does indeed compare the preaching of his Gospel to a grain of Mustard-seed which is the least of all Seeds hut when it is grown it is the greatest among Herbs unto Leaven which leaveneth the whole Lump unto a Net which gathereth of every kind All which Comparisons do intimate how much his Church would spread far near but not that such its diffusiveness was to be relied upon as a Note whereby to find it for by that Mark it could not then have been found when it was but a little Flock Besides that in the same Chapter he compares likewise the preaching of his Gospel to a Man which sowed good Seed in his Field Verse 24 25 26. but while Men slept his Enemy came and sowed Tares among the Wheat and went his way but when the Blade was sprung up and brought forth fruit then appeared the Tares also In which case if we were to judg by the growth and spreading we might conclude the Tares to have been the best Seed and not sown by an Enemy He compares likewise the Ministers of his Word to the Servants of a certain King sent out by him to call those that were bidden to the Wedding but to no purpose Mat. 22.2 c. for they all made light of it Intimating hereby how possible it is for those who are obstinate not to hearken to the most efficacious Doctrine that can be preached the most passionate and earnest invitations which can be made them And in the Parable of the good Seed some of which fell by the way-side some upon stony places some among Thorns Mat. 13.3 4. and other upon good Ground He does plainly set forth that let any Doctrine be never so good the reception which it finds in the World will be no other than what is agreeable to those Dispositions of mind which it happens to meet with And here also if the Rule had been that that is the true Doctrine which grows fastest and out-tops the other we must have given it for the Thorns which grew up and choaked the good Seed Which leads me to shew 2. From the consideration of the Temper and constitution of Mankind how weak a proof of a true Church the prevalency of any Doctrine is which it teacheth For Mens minds are so uncertain by reason of the Inconstancy of their Circumstances which chiefly influence them that often Truth is shut out where Error finds an easy admission Humane Nature is so weak a thing so apt to take impressions first from this thing then from another that no great heed is to be given to its changes no certain Argument can be drawn from them Such indeed is the Power of Truth that were Mankind freed from their Prejudices against it were their Minds no way byassed by Interest or Passion and at the same time fully instructed concerning it there is
others has to pretend that it is the Character of its being a true Church I desire in the second place that these following Particulars may be considered 1. That altho we charge the Church of Rome with many Errors and Mistakes yet we allow it to contain in it a mixture of Truth Now this very mixture of Truth may perhaps be of sufficient force to make Proselytes but then it does not follow but that such Proselytes may likewise have embraced the Errors which are mixed with it as well as the Truth it self The Indians whose Conversion to the Romish Faith I shall speak of afterwards were not so void of Reason but that if they compared the Religion of their Conquerors with their own Worship they might be perswaded to embrace the former rather than adhere still to the latter And altho by this means they were but half converted to the Truth yet it was better that it should be thus than that they should not have been converted at all for by this means they were much nearer the reception of the whole Truth than they were formerly which was a great advantage and therefore we reckon those but an ill sort of Protestants who would rather have Men Turks and Infidels than of the Romish Church But at the same time the Conversion of never so many to Church of Rome is no Argument of its not being a corrupted Church as long as we can prove it to maintain such gross Errors as it does altho accompanied with such a mixture of Truth as may be of great force to bring over such as had before little or no knowledg thereof 2. That the Prevalency of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome can be no Note of its being a true Church because it is so much alter'd from what it formerly was The Doctrine of the Church of Rome was in the beginning of Christianity the same with that which was deliver'd by Christ and his Apostles to the Saints Afterwards new Doctrines insensibly crept into and were received by that Church and at last Matters came to be settled as we now find them in the Council of Trent This has been often cleared by Learned Men and in some of those Discourses which have of late been writ Barrow of the Pope's Suprem Discourse of Transubst Disc concerning the Worship of the blessed Virgin and the Saints Disc of Commun in one kind Vindicat. of the Answ to some late Papers c. some of the new Doctrines have been traced step by step and the manner now they came to be receiv'd set down and in others the Church of Rome has been compared with her self and what was determin'd by the Council of Trent has been shown to be quite another thing from what was held some Ages ago Now it is impossible that things that are different should be the distinguishing Character of that which is always the same Since then I suppose it will be readily granted that the Church of Rome has always been the true Church the Efficacy of its Doctrine can be no Note thereof since in some Ages those Doctrines have prevailed in it which are directly contrary to those which have prevailed in other 3. That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church where those who embrace it are hindred from thoroughly examining it For without a thorough Examination it never can be rightly understood and what Efficacy can it have upon his Mind who does not rightly understand it Now the Church of Rome exacts of the Members of her Communion a tame Submission to and Compliance with whatever she proposeth to their Belief and Practice and by forbidding them the use of the Scriptures she takes from them the use of that Rule whereby they are to judg of the Reasonableness of her Proposals How then can the reception of her Doctrine be a Note of her being a true Church when perhaps not one amongst a thousand of her Members who receeive it is capable of understanding what he is bound to believe 4. That the Prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church where Art and Force are made use of to make it prevail For it is no difficult matter for cunning Deceivers to impose upon unstable Souls and it must be a great courage and constancy of Mind which can make Men for-go Father and Mother Houses and Land c. for the sake of Truth Now that the Church of Rome has taken this course to propagate her Doctrines we may be assured by some of her own Members There are saith Erasmus Erasmus in Annot. in Mat. 23. those who after a new Example make Christians by force but whilst they pretend the Propagation of Religion they do in reality study the Inlargement of Riches and Power Not unlike these are those Monks who inveigle others to take upon them their Order and do use a great deal of cunning to insnare such as are young and unskilful and who neither understand Themselves nor the Nature of true Religion And Stapleton declares very freely Stapleton Epist Dedic de oper Justific Edit Paris 1582. Eo sane loco haereses sunt c. Heresies are come to that pass that their Gordian Knots are not to be dissolved by Art and Industry but by the Sword of Alexander and the Club of Hercules is more fit to subdue them than the Harp of Apollo I might quote several others to the same purpose but the constant Practices of the Inquisition in those places where it is received and the extraordinary Methods which have of late been made use of in a Neighbouring Nation to gain Proselytes do sufficiently shew that the Church of Rome does more depend upon something else than upon the Efficacy of her Doctrine for the making of Converts Which will more fully appear if in the third place we consider the insufficiency of the Cardinal's Arguments which are fetched First From the Scriptures Secondly From what happened in the beginning of the Christian Church Thirdly From the particular Instances which he gives of Conversions wrought by those of the Church of Rome First As to the Scriptures which are quoted Ps 19.7 The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the Soul and Heb. 4.12 For the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged Sword piercing even to the dividing asunder of Soul and Spirit and of the Joynts and Marrow and is a discerner of the Thoughts and Intents of the Heart It may be answer'd 1. That the latter of these is by several Expositors interpreted of the Son of God and not of his Doctrine 2. That if they are both interpreted of the Efficacy of any Doctrine yet that the Efficacy which is spoken of is wholly internal as we before observ'd and consequently such as cannot be accounted a Note of the true Church For the Note of a Church must be what any one can come to the knowledg of 3. Suppose by these words
was to be understood the visible Prevalency of any Doctrine in the World yet it would make nothing to the Cardinal's purpose For that which in these SS is said to prevail is The Word of God The Law of the Lord i. e. the true Doctrine But we deny the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to be such and therefore these places are not applicable thereunto 4. Were these SS applicable to the Church of Rome as having that true Doctrine which is oftentimes so efficacious yet the Efficacy here expressed could be no Note of the true Church since altho as has already been shewn the true Doctrine does sometimes prevail yet it does not follow that it always should For it may be perverted it may be resisted and Error may meet with a much kinder Reception in the World than it does As for what Bellarmine saith in the second place concerning the Prevalency of the Christian Doctrine in the beginning of the Church we allow it all to be true but we do not think the Church of Rome to be more concerned in it than any other Christian Church whatsoever What then happened does very much confirm the Christian Doctrine in the general but does not at all prove any particular party of Christians to be better than another much less the Church of Rome whose Doctrine altho it was once the same with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church yet what it was in the Cardinal's days and what it is now is quite another thing from what it was then The Primitive Christians converted the Heathens from their Idolatry to worship the true God but the great design of the Catholick Missionaries is to render their Proselytes intirely submissive to the Pope of Rome in all things I might here conclude did not the Cardinal much insist upon the particular Conversions wrought by those of the Church of Rome upon some of which in the third place I shall make some brief Reflections Now as to the Conversion of the English by Augustin the Monk it may be replied 1. That the Centurists out of whom he quotes this and the other Instances do expresly say that Augustin eas Ecclesias magis deformavit quam recte instituit Cent. 6. c. 2. p. 37. 2. That this was not such a general Conversion as seems to be pretended for as has been lately cleared by a very learned Man the Faith was here planted during the Apostles times Dr. Still Origin Britan. c. 1. and in all probability by St. Paul rather than by St. Peter or any one else Besides Bede gives us an account of Germanus Bed. l. 1. c. 17 21. Lupus and Severus coming over hither to reclaim the Britains from the Heresie of Pelagius several Years before the arrival of Augustin Lib. 2. c. 2. Origin Britan. c. 5. p. 357. and that at his coming over several British Bishops met him at Augustinsac and stoutly refused all Submission either to the Church of Rome or to him Lastly altho he might be very instrumental towards the Conversion of the Saxons in Kent yet was he even in that Affair mightily assisted by the Authority of a Christian Queen named Bertha Bed. l. 1. c. 25. and a Christian Bishop named Luidhardus 3 That the Doctrine which Augustin taught Vindicat. of the Answer of some late Papers p. 72 c. being the Doctrine of Gregory the Great is vastly different from what has been since taught in the Church of Rome 4. That Augustin's proud carriage towards the British Bishops and the death of 1200 Monks of Bangor occasioned by their denial of Subjection unto him Bed. l. 2. c. 2. do sufficiently shew of what Temper he was Galfridus Monumet Hist Brit. l. 11. c. 12. 13. and that he thought it lawful to make use of other means besides the Efficacy of his Doctrine to promote what he was sent hither by the Pope about The next Mission which the Cardinal makes mention of is that of Kilianus by Pope Conon who converted the People of Franconia whose chief City was Herbipolis or Wirtzburg Now the account that the Centuriators give of this Kilianus and which makes him not to have had that success in the Conversion of People as is pretended is this viz. That being a Monk and by Nation a Scotish-man Centur. Magdeb Cent. 7. p. 516. and not being able to do any good amongst his own Country-men with his preaching up of new Rites and Ceremonies he passed over into Germany to see what he could do there and finding that at Wirtzburg the Governour Gosbertus gave him but little Encouragement he being one who as those Historians relate did abhor those Popish Ceremonies which Kilianus taught he went to Rome and got the Pope to make him Bishop of that City hoping that at his return thither with greater Authority he should be better received but was soon slain by his own Auditors The third Instance is the Conversion of a great part of Germany by Vinofrid otherwise called Boniface who seem'd a little to mistrust the Efficacy of his Doctrine when he thus wrote Bonif. Ep. 3. That without the Command and Awe of the Prince of the Francks he could not be able to hinder the Pagan Rites and Idol-Sacrileges in Germany and as the Centuriators tell us entred the Country of the Thuringi with an Army Cent. 8. p. 21 22. forcing them to take Refuge in a fortified place and when upon no other terms they were willing to turn Christians but upon their being freed from paying Tenths for the future to the King of Hungary gratified them therein Of the Conversion of the Vandals which he ascribes to the Monks of Corbie hear the account that Albertus Krantzius gives The Vandals says he were a Nation singularly given to the Superstitious Worship of their Idols Lib. 1. c. 1. till by the Arms of the King of Denmark by Sea by those of the Pomeranian on the East and those of other Christian Princes on the South they were forced to become Christian As to the Conversion or the Danes Saxo Gram. Hist Dan. l. 9. p. 158. we are told that Harald being beaten by Regner and having no other hopes Alb. Krantzii Metrop l. 1. c. 19. fled for help to Ludovicus the Emperour then at Mentz who refused to assist him upon any other condition than that of his turning Christian which he and his People accordingly did And as for the Bulgarians Sclavonians c. besides that they were converted by their Neighbour Greeks as well as Italians especially the Bulgarians whose disturbance from some Western Missionaries Photius passionately laments it is not a sign that they were made so subject to the Popes of Rome Ep. 2. as is pretended since as the Centuriators tell us when Pope Nicholas would have obliged the Sclavonians and Polonians Cent. 9. c. 2. col 18. whom Cyrillus and Methodius who converted them had taught to have their publick Service
which that great Historian tho a Gentile profest in his writing the Peloponesian War he had lost the greatest part of this Note and we been excus'd the pains of examining it Thucydid l. 1. p. 16. A. B. C. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that Historian tells us He could multiply Fables as others have done and they might perhaps be more divertive to an injudicious Reader but his regard should be to what is true and certain which all that have a mind to the certainty of things should judg much more profitable However proceed we to the Examination of this Note as the Cardinal hath thought fit to propose it in proof of His Church As to this he premiseth this twofold Foundation 1. That Miracles are necessary to evince any new Faith or extraordinary Mission 2. That Miracles are efficacious and sufficient By the former he tells us may be deduc'd that the Church is not to be found amongst us Protestants By the latter that it is most assuredly amongst them 1. As to the Necessity of Miracles he quotes Moses (a) Exod. iv St. Matthew (b) Matth. x. and St. John (c) Joh. xv He further proves it by a Similitude of one necessarily shewing his Orders received from his Diocesan by which he is authoriz'd to Preach and by a Quotation from St. Austin and the Concession of Melancthon one of the Reform'd Persuasion all which was needless and the Similitude too weak and inconclusive 2. As to the Efficacy and Sufficiency of Miracles He proves this partly as they are the Seals and Testimonials God useth without whose immediate Power they could not be perform'd and who will by no means bear witness to a Lye. And therefore where either Turks or Pagans Jews Hereticks or false Prophets have pretended to any extraordinary Feats or Accomplishments of this kind either they have appear'd the meer Tricks and Delusions of the Devil or else in the Attempts they have made they have been publickly disgrac'd and disappointed So the Prophets of Baal Simon Magus several of the Donatists Luther and Calvin In the Application of the whole for the proof of His Church and the utter exclusion of Ours from all Title to the Denomination and Benefits of a Church he gives a summary of Miracles in every distinct Age by which the Church of Rome and no other for that is the whole drift of his Argument hath been all along signaliz'd as the True Catholick Church In the first Age he mentions the Miracles of the Holy Jesus and his Apostles In the second those of the Christian Souldiers under Antonius the Emperor In the third those of Gregory Thaumaturgus In the fourth those of Anthony Hilarion and others In the fifth several mention'd by St. Austin as done in his time In the sixth some Wonders done by Popes viz. John and Agapetus In the seventh Miracles wrought in England by Austin the Monk and his Company In the eighth St. Cuthbert and St. John in England In the ninth those of Tharasius and great Numbers by Sebastian the Martyr In the tenth St. Rombold St. Dunstan and a certain King of Poland with others In the eleventh St. Edward St. Anselm and to make up the number honest Hildebrand or Pope Gregory VII In the twelfth St. Malachy and St. Bernard In the thirteenth St. Francis and Bonaventure St. Dominic and others In the fourteenth St. Bernardinus and Catharine of Senna In the fifteenth Vincentius St. Anthonine and others And lastly in the Cardinal 's own Age Franciscus de Paula and the Holy Xaviere among the Indians Thus having laid down the main Scheme of the Cardinal 's managing this Note which he calls the Glory of Miracles I shall shew the weakness of this proof as it concerns the Church of Rome distinct and exclusively to that of the Reformed And that under these three Heads I. That meer Miracles without any other Considerations at all are not a sufficient Note of any Church or Religion whatever II. Much less are those Miracles which are alledged in the Church of Rome any tolerable Proof or Confirmation of these particular Doctrines or Practices wherein we of the Reform'd Church do differ from them III. And Lastly We of the Reform'd Church as we do not pretend to the working of Miracles in our Age so if we did we could pretend to prove nothing by them but what hath been already sufficiently prov'd by the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles I. That meer Miracles without any other Considerations at all are not a sufficient Note of any Church or Religion whatever I add this Passage without any other Considerations at all because those Miracles which are recorded and embrac'd by all the Faithful as part of the undeniable proof of Christianity are attended with all the Circumstances that are requisite to strengthen and enforce them Whereas those Miracles which the Church of Rome pretends to in Confirmation of some Doctrines which we differ from them in they are attended with none of the requisite Considerations to enforce them i. e. they are produc'd meerly to confirm some particular Doctrines which Doctrines have no antecedent advantage of being plainly and expresly laid down in the Holy Scriptures nor the Miracles themselves of being foretold by any Prophecy As for those Miracles that in Primitive Days were wrought to confirm Christianity in general It was the infinite goodness of Providence to make them of that nature and to order the performance of them in that way that there is no room left for the honest considering mind to reject them Either as to matter of Fact to mistrust that they were never done or as to their Force and Efficacy to suspect that they do not most fully confirm what they were produc'd for 1. As to matter of Fact they were done so publickly and in the view of those that were the greatest Enemies and after they were done they were reported partly so soon in an Age when there were so many then alive that could have contradicted the Report if not well grounded and partly with so much hazard that as the very reporting them expos'd them to the rage of the Enemy to the uttermost so the Falshood of them if it had appear'd had brought upon them the scorn of those that had been kindliest enclin'd Whereas the Miracles that are more peculiarly appropriated to the Church of Rome they are never pretended to be done but amongst those of their own Communion never for the Conviction of any one Gainsayer no one of the Reform'd Religion having ever once been an Eye-witness to any of them * Vid. Pref. to the School of the Eucharist They come handed to us from a dark and fabulous Age reported of Persons who themselves hint no such thing of themselves in any of their own Writings but rather to the contrary as may be seen more afterward And the Stories they have fram'd gave them no hazard excepting loss of Reputation with all wise Men for
virtutes magnas in terris facere sublimis utique admirabilis res est non tamen regnum coeleste consequitur quisquis in his omnibus invenitur nisi recti justi itineris observatione gradiatur Cypr. de Unitat. Eccles St. Cyprian discoursing of some that had broken off from the Church and yet supposing it possible for them to signalize themselves by Miracles quoting that Passage of St. John Ep. 1. ch 2. They went out from us but they were not of us tells us that though the doing such Miracles is an high and admirable thing yet if they take not heed to go in the just and right way it gives them no Title to the Kingdom of Heaven where it is observable that the recti justi itineris observatio is not to be understood meerly a good and vertuous Life for that is acknowledged on all hands that some Persons inwardly wicked but outwardly holding Communion with the true Church might work Miracles as probably Judas did amongst the other Disciples But St. Cyprian means it of those that had turn'd out of the right way and thrô Schism had broken off from the true Church as the tenor of that Discourse carries it †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Irenae advers Haeres l. 1. c. 9. Irenaeus tells us of the prodigious Errors of Marcus the Heretick and yet two of the Wonders he did viz. When he was consecrating or giving of Thanks over the Cup mixt with Wine drawing out his Invocations to a mighty length he made the Cup appear of a Purple or Red Colour and that it should seem that that Grace that comes from the place which is above all things did by the power of his Invocation distil its own Blood into the Cup that those that were present should vehemently desire to taste of the same draught that so that very Grace boasted of by the Magician might actually flow into them too He further instances in a Magic Trick he had of filling a greater Cup with a much less and to the view of others inspiring some of the seduc'd Women with the gift of Prophesying and the like This passage of Irenaeus is quoted verbatim by Epiphanius who also calls this Marcus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one perfectly skill'd in the Magic Art. * Epiphan in Haeres 34. Marcosii (b) August Exposit in Evang Johann Tractat. 13. versus finem St. Austin directs thus Let no Man saith he vend Fables amongst you Both Pontius wrought a Miracle and Donatus pray'd and God answer'd him from Heaven First either they are deceived themselves or else they deceive others However suppose he could remove Mountains yet saith the Apostle If I have not Charity I am nothing Let us see whether he hath not Charity I should have believed it if he had not divided the Unity of the Church for God hath warned me against such Wonder-Mongers if I may so call them * Istos mirabiliarios In the latter Days there shall arise false Prophets doing Signs and Wonders c. Mark xiii Ergo cautos nos fecit sponsus quia miraculis decipi non debemus Therefore hath our Lord warned us because we should not be deceived by Miracles And so he goes on with that which we find in Decret part 2. Caus 1. Quaest 1. cap. 56. Teneamus ergo unitatem fratres mei praeter Vnitatem qui facit miracula nihil est Let us hold fast the Vnity out of this Vnity even he that works Miracles is nothing Peter the Apostle saith he rais'd the Dead Simon Magus did many things there were many Christians that could do none of these things neither what Peter nor what Simon did but what did they rejoice in That their Names were waitten in Heaven This Father hath many other Passages of this kind in his Book de Vnitate Ecclesiae but they are already so largely quoted in that excellent Preface before the School of the Eucharist lately made English that I refer the Reader thither not only for that but also for the whole Argument about Miracles which might justly have superseded this Discourse upon the Note of Miracles had it been so ordered in its due Place So that Miracles meerly we see in the Judgment of the Fathers were never accounted a full and adaequate Note of any true Church Which in Truth the Cardinal himself after the great Foundation he seem'd to have laid as to the sufficiency of Miracles does in some measure yield when he tells us in this very same Chapter Ex miraculis demonstratur Ecclesia non quoad evidentiam vel certitudinem rei sed quoad evidentiam certitudinem credibilitatis Bel. l. iv c. 14. That the Church is demonstrated by Miracles not as to the evidence and certainty of the thing but only as to the evidence and certainty of Credibility Which is as much as to say that Miracles may be a Note of the Church and they may not be so that is such a kind of Note by which we may give a good guess at the true Church but cannot be certain For as one of their own Writers expresseth it Miracula Deo Diabolo Christo Antichristo sunt communia * Espencaeus in 2 ad Tim. Miracles are common to God and the Devil to Christ and Antichrist II. If Miracles in general are no sufficient Note or Proof of any Church whatever much less are those Miracles alledg'd in the Church of Rome in Confirmation of those particular Doctrines and Practices wherein we of the Reform'd Church differ from them much less I say are they any just Note of their Church or Evidence of the Truth of those Doctrines There are a Variety of Miracles offer'd to us in their Histories or in their Legends in Confirmation of the several Doctrines of Sacramental Confession Adoration of Images and Reliques Invocation of Saints Purgatory the bodily Presence in the Eucharist and the Holiness of particular Persons that have flourish'd in their Church Now as to this we are to consider these things First That we do not observe any ground throughout the whole Scriptures either of the Old or New Testament to expect any Miracle for the Confirmation of any particular Doctrine whatever Secondly That many of those Doctrines which these Miracles are alledg'd in Confirmation of are so far from being expresly asserted or warranted in the Holy Scriptures that they rather bear a direct Contrariety Thirdly That there is no tolerable ground for Certainty as to the truth of most of those Miracles which the Romanists do make the Glory of their Church First That we do not observe any ground throughout the whole Scriptures either of the Old or New Testament to expect any Miracle for the Confirmation of any particular Doctrine whatever The Miracles under the Mosaick Dispensation were to confirm and establish that And the Miracles perform'd by Christ and his Apostles as I have already intimated were to bring in and establish
the New Law of Faith. We read nothing throughout the whole Jewish State that may make us suppose that any of the Prophets after the Death of Moses tho they were sometimes endu'd with the Power of doing this or that Miracle that they ever taught any new Doctrine which had not been deliver'd by Moses or which they undertook to confirm by any Miracle It is true they sometimes wrought a Miracle as a Credential for themselves and their own Character to shew that they were Prophets sent from God. But then the whole Errand of their Commission was to explain Moses's Law to awaken Men to a stricter Conformity to what they had so provokingly violated to denounce heavy Judgments upon their Disobedience to speak encouraging things to a distress'd and persecuted Church and in a Word to fore-tell the Events of future Ages and particularly point out the Days of the Messiah and Revolutions of Christianity Again we find that under the Dispensation of the Gospel the Miracles which our Saviour and his Apostles wrought were to warrant the whole new Oeconomy And tho one main thing the Apostles were empowr'd for was to bear Testimony to the Resurrection of their Master yet was this chiefly as the whole frame of the Gospel depended wholly upon the Truth and Evidence of this great Event because if it were not as fully made out that he rose again as that he dy'd their Preaching had been vain and their Attempts to abolish the Law and Constitution of Moses had been an unwarrantable Usurpation Nor do we find that tho in a following Age or two the Church was probably bless'd with those miraculous Powers till the Gospel was diffusively enough propagated yet do we not find that they wrought any one Miracle for the establishment of any one particular Doctrine much less any Doctrine that had not been delivered by the Apostles before them nor enter'd into the Substance and Fundamentals of the Gospel Which leads to the next thing viz. Secondly That many of those Doctrines which these Miracles are alledg'd in Confirmation of are so far from being expresly asserted or warranted in the Holy Scriptures that they rather bear a direct Contrariety E. g. The Doctrine of Transubstantiation upon which is superstructed the Adoration of the Host which Adoration supposing the Doctrine of Transubstantiation not to be fundamentally true is by the Confession of several of their own Authors down-right Idolatry Again the Doctrine of worshipping Images we cannot but think to be against the express Law of God. The Doctrine of praying to Saints departed seems immediately to intrench upon the Office of the Holy Jesus as he is our alone Mediator and gives to the Creature incommunicable Attributes of the Creator as Omniscience and Omnipresence And to name no more the Doctrine of Purgatory with its appendent Doctrines about Indulgences Satisfaction and the like they seem to alter the whole Scheme of the Gospel-Institution by taking off from the infiniteness of Divine Mercy and sufficiency of Christ's Satisfaction Now these are the Doctrines wherein the Glory of the Roman Miracles have been generally concern'd So long therefore as we think we have so much in the Holy Scriptures in bar against the Doctrines themselves we cannot but think we have most just prejudices against the Miracles by which the truth of these Doctrines are advanced or supported We are directed by the Apostle to prove all things and to hold fast that which is good 1 Thess v. 21. And not to believe every Spirit but to try the Spirits whether they be of God 1 Joh. iv 1. By the Spirits doubtless must be meant no other than those that pretended to Prophesying to Revelations and to the Power of some Miracles Now it is very true in that first Age wherein this Apostle wrote among the diversity of Gifts there was this of discerning of Spirits that adorn'd some Men 1 Cor. xii 10. It is not probable that the Apostle caution'd these against false Spirits for they were empowr'd to discern them But the Warning belongs to the whole Rank of Christians as appears by the plain Rule he gives to try them by Ver. 2. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh is of God c. This seems to point at a sort of Gnosticks in that Age that would be allegorizing the whole History of our Saviour's Life and Death and Resurrection and make it no real thing but purely Mystical and Figurative Whoever therefore would pretend to the Gift of Prophecy or Miracle and yet deliver this kind of Divinity he must be rejected notwithstanding all the shew he might make So in proportion still are we warranted to try the Sprits to judge of any Powers of Miracle that are produc'd in Confirmation of a Doctrine that may intrench upon the great Offices of the Blessed Jesus or look new and forreign to those Revelations which himself and his Apostles have deliver'd to us as the sum and upshot of Christianity Tho we saith the Apostle or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed Gal. i. 8. Tho we the Apostles that are vested with so visible a Power of Miracles nay tho an Angel from Heaven and certainly if an Angel should come he might be capable of doing things beyond the order or course of Nature as to us at least as hath been often seen by what Devils have perform'd tho such an one should be propagating other Doctrines and that by all the most powerful Methods that such spiritual Beings are capable of using they are to be held accursed Our Saviour gives the Caution to all his Followers in every Age That there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and shall shew great Signs and Wonders insomuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very Elect. Behold I have told you before Matth. xxiv 24 25. I shall only add the great Criterion of Miracles in the old Testament Deut. xiii 1 2 3. If there arise among you a Prophet or a Dreamer of Dreams and giveth thee a Sign or 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 to 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 and with all your Soul. So long therefore as the Doctrines which these sort of Miracles are brought to confirm are in dispute betwixt us and after all the impartial Enquiry we can make we think that several of them do war directly against the received Doctrines of our Faith this Glory of Miracles is vainly urg'd to us as a Note of the true Church when we are warn'd even against Miracles themselves where they
are pleaded to establish them All this upon supposal that all these pretended Miracles were actually true But then Thirdly There is no tolerable ground of Certainty as to matter of Fact of most of those Miracles which the Romanists do make the Glory of their Church The first instance of any Miracle wrought by the Relicks of a Martyr is that Story of the Bones of Babylas That Martyr having been Interr'd in Daphne a Suburb of Antioch when Julian the Apostate came to consult Apollo's Oracle in that place near an hundred Years after this Martyr's Interment he could procure no Answer Upon this the Oracle was conjur'd at least to give a reason of this Silence accordingly it answered Because the Bones of Babylas lay so near his Temple I do not find this Story call'd much into Question by the gravest Authors nor indeed can we much wonder that the Devil should for once give so open a Deference to the Remains of an Holy Man when by one such an Act he hath so effectually emprov'd his Interests and Kingdom to so great an advance of Superstition afterward in all those fond Devotions that have been since pay'd to the Reliques of pretended Saints and all those lew'd Fables of innumerable Miracles acted at their Shrines which probably have been coyn'd upon this first occasion of Babylas There is another Story almost of as ancient a Date and that is of St. Ambrose having by Vision reveal'd to him where the Bones of Gervasius and Protasius the Martyrs lay which he took up and after considerable Miracles wrought such as curing a blind Butcher c. he repos'd the Venerable Reliques under the Altar of a new Church which he had then built and dedicated I am not willing to bring a Question upon this neither as to the truth of it because I find it not rejected by the best Writers as well as told by St. Ambrose himself and the Reason of some Miracles of that time might be in Vindication of the Catholick Faith against the Pestilence of Arianism that rag'd so fiercely at that time Yet there are some Circumstances that render it something suspicious as why that Holy Man should think of not building or dedicating a new Church unless he could be furnish'd with some Reliques There seems a good pretty tang of Superstition in the very Thought and then the bulk of those Bodies when they were found They seem of a Gygantick Race few of which I presume were ever of a Constitution for Martyrdom Invenimus mirae magnitudinis viros duos ut prisca aetas ferebat We found two Men of wonderful bulk such as olden Times were wont to produce * Ambr. Epist ad Marcel Soror l. 7. Certainly the Age of Decius wherein they suffer'd did not produce Men of a much larger size than the Age of Gratian and Valentinian But still let this Story as to matter of Fact be receiv'd as true doubtless it hath been followed in later Ages with thousands of the like kind that have been so prodigiously ridiculous and improbable that several of the considering Writers in the Church of Rome have been asham'd of them have profest their disdain at them and left their Censure upon them as plainly false and impossible Petrus Abbas Cluniacensis had the Wit and Honesty even in the XIIth Age to complain of these Tales Nosti quantum me pigeant falsa in Ecclesiâ Dei Cantica †Petr. Abbas Cluniacens l. 5. Epist 89. c. You know how irksom these false Hymns in the Church of God must needs be to me And a little after in the same Epistle adds Mendacia ad minus 24 Canticum id citato percurrens animo reperi He found at least four and twenty Lies in one Hymn of Benedict Lindanus one of their own Writers cites a Bishop of Lyons saying that he had corrected the Antiphonary Amputatis quae superflua levia falsa blasphema phantastica multa videbantur having cut off many things which seem'd superfluous trivial false blasphemous and fantastical And then adds of his own that if that Bishop had liv'd to see the Missals in his days Deum Immortalem quo ea nomine pingeret Good God by what Name would he have described them * Lindan de Interpretandis Scripturis l. 3. c. 3. Ludovicus Vives another of their own Authors speaks of their Golden Legend quam indigna Divis Hominibus Sanctorum Historia c. How unworthy either of Saints or Men is that History which I know not why they should call the Golden Legend when it was writ by a Man of an Iron Forehead and leaden Vnderstanding †Lud. Viv. In fine lib. 2. de Corrupt Artis We are told also by Melchior Canus that he cannot deny but that even their best Writers especially in describing the Miracles of the Saints have gathered up scattered Rumours and transferred them to Posterity in their Writings herein too much indulging themselves or the ordinary sort of Believers whom they suppos'd not only ready to believe but also vehemently desirous of such Miracles * Quanquam negare non possumus viros aliquando gravissimos c. Melch. Can. Loc. Theol. l. 11. c. 9. And of the Legends he declares he could not to this day meet with one Story that he could allow This was the Opinion and Esteem the wiser Authors in the Church of Rome have left behind them of such Stories as these however Father Cressy in his Church-History in this very Age of ours and in a Nation where there seems no Inclination to such unreasonable Credulity hath thought fit to lick up the Spittle of the idlest Monks and to avow the absurdest of all their Fictions The Centuriators have taken pains for several Centuries both to reckon up the Doctrines which the Church of Rome hath brought in and also in every Age to affix the particular Miracles that are pretended to justify those Doctrines It might create an infinite Nausea in the Reader should I follow that Method or indeed examine those Persons and their Miracles whom the Cardinal hath rang'd in order from the seventh to the sixteenth Age. However 1. as to the Persons whom he makes so famous for Miracles I shall examine one or two to give you a taste of the uncertainty of all the rest And 2. as to the Doctrines because the Cardinal hath instanced in some particularly in Confirmation of Christ's bodily Presence in the Eucharist I shall examine one or two of them too 1. As to the Persons In the twelfth Age (a) Bellarm. de Not. Eccles l. iv c. 14. Romanis Pontificibus addictissim is pluribus Miraculis claruit quam ullus Sanctorum quorum vitae scriptae exstant the Cardinal brings in S. Bernard who as he tells us was the Father of the Monks and most devoutly addicted to the See of Rome that he was famous for more Miracles than any of the Saints whose Lives are at present extant Whereas if we
consult St. Bernard himself he is comforting himself and others under the defect of Miracles in his Age. * Bernard Serm. 1. In di◠Ascensionis Non tam merita sunt quanindicia meritorum Quis daemonia ejicit linguis novis loquitur serpentes tollit c. Primum enim opus fidei per dilectionem operantis cordis compunctio est in quâ sine dubio ejiciuntur daemonia cum eradiantur e corde peccata c. Bern. ubi supr He tells us that Miracles are not so properly meritorious as the Indications of good Men. Who saith he now casteth out Devils speaketh with Tongues destroys Serpents c. Nay seems to account the great Work wrought upon the Hearts of Believers wherein he and others were made the blessed Instruments to be equivalent to Miracles The first Work saith he of that Faith which worketh by Love is the Compunction of the Heart by which without doubt Devils are cast out when Sin is rooted out of the Heart And then those that believe in Christ speak with Tongues too when the old things are vanish't from their Lips they do not speak for the future with the old Tongue of their first Parents who declin'd into Words of Wickedness So when by Compunction of Heart and Confession of the Mouth former Sins are blotted out they must necessarily destroy Serpents that is extinguish the venomous Suggestions c. And thus he goes on in that allusive way accommodating the whole Christian Life to something of those miraculous Acts in the Primitive Days But let the ingenuous Reader judg now Is it not probable that had St. Bernard been so very illustrious for Miracles beyond all the Saints whose Lives had been ever written instead of apologizing for the defect of Miracles or drawing the equivalent between the Conversion of a Sinner and casting out Devils or speaking with Tongues he would not have put in a word or two here of what great things God had enabled him to do Again it is observable of St. John Damascen concerning whom they tell us that his Hand having been cut off by the Saracens for the Profession of the Faith he praying before the Image of the Blessed Virgin and falling asleep upon his awaking found his Hand restor'd only a Seam of Blood visible where it was cut off and joyn'd again Now if we consult himself he tells us of the Doctors and Pastors of the Church that succeeded the Apostles in their Grace and Dignity that they having obtain'd the enlightning Grace of God's Spirit did both by the Power of Miracles and Eloquence of Speech enlighten blind Men and reduce the Wanderer into the way * Damascen Orthodox Fid. l. 1. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But we saith he who have neither the Gift of Miracle nor of Speech c. Is this spoken like a Man of Miracle ‖ Cum modestiâ viro Christiano dignâ humilitate de seipso loquitur B. Pater Damascenus c. His Commentator indeed would bring him off as if it were his Modesty to speak thus of himself and gives the instance of S. Paul confessing himself least of all the Apostles But certainly were he never so modest he would not lie for the matter by any means especially when he made mention of the Miracles that former Ages had produc'd St. Paul as humbly as he thought and spoke of himself made no scruple upon occasion to mention the mighty Powers that God had endu'd him with and so did St. Peter too Nor was it other than their Duty sometimes to do it both to own the Gift with Thankfulness and to make use of it as an Argument to enforce their Doctrines upon those they had to deal with Thus much for the Persons 2. For the Doctrines It would be too tedious to run through the various Heads of Doctrine which they boast of as confirm'd by Miracles many of which are so monstrously ridiculous so highly improbable so confessedly fabulous so perfectly needless and to no purpose that they are not worth one minute's regard either to examin or expose them The Legends of the Saints and the School of the Eucharist lately published in English I may add Father Cressy's Church History will abundantly furnish the Reader that is at leisure to dip into that way of Learning However because our Cardinal hath thought fit to make this of Miracles his last Argument for the Proof of Christ's bodily Presence in the holy Sacranent and besides pointing at great numbers hath himself insisted upon six or seven which he thought of the greatest weight (e) V. Bellar. De sacr Euchar l. 3. c. 8. I shall examine one or two of them It is a very considerable Miracle the Cardinal mentions from Paulus Diaconus in the Life of Saint Gregory which I rather pick out because I find our Putney Convert very fond of it It is of a Woman that laugh'd while in the distribution of the Sacramental Bread Consensus Veterum p. 69. she heard it call'd the Body of our Lord when she knew she had made it with her own Hands Upon this St. Gregory prayed and the outward species of Bread was turned into visible Flesh by which the Woman was recovered to the true Faith and the whole Assembly mightily confirmed This were a good significant Proof of Transubstantiation indeed if it were but true Though here also a Man might as justly question his Senses at the sight of such a Change as he must always renounce them in the belief of the thing it self But there are considerable difficulties before the truth of the Story will go down with Vs Vnbelievers For 1. It is a very unlucky thing that never any such Miracle was yet wrought in view of any of those Churches that do professedly deny this Doctrine In the second Council of Nice Actio 7. Therasius the President puts this grave Question What is the cause that Miracles are not wrought by any of our Images and as gravely answers it himself Because Miracles are not given to them that believe but to them that believe not It is indeed what St. Paul intimates concerning the Gift of Tongues 1 Cor. xiv 22. which most Interpreters apply to all other Miracles We are the Persons to whom this Ocular Demonstration should be made and because it hath not yet upon any Occasion or Challenge whatever been made amongst us we may reasonably question the truth of this or any other Story of this kind which they tell amongst themselves Besides 2. this Story was writ by Paulus Diacocus about two hundred years after the Death of this Gregory and in an Age as Fabulous as any hath yet been I add lastly That the very Doctrine of Transubstantiation had hardly got the least footstep in the Church in the days of St. Gregory it cannot be pick'd out of any of his Writings no not in that passage which Mr. Sclater hath quoted from him * Consens veterum p.
Putney This Galatinus was born a Jew he was afterwards a Convert to the Church of Rome and a Fryar and pretends to discover something in the Hebrew Doctors to justify the Doctrines of the Roman Church to which he had betaken himself 'T is certain that learned Men have represented him as a Man of no Sincerity and have taken notice of his Falsity and the Forgeries of his Book Johannes Mercerus a Man of singular Learning J. Mercer in Job ii 11. and Scaliger a great Judg give this Account of him And so also many others Scalig. Epist ad Casaubon and some of the more learned Men of the Church of Rome have done Sixtus Senensis reprehends him for belying Pope Clement 5. Joseph de Voisin Biblioth St. l. 2. a Priest of the Church of Rome J. Voisin Theolog Judaeorum p. 237. taxeth him of Ignorance of the Doctrine of the Jews The best Character I find of him is that he was a Plagiary or Thief He stole what is good out of the Pugio Fidei of Raimundus Jac. Maussaci Prolegom in Pug. Fid. For other things in his Book they are Figments and Forgeries Trifles and ridiculous things His Testimonies out of Gale Razeiah and Zohar are of no credit Jac. Mausacus and the above-named Jos de Voisin Authors against whom Mr. Sclater cannot except J. de Vois observat in Proaem will give the Reader this Account of him In a word he was a Converted Jew and what kind of Men they have proved I need not tell nor can I think of that matter without sorrow he is one that Cardinal Bellarmin thought not fit to quote in behalf of their Church one that is condemned and stigmatized by the learned Men of the Church of Rome But yet this Author hath so great force with Mr. Sclater of Putney that he is confirmed by the very Title-page of his Book I should be vain if after this I should be operose in examining the Testimonies produced and yet I cannot but reflect a little farther upon the stupid Ignorance or Insincerity of this Writer R. Sol. in 72.16 He quotes R. Solomon for the Proof of Transubstantiation All that R. Solomon says to his purpose is that the LXXII Psalm is wholly meant of the Messias and that many of their Rabbins interpreted that which we render Handful of Corn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a modern Word probably from the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of certain Sweet-meats or Dainties in the Days of Messias It is very well known that the Jews fondly expect great feasting in the Days of the Messias and no wonder that many of the Rabbins should interpret these Words of those Dainties After all this R. Solomon gives another Interpretation of the Place V. Buxtorf Synagog Jud. l. 36. But what is all this to Transubstantiation But be all that as it will With what Face can he affirm that he produces several Jewish Masters when he produces not one Conssens Vet. p 21. And yet he confidently attempts to name them tho he bewray his great Ignorance in it He says he produceth the Book Siphre R. Ira Midras Coheleth where he reckons Midras Coheleth which is but the Title of one Book viz. a Commentary of Ecclesiastes for two Rabbins This I dare say is Mr. Sclater's own he could not borrow it from the learned Galatinus Mr. Sclater adds that he says that by the Tops of the Mountains in that Psalm nothing can be more rightly designed than the Prelates and Priests of the Church in whom this Scripture is then fulfilled and verified when the Body of Christ is elevated Now there is not one Syllable in R. Solomon of Siphre R. Ira Midras Coheleth not a word of the Priests and Prelats All this is Mr. Sclater's Galatinus himself affirms no such thing of R. Solomon and therefore if by he produces Pag. 21. l. 37. Mr. Sclater mean R. Solomon as any Reader will be apt to think he wrongs him for in truth he quotes none of those Authors tho Galatinus do For his first Quotation out of R. Moses Haddurshan or the Preacher if we should allow it to be truly cited yet any indifferent Reader will find it nothing to the purpose For what follows is too transparent to gain belief Besides that a learned Society of Hebricians were many Years ago consulted about a Quotation of Galatinus Dr. Morton's Catholick Appeal P. 394. out of that R. Moses who gave it under their Hands that they found in the place quoted nothing to the purpose For his Citation out of Mechilta tho there be nothing in it to the purpose yet if there had P. 22. he ought to have referred to the Page or Leaf of that Book if he had done sincerely For R. Cahanah who he says was born before Christ P. 23. we have so little evidence of that that it does not appear that there ever was any such Writer And for R. Johai there is no such Author found P. 24. nor mentioned by any but Galatinus For the Fable of Elias his being present at Circumcision 't is a Jewish Dream the use he makes of it is ridiculous P. 24. and the Testimony of R. Judas a mere Figment For the Gale Razia cited by him and what he cites from Rabbenu Hak-kodesh by whom he should mean the Compiler of the Jewish Misna they are mere Counterfeits And Mr. Sclater is something unlucky P. 25. for he in his Book instead of Gale hath Gate and in his Errata he hath it Gaize III. I shall prove that the Jewish Writers are so far from serving the Church of Rome by their Confession that they bear witness against it and that also in this very business of Transubstantiation And here it were easy to enlarge and to bring abundant Proofs from Authors known and easily to be procured and from such as have the greatest Reputation among the Jews The ancient Jews are on our side as to the number of Canonical Books of the Old Testament Joseph Antiq. Jud. l. iii. c. 4. Philo Jud. de Decalogo I could easily prove both from Josepus and Philo the Jew that they are against that distribution of the Precepts of the Decalogue which obtains in the Church of Rome and with us do reckon the Commandment against Images to be a distinct Precept and the second in Number The Doctrine and Practice of praying to Saints and worshipping of Images Nizach Vet. p. 128. the Jews except against R. Isaac p. 383. Lipman p. 16. the latter of which is against the very Letter of their Law. The Doctrine of Purgatory Lipman 's Nizachon p. 25. Nizach Vet. p. 23 42 43 196. the Practice among Christians of Crossing themselves when it Thunders the Christening of Bells the Doctrine of the necessity of the Caelibacy of Priests the vowed Caelibacy of Monks and Nuns R. Isaac Chizuk Emuna p. 345. as well as
the receiving of Apocryphal Books into the Canon of Scripture and other Opinions and Practices in the Christian Church And for the Doctrine of Transubstantiation as it is against the common Sense of Mankind and destroys the certainty of every thing else so the Jews upon all occasions object against it We have a Witness beyond Exception even of the Roman Church who brings in the Jews objecting against this Doctrine Fortalitium Fidei Lugd. Anno 1525. and representing the unreasonableness and absurdity of it from fourteen several Heads of Argument which I may not here represent to the Reader because it would be too great a Digression Nor do I find this Learned Author who writes in Defence of the Roman Church and attempts to answer these Objections alledging that this was the Doctrine which was taught by the Hebrew Doctors The Jews have so far abhorred this Doctrine Decret Gregor l. v. Tit. vi cap. 13. Accepimus autem c. and so far detested Christians upon this account that they were wont when they made use of Christian Nurses to force them to throw away their Milk for three Days together before they gave suck when it happened that at Easter these Nurses had received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ This Pope Gregory complains of and decrees upon it that Christians should not for the future be Servants to the Jews J. Albo Ikkarim And Josephus Albo disputes against this Doctrine of Transubstantiation very vigorously And so do many others V. Nizach vet p. 255. in their Books against Christians And many more Testimonies might be produced Lipman Nizachon p. 11. were not most of their Books printed in Italy where it is not safe for them to be too plain And Learned Men do very well know that the Passage in Joseph Albo against this Doctrine of the Roman Church hath been expunged in one Edition of that Author 'T is very well known that all the later Jews are against this Doctrine And that Trypho the Jew and the most ancient Writers have not objected it against Christians is only an Argument that this Doctrine was not so old as that time in which they lived This Doctrine the Jews are certain cannot be true because if they are not certain of the Falsity of this they have no Certainty of their own Religion nor can ever be convinced of the Truth of ours The Truth is this is one great occasion of hardening them against Christianity and we are never like to see them come into the Christian Church till this Doctrine of Transubstantiation and the Worship of Images be removed out of it But then the Practice annexed to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation of worshipping a Creature is so dangerous that even they who own the Doctrine confess if that be not true they cannot be excused from Idolatry God give us a just Sence of these things that we may not hereafter have besides our own Sins which will be load great enough the Obstinacy of the Jews in great measure to answer for THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Fourteenth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The unhappy End of the Church's Enemies Decima quarta Nota est Infelix exitus seu finis eorm qui Ecclesiam oppugnant Bellarm. L. iv c. 17. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR July 27. 1687. Guil. Needham IF he be an unwise Builder who pulls down what he intends to build up then Cardinal Bellarmin tho one of the Master-Builders of the Church of Rome deserves not to be reckon'd one of the wisest For he must shut his Eyes close who does not plainly see that he frequently defeats his own Design by giving Notes which conclude that Church to be false which he design'd to prove was the only true one Such for instance is that which is now to be consider'd as shall in the Sequel of this Discourse be made appear The Confutation of which cannot be difficult since I find nothing in the whole Chapter that hath so much as the shew of an Argument Whereas some of his Notes are guarded with a pretence at least of Scripture Reason and Antiquity this is exposed naked to the Assaults of its Adversaries without so much as a Paper Shield to protect it He tells us indeed many Tragical Stories of unhappy Deaths some of which are true some doubtful and others false some of Persons who were deadly Enemies other of Persons who were zealous Defenders of the true Church But had the Stories been all certainly true and had the Persons who thus died been all of them implacable Enemies of the Church of Rome yet what does it signify unless he had also proved That when a Person dies an unnatural Death the meaning of it is That that Church of which he professed himself a Member is false and the Church he opposed the only true one But how unwise soever he was in the choice of his Note he was so wise as not to attempt the proof of this unless the Citation of this Scripture may pass for a Proof Praise his People O ye Nations for he will avenge the Blood of his Servants and will render Vengeance to his Enemies (a) Deut. 32.43 God will avenge the Blood of his Servants therefore if a Protestant die an uphappy Death the Church of Rome is the only true Church But why did the Cardinal send out this Note so forlorn For a good Reason because no Defence could be found for it But why did he then bring it into the Field Because he knew it was Popular and might serve the Cause better than another that was never so well fenc'd For will not he dread to oppose the Church of Rome who is persuaded that God will set a Note of Vengeance upon those that do so Will not he stedfastly adhere to it who believes that that is a certain way to an happy Death In short whosoever can be persuaded to believe that the Church of Rome is by this Note distinguish'd from all other Churches he will as much dread to turn Protestant as he does to die the most prodigious sort of Death But the Mischief is That however serviceable this pretended Note may be to them among weak and undiscerning Persons it will do there as much disservice among those who are judicious and able to examine it For when they shall once see what a palpable Cheat it is and in case that it were a Note of the true Church that the Church of Rome hath the least Reason of any Church in the World to pretend to it they will be thereby disposed to break off from the Communion of that Church which contradicts its own Marks and betake themselves to some other Church which hath a better Title to them For the effecting of which I shall proceed in this Method I. I shall premise some Things as preparatory to what follows II. Shew that this can
Apostolicum solium annos decem menses septem tenuisset praecipiti morbo ex humanis ereptus est Raynald ad an 1352. n. 21. as their own Writers witness But Luther had eat a lusty Supper and was merry and jocular the Evening before And so had several of their Popes the next Evening before they died Pope Paul II after he had supp'd most jollily and perswaded himself that he had many Years to live the same Night died of an Apoplexy (o) Et cum annos plurimos vivere sibi persuaderet anno salutis nostrae 1471. v. Kal. Augusti hora secunda noctis cum eo die laetum consistorium habuisset jocundissime caenasset Apoplexia correptus vitam cum morte mutavit Johan Stell Anno 1464. p. 262. Pope Leo X led constantly a merry Life but his Death happen'd in the highest excess of Feasting Mirth and Jollity and so suddenly that there was not time afforded for Absolution and Extreme Unction (p) Ex hujus victoriae nuncio Leonem Pontificem ingenti diffusum gaudio referunt in qua Apoplexia correptus nullis perceptis Sacramentis aetatis anno quadragesimo sexto nondum exacto decessit inopina morte Raynald ad an 1521. n. 108. Die insequenti laetitiae pompam sua morte clausit inopina quidem adeâ— ut ne Sacramentis quidem munitus suerit N. 109. And if Luther jested the Day before he died methinks it might have passed without any severe Censure since Sir Tho. More the Pope's Martyr was so sportful upon the Scaffold and died with a Jest in his Mouth But what credit is to be given to his Enemies we may learn from those monstrous Tales they spread concerning his Death not only after but long before it Such as that horrible Miracle wrought at his Funeral for the Conviction of Hereticks which he confuted with his own Hand And it is not unpleasant to read how they contradict one another One says That he purged out his Entrails like Arius Another That his Mouth was distorted and his whole right Side turned to a duskish Colour But above all commend me to Thyraeus the Jesuit He confidently tells us That in a Town of Brabant named Cheol there were many Persons possess'd with Devils who were brought thither to be cured by the Intercessions and Prayers of the Saint of the Place That these poor Creatures were on a sudden deliver'd from these Evil Spirits and that this was the very Day that Luther died That the day after the Devils return'd again into the same Bodies and being asked whither they were gon the day before answer'd That by the Commandment of their Prince they were call'd forth to attend the Soul of their Grand Prophet and Companion Luther This Fable as ridiculous as it is malicious is quoted at large and credited by as considerable a Man as Florimond de Ramond (r) De la Naissance de l' Heresie l. 3. c. 11. p. 332. He I say that shall reflect upon these things will not be apt to believe the Reports of his Adversaries If we take the account of his Death from Sleidan we shall find it very different and such as was every way becoming a most pious and devout Christian (s) Jo. Sleid. Comment l. 17. But it will be said that he was his Friend and therefore as little to be credited as his Enemies Hear therefore what many Learned Men of the Church of Rome say who cannot be suspected of any partiality in Favour of him The Fathers in Trent saith Father Paul and the Court of Rome conceived great hope seeing that so potent an Instrument to contradict the Doctrine and Rites of the Church of Rome was dead c. and the rather because that Death was divulged throughout Italy with many prodigious and fabulous Circumstances which were ascribed to Miracle and the Vengeance of God tho there were but the usual accidents which do ordinarily happen in the Deaths of Men of sixty three Years of Age (t) Hist of the Counc of Trent l. 2. p. 149. So that in Father Paul's judgment there was nothing in his Death but what was common Yea that the very worst Circumstances were no other than such Accidents which happen also many times to VERY GOOD CHRISTIANS is acknowledged by a late Adversary (u) Spirit of Mart. Luth. p. 104. who hath written a Book on purpose to disparage him Yea that he died in great Honour as well as piously another hath informed us After Supper says Thuanus immediately before the Night in which he departed when he was ask'd Whether in the Eternal Life we shall know one ather he said that we should and confirmed it by Testimonies of Scripture As many strove who should best express their Love to him while he lived so neither by Death could they be drawn from loving him The Citizens of Mansfield contended that he ought to be buried with them because that was his Native Soil but the Authority of Frederick the Prince Elector prevail'd that he should be carried to Wittenberg and there honourably Interr'd (w) Post caenani proxime ante noctem qua decessit cum rogaretur num in illa sempiterna vita simus alter alterum agnituri ita esse aiebat Scripturae testimoniis confirmabat Ut certatim eum vivum c. Thuan. Hist l. 2. And indeed the transcendent Honour that was done to his Memory seems to be that which chiefly provoked his Enemies to set their Inventions on work to defame him The Cardinal 's next Instance of an unhappy End is Zuinglius And why is his Death reckon'd unhappy Because he was slain in a War against Catholicks (x) Zuinglius in bello contra Catholicos trucidatus est Bellarm. But is it a strange thing for a Man to be kill'd in a War Does every one that so ends his Days die miserably If so How many Millions hath the Pope brought to a miserable End in sending them to the Wars against Saracens and Hereticks O that they 'l say is a glorious Death that merits the brightest Crown in Heaven But Zuinglius was kill'd in a War against Catholicks But stay the Cardinal makes them Catholicks too soon he supposes them Catholicks before Zuinglius was kill'd whereas he was to prove them Catholicks by his being kill'd for his unhappy Death is the Note now under debate by which they were to be known to be of the true Church But that his Death could be no Argument that God disapproved the cause in which he died is evident because to the great grief of our Adversaries the Reformed Religion which they hoped would have died together with him made a greater Progress after his Death than it had done before I shall speak but a word to the two next because the Cardinal's Spite is chiefly against Calvin who brings up the rear Oecolampadius says Bellarmin in the Evening went well to Bed and in the Morning was by his Wife found dead
from being dazled at the Sight that they were no more affected than if I had looked on a Piece of Green Silk But I doubt he will censure them very hardly for it and think they are a sort of malignant Cavaleerish Eyes I can't help that but whatever Eyes they be since I have been able to hold them open so long against the glaring imaginary Splendor of These These Triumphant NOTES I will venture to draw out the whole Train once more and give a little Remark upon every one of them as they pass by 1. The Name of Catholick This is a Note which may be easily usurped by every bold Pretender but till it can be proved that it is joyned with the Profession of the true Faith the Name alone is nothing but an empty and insignificant Sound 2. Antiquity I shall not here mention the Antiquity of some Errors nor that there were many Churches in the World before there was any at Rome but will freely confess that that had been ancient enough if it had preserved that Doctrine in its Purity which it received at the first But it is well known that the Additions she has made unto that concerning Infallibility Images Purgatory and the like cannot be pretended to be of Antient and Apostolical Tradition Nay many of their present Tenents were never declared necessary till the last Age and the Church of Rome as it is now constituted can be esteemed no older than the Council of Trent that is about fourty Years younger than the Reformation 3. Duration By this the Cardinal would perswade us that his true Church has been from the Beginning and shall continue to the End of Christianity The first we deny the second can never be proved till the Day of Judgment We are sure the Church of Rome has been changed already from what it was and we hope and believe that it will be changed again from what it is And then what would become of the Duration they boast of if they should ever reform themselves from those Errors and Abuses which have crept in among them as has been often attempted and a long time most earnestly desired by many of the best and most impartial of their own Communion So that granting this to be a Note it would make against them both ways For what is past we know what Alterations have been made by them and they can never be secured against others that may happen hereafter 4. Amplitude or Multitude and Variety of Believers This can by no means be made a Note of the Church for the time was once that Christ's Flock was a little Flock Acts 1.15 and the number of the Names together were but about an hundred and twenty And afterwards the Arrian Heresy had almost overspread the Face of Christendom insomuch that the whole World was thought to be against Athanasius and Athanasius against the whole World. Or should we let it pass for a Note they could gain but little by it For they are infinitely exceeded in Multitude not only by Heathens and Mahometans but by Christians of other Denominations 5. Succession of Bishops How far this may be necessary to the Being of a Church I need not dispute But the uninterrupted Succession they of Rome are wont to glory in is manifestly false For besides the long Vacances that have sometimes happened and the many Schisms they have had when two or more have pretended to the Papacy and no Man could determine who had the Right which must make it dubious the confessed Hereticks that have possessed themselves of the Infallible Chair must quite cut off at least interrupt the Succession Or if they have it notwithstanding this or any other Objection that might be made We of the Church of England can plead the same 6. Agreement in Doctrine with the Primitive Church This is a good Note indeed if they mean the truly Primitive Church for that agreed with the Scripture and Doctrine of the Apostles But then I hope they will not have the Confidence to affirm that their Prayers in an Unknown Tongue their Half-Communion their Adoration of the Host and many other things which they now receive are agreeable to the Practice and Belief of that Primitive Church 7. The Vnion of the Members among themselves and with the Head. Of this they are continually making their Brags but the many and violent Contentions that have often been betwixt the several Pretenders to the Papal Dignity and the endless Feuds and Animosities that are kept up amongst them about many Controverted Points do sufficiently declare that their Church has been rent and torn with Factions and Intestine Divisions as much as any other Society Or if they were as firmly Vnited as they pretend it is no more than other Combinations of Men have been in known and wicked Errors 8. Sanctity of Doctrine For they generally assert as the Cardinal does here that the Roman Church maintains nothing that is False either in Matter of Faith or Manners If they were able to prove this there might be some Reason indeed that their Church should be esteemed the Mother and Mistress of all Churches as she has been wont of late to stile her self But since the Power of deposing Princes has been openly assumed and frequently practised and never yet condemned by any either Pope or Council since the Doctrine of Aequivocation and many other absurd and impious Opinions are taught by their Casuists and made use of by their Confessors in directing the Consciences of their Penitents and since these and many more very dangerous Errors do not only escape without a Censure but are approved of and incouraged by their Governours I do not see how they and their Church can possibly be excused from the Guilt of them 9. The Efficacy of Doctrine Here we are told of the wonderful Success they have had in the Propagation of their Faith and the Conversions that have been made of whole Nations And supposing it were as they say yet Heresy and Infidelity has often had as great and swift a Progress in the World as any that their Doctrine can boast of and considering the Pravity and Corruption of Human Nature it is not strange that the most gross and pernicious Errors should be more readily received and spread themselves faster than the most divine and sacred Truths 10. Holiness of Life This is indeed the most real Commendation of a Christian and I will not go about to rob them of the Glory of it But then it cannot be denied but meet Philosophers and some of the Antient and many of those whom they account Modern Hereticks have been of a very strict and unblamable Conversation and divers of their Popes and other Ecclesiasticks of the greatest Eminency of Place have been very infamous for all sorts of Wickedness and Debauchery and their very Religious Orders have been often complained of for the neglect of their Discipline and loosness of their Lives as is abundantly testified by their
own Authors 11. The Glory of Miracles These alone were never a Note of the true Church And those extraordinary Gifts which were bestowed at first for the Confirmation of Christianity we think they are ceased long ago But we are forewarned of False Christs and false Prophets Mat. 24.24 which should shew great Signs and Wonders which me-thinks should make a Church very careful how they made any pretension to Miracles But the Church of Rome is resolved to do it and would fain perswade us that there are many great Ones wrought among them to this very Day and as they believe always will be But we know and they will not deny it that many of the Miracles they have talked of are meer Forgeries and Delusions others altogether incredible and but weakly attested and wholly unworthy of the Seriousness and Gravity of the Christian Religion most of them said to be done in Corners and are never to be seen but among themselves When they please to oblige us Protestants with the sight of a few of them they may then deserve to be farther considered till that be done they must give us leave to think that their Church is reduced to great Streights when it shall stand in need of such slight Artifices as these to support it 12. The Light of Prophecy This if they had it can bring no more Advantage to their Cause than the other The Church of God anciently when extraordinary Revelations were more common had not always Prophets in it And when any appeared the Prophet was to be tryed by the Faith of the Church and not the Church by the Predictions of the Prophet And we are still commanded to try the Spirits whether they are of God 1 Joh. 4.1 Because many false Prophets are gone out into the World. 13. The Confession of Adversaries This if the Cardinal's Instances were pertinent would yet be but of little Consequence for if some Protestants have spoken favourably of his Catholicks some of his Catholicks have spoken favourably of Protestants Or if we should be willing to hope well of some of them as we are and they should adjudge us every one to Eternal Damnation as they generally do this would be but an ill sign that their Church must therefore be the truer because it is more Censorious and Uncharitable than Ours 14. The Vnhappy End of the Church's Enemies A wise Man would be something afraid of passing this into a Note before he was himself safe in his Grave For all things come alike to all Eccl. 9.2 there is one Event to the Righteous and to the Wicked Many of the most Zealous Patrons of the Romish Persuasion have met with as Tragical and Unfortunate Ends as the most accursed Heretick that ever was devoured by Vermin or burnt at a Stake 15. Temporal Felicity This may be placed in the same Rank with the former it is altogether as variable and inconstant as that no certain Judgment can be made upon it They are not to learn that the Enemies of their Church have been often successful and that Victory has not always waited upon their Catholick Arms no not in their most Holy Wars when Religion has been the only ground of the Quarrel Thus upon a Review of all the Notes in order as they are mustered up by the great Cardinal it may appear to any unprejudiced Enquirer that he has missed of his Aim For that they are either no Notes of a Church at all or not proper to that of Rome And now after the highest Pretences of an Infallible Church and the absolute Deference and Submission which they say is due unto it any Man that shall seriously consider the Matter must needs wonder they should have no surer means at last to find it out than a few slight and improbable nay some of them very vain false and extravagant Conjectures The Protestants whom they will not allow to be certain of any thing have far better Evidences than these and as good Assurances of the Truth of their Church as can be desired For we think the True Faith True Worship and a Right Administration of the Sacraments do unquestionably make a True Church These the Romanists themselves cannot deny to be the great and necessary Notes and if the Controversy betwixt us come to be determined by these it will soon appear which Communion we ought to prefer We make Profession of the whole Catholick Apostolick Faith as it is contained in the Holy Scriptures and briefly comprized in the three Creeds which is all that was ever received in the Primitive Church They have made large Additions to the Antient Belief and increased the number of the Articles from Twelve to Four and Twenty many of which were not so much as heard of in the First Ages and never made necessary to be believed till above fifteen hundred Years after the Publication of the Gospel We Worship Almighty God and none but him and unto him we Pray in a Language we understand through Jesus Christ our only Mediator in whose Name when we ask we are sure to be heard They have a kind of Worship which they give to Saints and Images which as to all External Acts of Adoration is the very same they pay to God himself and when their Addresses are directed unto Him all their Publick Service is in an unknown Tongue and they set up to themselves many Mediatours of Intercession when they cannot tell whether they hear them but it is most certain that God has never promised to hear them for their Sakes We receive the two Sacraments which Christ ordained in his Church and administer them both in such Manner and Form as he has appointed They without any Divine Authority have made Seven Sacraments and in the Lord's Supper they believe that there is offered up a proper Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead they adore the Elements which they think are Transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of our Saviour and suffer the Laity to communicate but in one kind robbing them of the Cup contrary to the plain Institution and express Command of our Blessed Lord. And since we have the True Faith True Worship and the Sacraments rightly Administred it is evident that we are not deficient in any thing that is necessary to the Constitution of a True Church But They will never be able to prove themselves such a One by the late Additions they have made to the Creed and their many Deviations from the Primitive Rule And yet they will be continually vaunting that they are not only a True Church but the only True Church in the World and upon this Presumption they thunder out their Anathema's upon all Christendom besides and confidently condemn them for a Company of Heretical and Schismatical Conventicles But they cannot justify that rash and uncharitable Sentence nor make good any part of this heavy Charge For we that heartily believe all the Antient Creeds cannot be accused of Heresy neither are we guilty of Schism because we only Reformed those Errors and Corruptions which they had introduced and wanted not sufficient Authority for what was done But if they are still absolutely resolved to stand to the Censure they have passed and allow no True Church upon Earth but their Own it is not Cardinal Bellarmin's Fifteen Notes that will ever prove it FINIS ERRATA Pag. 367. l. 3. for not r. most P. 371. Marg. l. ult for cap. 3. r. 13. LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. BOOKS lately printed for Richard Chiswell THE Pillar and Ground of Truth A Treatise shewing that the Roman Church falsly claims to be That Church and the Pillar of That Truth mentioned by St. Paul in his First Epistle to Timothy Chap. 3. Vers 15.4o. The Peoples Right to read the Holy Scripture Asserted 4o. A Short Summary of the Principal Controversies between the Church of England and the Church of Rome being a Vindication of several Protestant Doctrines in Answer to a Late Pamphlet Intituled Protestancy destitute of Scripture Proofs 4o. Two Discourses of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead An Answer to a late Pamphlet Intituled The Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England concerning one Special Branch of the King's Prerogative viz. In dispensing with the Penal Laws 4o. A PRIVATE PRAYER to be used in Difficult Times 8o.
THE NOTES OF The Church As Laid down By Cardinal BELLARMIN Examined and Confuted With a Table of the Contents IMPRIMATUR Apr. 6. 1687. Guil. Needham LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVIII THE SEVERAL TRACTS Contained IN THIS VOLUME 1. A Brief Discourse concerning the Notes of the Church with some Reflections on Cardinal BELLARMIN's Notes 2. An Examination of Note concerning BELLARMIN's First The Name of Catholick 3. His Second Note Antiquity 4. His Third Note Duration 5. His Fourth Note Amplitude or Multitude and Variety of Believers 6. His Fifth Note The Succession of Bishops 7. His Sixth Note Agreement in Doctrine with the Primitive Church 8. His Seventh Note Vnion of the Members among themselves and with the Head. 9. His Eighth Note Sanctity of Doctrine 10. His Ninth Note Efficacy of the Doctrine 11. His Tenth Note Holiness of Life 12. His Eleventh Note The Glory of Miracles 13. His Twelfth Note The Light of Prophecy 14. His Thirteenth Note Confession of Adversaries 15. His Fourteenth Note The Vnhappy End of the Church's Enemies 16. His Fifteenth Note Temporal Felicity 17. A Vindication of the Brief Discourse concerning the Notes of the Church in Answer to a Late Pamphlet Intituled The Vse and great Moment of the Notes of the Church as delivered by Cardinal Bellarmin de Notis Ecclesiae Justified 18. A Defence of the Confuter of Bellarmin's Second Note of the Church Antiquity against the Cavils of the Adviser 19. A TABLE of the Contents THE CONTENTS Of the following NOTES The INTRODUCTION to the Notes of the Church THE Visibility of the Catholick Church takes away the Necessity of finding out Notes to distinguish it by especially of such Notes as are matter of Dispute themselves p. 3. The Vse of Notes of find out an Infallible Church and these appropriated by the Cardinal to the Church of Rome only p. 4. What Protestants intend in those Notes they give of the true Church and what the Papists by their Notes of a Church p. 5. The Protestant Way of finding out the Church by the essential Properties of a true Church p. 6. Three things objected to this by the Cardinal and Answers returned p. 7 8 9 10 11 12. The Cardinal's Way considered and examined 1st To find out which is the True Church before we know what a True Church is p. 13. Two Enquiries in order of Nature before which is the True Church whether there be a True Church or not and what it is ibid. No Notes of these but such as they dare not give viz. the Authority of the Scriptures and every Man 's private Judgment of the Sense and Interpretation of them p. 14. 2ly She gives us Notes whereby to find out the True Catholick Church before we know what a particular Church is p. 15. Impossible to know what the Catholick Church is before we know what a particular Church is ibid. No other Notes of a True Church but what belongs to every True particular Church and that can be nothing but what is essential to a Church and what all Churches do agree in viz the true Faith and Worship of Christ p. 16. The 6th which is the same with the 2d and the 8th are the chief if not the only Notes of this Nature and here our Claim is as good if not better than theirs ibid. His 9th 10th 11th and 12th not properly Notes of a True Church any otherwise than as they are Testimonies of the common Christianity which is professed by all true Churches ibid. The 13th 14th 15th no Notes at all because they are not always true ibid. His 3d and 4th Notes are not Notes of a Church but only God's Promises made to his Church p. 17. His 1st Note doth not declare what a Church is but in what Communion it is and is no Note of a true Church unless it be frrst proved that they are true Churches which are in Communion with each other ibid. His 5th common to the Greek and any other Church who have Bishops in Succession from the Apostles or Apostolical Bishops p. 18. The 7th Note serves to purpose the Cardinal's Design and doth his Business without any other Note ibid. 3dly Another Mystery in forming these Notes is to pick out of all the Christian Churches in the World one Church which we must own for the Catholick Church and reject all others as Heretical or Schismatical or Vncatholick Churches who refuse Obedience and Subjection to this one Catholick Church p. 19. That there is but one True Church in the World and that the Catholick Church doth not signify all the particular True Churches but some one Church which all others are bound to submit to and communicate with if they will be Members of the Catholick Church this necessary to be proved before the Cardinal had given us these Notes of a Church p. 20 21. 4thly Another Design in making these Notes is to find out such a Church on whose Authority we must rely for the whole Christian Faith even for the Holy Scriptures themselves p. 22. But here we must first be satisfied that the True Church is Infallible this can never be proved but by Scripture which a Man must first believe before it can be proved to him that there is an Infallible Church p. 23. The Church is not the first Object of our Faith in Religion since we ought to know and believe most of the Articles of the Christian Faith before we can know whether there be any Church or no. p. 23 24. The Contents of the First NOTE CATHOLICK THE sincere Preaching of the Faith or Doctrine of Christ as it is laid down in the Scripture is the only sure and infallible Mark of the Church of Christ p. 25. The Church of Rome declines being examined by this Rule p. 26. Bellarmin's Argument for the Name Catholick being an undoubted true Mark of a True Church p. 26. The Weakness of the Cardinal's Argument exposed in three Particulars I. In what respect the Name Catholick was esteemed by some of the Fathers in their Time a Note of a Catholick Church and in what respects 't will ever be a standing Note of it p. 27. This shewn to be upon the account of the Catholick Faith and therefore in their time is joined with the Word Catholick p. 28. What the Catholick Faith and why called Catholick ibid. None in the first Ages of Christianity went by the Name of Catholick but those who profest the true Catholick Faith. p. 29. II. No Argument can be drawn from the bare Name of Catholick to prove a Church to be Catholick p. 29. I. The Christian Church was not known by the Name Catholick at the Beginning though of an antient and early Date and therefore no essential Note of it p. 30. 2. Names are oft times arbitrary and at random and falsly imposed on things and therefore nothing can be concluded from them ibid. 3. Names are oft times imposed on
Christians Now I must confess these Notes as he well observes are common to all Christian Churches and were intended to be so and if this does not answer his Design we cannot help it The Protestant Churches do not desire to confine the Notes of the Church to their own private Communions but are very glad if all the Churches in the World be as true Churches as themselves The whole Catholick Church which consists of a great many particular Diocesan or National Churches has the same Nature And when the whole consists of univocal parts every part must have the same Nature with the whole And therefore as he who would describe a man must describe him by such Characters as fit all Mankind so he who gives the Essential Characters of a Church must give such Notes as fit all true Churches in the World. This indeed does not fit the Church of Rome to make it the only Catholick and the only true Church nor do we intend it should but it fits all true Churches wherever they are and that is much better To answer then his Argument when we give Notes which belong to a whole Species as we must do when we give the Notes of a true Christian Church there being a great many true Churches in the World which make up the Catholick or Universal Church we must give such Notes as belong to the whole kind that is to all true Christian Churches And though these Notes are common indeed to all true Christian Churches yet they are proper and peculiar to a true Christian Church as the Essential Properties of a man are common to all men but proper to mankind And this is necessary to make them true Notes For such Notes of a true Church as do not fit all true Churches cannot be true Notes As for what the Cardinal urges That all Sects of Christians think themselves to have the true Faith and true Sacraments I am apt to think they do but what then If they have not the true Faith and true Sacraments they are not true Churches whatever they think of it and yet the true Faith and true Sacraments are certain Notes of a true Church A Purchase upon a bad Title which a man thinks a good one is not a good Estate but yet a Purchase upon a Title which is not only thought to be but is a good one is a good Estate All that can be said in this case is That men can be no more certain that they have a true Church than they are that they have a true Faith and true Sacraments and this I readily grant But as mens mistakes in this matter does not prove that there is no true Faith nor true Sacraments so neither does it prove that a true Faith and true Sacraments are not Notes of the true Church 2. The Cardinal 's second Objection is That the Notes of any thing must be more known than the thing it self which we readily grant Now says he which is the true Church is more knowable than which is the true Faith and this we deny and that for a very plain reason because the true Church cannot be known without knowing the true Faith for no Church is a true Church which does not profess the true Faith. We may as well say that we can know a Horse without knowing what the shape and figure of a Horse is which distinguishes it from all other Creatures as that we can know a Christian Church without knowing what the Christian Faith is which distinguishes it from all other Churches or we may as well say that we can know any thing without knowing what it is since the very Essence of a true Church consists in the true Faith which therefore must be first known before we can know the true Church But the Cardinal urges that we cannot know what true Scripture is nor what is the true interpretation of Scripture but from the Church and therefore we must know the Church before we can koow the true Faith. As for the first I readily grant that at this distance from the writing the Books of the New Testament there is no way to assure us that they were written by the Apostles or Apostolical men and owned for inspired Writings but the Testimony of the Church in all Ages But herein we do not consider them as a Church but as credible Witnesses Whether there be any such thing as a Church or not we can know only by the Scriptures But without knowing whether there be a Church or not if we know that for so many Hundred years these Books have been owned to be written by such men and have been received from the Apostles days till now by all who call themselves Christians this is as good an Historical Proof as we can have for any thing and it is the Authority of an uninterrupted Tradition not the Authority of the Church considered as a Church which moves us to believe them For setting aside the Authority of Tradition how can the Authority of a Company of men who call themselves the Church before I know whether there be any Church move me to believe any thing which was done 1600. years a-go But there is a Company of men in the World and have been successively for 1600. years whether they be a Church or not is nothing to this question who assure me that these Books which we call the Scriptures were written by such inspired men and contain a faithful account of what Christ did and taught and suffered and therefore I believe such Books and from them I learn what that true Faith is which makes a true Christian Church As for the true interpretation of Scripture that we cannot understand what it is without the Church this I also deny The Scriptures are very intelligible to honest and diligent Readers in all things necessary to salvation and if they be not I desire to know how we shall find out the Church for certainly the Church has no Character but what is in the Scripture and then if we must believe the Church before we can believe or understand the Scriptures we must believe the Church before we can possibly know whether there be a Church or not If we prove the Church by the Scripture we must believe and understand the Scripture before we can know the Church If we believe and understand the Scriptures upon the Authority and Interpretation of the Church considered as a Church then we must know the Church before the Scripture The Scripture cannot be known without the Church nor the Church without the Scripture and yet one of them must be known first and yet neither of them can be known first according to these Principles which is such an absurdity as all the Art of the World can never palliate 3. The Cardinal 's third Objection is That the true Notes of the Church must be inseparable from it whereas the Churches of Corinth and Galatia did not always teach true Doctrine some of the Church
of this for all those Articles which are before the Holy Catholick Church must in order of Nature be known before it That there is a God who made the World that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God who was conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buried and descended into Hell that he rose again the third day from the dead and ascended into Heaven and sitteth on the Right-hand of God the Father Almighty and from thence shall come to judg the Quick and the Dead I believe in the Holy Ghost and then we may add the Holy Catholick Church and not till then For the Church is a Society of Men for the Worship of God through the Faith of Jesus Christ by the Sanctification of the Holy Spirit which unites them into one Mystical Body So that we must know Father Son and Holy Ghost before we can know what the Catholick Church means And is it not strange then that our Faith must be founded on the Authority of the Church when we must first know all the great Articles of our Faith before we can know any thing about a Church This inverts the order of our Creed which according to the Principles of the Church of Rome should begin thus I believe in the Holy Catholick Church and upon the Authority of that Church I believe in God the Father Almighty and in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost and no doubt but the Apostles or those Apostolical Men who framed the Creed would have put it so had they thought the whole Christian Faith must be resolved into the Authority of the Church This short Discourse I think is enough in general concerning the Notes of the Church and I shall leave the particular Examination of Cardinal Bellarmin's Notes to other Hands which the Reader may expect to follow in their order The End. BELLARMIN'S First Note of the Church concerning the name of Catholick EXAMINED Prima Nota est ipsum Catholicae Ecclesiae Christianorum nomen Bellar. cap. 4. de notis Ecclesiae p. 1477. IMPRIMATUR Apr. 8. 1687. Guil. Needham RR. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacr. Domest THat the sincere Preaching of the Faith or Doctrine of Christ as it 's laid down in the Scripture is the only sure Infallible Mark of the Church of Christ is a Truth so clear in it self so often and fully prov'd by Learned Men of the Reformation that it may justly seem a Wonder that any Church which is not conscious to her self of any Errors and Deviations from it should refuse to put her self upon that Tryal This gave Being to the Church of Christ at first makes it One and makes it Catholick According as this fares in any Part or Member of it is that Church distinguish'd and denominated it will be True or False Pure or Corrupt Sound or Heretical according as the Faith it holds bears a conformity or repugnance to the written Doctrine of our Saviour An Orthodox Faith makes an Orthodox Church but if her Faith becomes Tainted and Heterodox the Church will be so too and should it happen wholly to Apostatize from the Faith of Christ it would wholly cease to be a Christian Church This may seem to be the Reason that the present Church of Rome being notoriously warp'd from Truth declines the being examined and measur'd by this Rule having indeed some reason to be against the Scripture that is so evidently against her and endeavours to support her self with great Names and Swelling Titles Hence it is that we so often hear of the Name of Catholick Antiquity Amplitude Vnity Succession Miracles Prophecy and several others that their great Cardinal sets down as so many perpetual and never-failing Marks and Characters to find out the True Church and to Assert his own I shall in this short Tract examine the first of these and that I may give it all the fair play imaginable endeavour to represent it in its full force and to its best advantage Bellarmin makes it thus to speak for it self The Apostle in 1 Cor. 3.4 makes it the Sign and Mark of Scismaticks to be called after the Name of particular Men tho' of the Apostles themselves whether of Paul or Apollos or Cephas And in the Writings of the ancient Fathers the Orthodox Churches were known and distinguish'd by the name of Catholick and the Conventicles of Scismaticks and Hereticks by the Names of their first Authors And therefore since the Church of Rome is by all even her bitterest Adversaries called Catholick and the several Sects of the Reform'd after the Names of their particular Doctors as Luther Calvin Zuinglius and the like it follows that the Name of Catholick is not only a sure undoubted Mark of the true Church but also that this Church of Rome is that Church This is his Argument and as much as he values his Church upon it I can see no more in it but this that because Churches professing the true Orthodox Faith were anciently styl'd Catholick therefore all that have been styled Catholick since be their Faith what it will must be True and Orthodox Churches And because the Apostle forbids Christians to be call'd after the Name of particular Men tho of never so great Eminency in the Church And those mentioned in the Works of the Ancients were really Scismaticks and Hereticks that were so call'd as the Valentinians Marcionites Montanists and others Therefore all that in after-Ages shall be so nick-nam'd tho out of Malice and Ill-will by their Enemies whilst they disown it themselves must go for Scismaticks and Hereticks This is so weak a Topick that I might justly break off here having expos'd it sufficiently by a bare Representing of it Yet for the Reader 's farther Information and Satisfaction in this matter I shall proceed to shew these three Things I. In what Respect the name of Catholick was esteemed by some of the Fathers in their Time a Note of a Catholick Church and in what Respects 't will ever be a standing Note of it II. That from the bare name of Catholick no Argument can be drawn to prove a Church to be Catholick III. That the Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the true Catholick Faith neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church I. In what Respect the Name of Catholick was esteemed by some of the Fathers in their Time a Note of the Catholick Church and c. And this as evidently appears from their Writings and even from those Testimonies cited by Bellarmine was upon the Account of the Catholick Faith that in their Time was generally and for the most part in conjunction with the Name of Catholick and when ever it is so 't will be an Infallible Note of a Catholick Church The Catholick Faith is that which was deliver'd by Christ himself to his Apostles and by them to the Church contain'd in those Writings which they by
the extraordinary Direction and Assistance of the Holy Ghost indited and commended to the Care and keeping of all the Churches planted by them as a sure unerring Rule of Faith and Manners Call'd Catholick both as it contains all things in it necessary to Salvation and as it was to be preach'd and publish'd in all times and successively in all places According to Vincent Lirin Rule quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus creditum est It set out at Jerusalem but was not to stop there but from thence to spread it self into all parts of the World. The Apostles were first to preach to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel but not to them only Go teach all Nations was our Saviour's Commission to the Apostles and I will give thee the Heathen for thine Inheritance and c. was God's promise to our Saviour The Christian Church was not to be confin'd within the Limits of one Nation like that of the Jews within the small Territories of Judaea but to be made up of every Kindred and Tongue and People and Nation Now in the first Ages of Christianity before the main Body of the Church was divided only some few misled and seduc'd People separating from it it being generally true that they that bore the Name of Catholick profest the true Catholick Faith and those that were called after the name of particular Men had deprav'd and corrupted it the very name Catholick became a distinguishing Note of a true Church and to be call'd after the Name of the Author of any Sect the Mark of an Heretical and Scismatical one but yet this was not so much for the Sake of the bare Names as for the things the Tenets and Doctrines signified by them In this Sense are all those Fathers to be understood quoted by Bellarmine and others who seem to lay any stress upon the Name 'T was upon the Account of the true Catholick Faith that in those times did for the most part if not every where accompany and go along with the Name Thus when St. Cyril of Jerusalem advis'd his Catechumens when they should go into any City Cap. 18. Catech. to enquire for the Catholick Church he gave this Reason for it because there the true Catholick Faith is taught and in the same place adds The Church is therefore call'd Catholick because it teaches all those Truths all Men are bound to know in order to Salvation and upon the same Account Pacianus not unfitly said Christian is my Name and Catholick my Sirname Epist ad Sym. pron de nom Cath. by the one I am distinguished from Heathens by the other from Hereticks and Scismaticks because in that Age few or none went by the Name of Catholick but those that were so indeed and profest the true Catholick Faith. And as this is a true Account of the Original of the Name Catholick and the weight that was laid upon it in those early Times so will the Name ever continue to be a sure unerring Note of the Catholick Church whilst it is inseparably conjoyn'd with the Profession of the Catholick Faith Where this is taught and profest there 's a true Church where this fails in part or in whole the Church decays or is lost II. No Argument can be drawn from the bare Name of Catholick to prove a Church to be Catholick This is so clear and evident in it self that it neither needs nor is scarce capable of a proof The Church of Rome is call'd Catholick therefore she is Catholick The Papists are call'd Catholicks therefore they are Catholicks This is such a way of Reasoning that every Man must be asham'd to own but those who have the confidence to say any thing when they are not able to say any thing to the Purpose For 1. The Christian Church was not known by the Name of Catholick at the beginning and therefore it can be no Essential Note of it We find no mention of this Name in the Writings of the New Testament We read That the Disciples were called Christians at Antioch but the name Catholick principally respecting the diffusive Nature of the Church the Church could not properly be so called till the Christian Faith had been more generally and universally preach'd in the World Therefore Pacianus in the fore-quoted Place confesses that the Name Catholick was not us'd in the Church in the Days of the Apostles and from thence some have concluded that the Creed which goes under the Apostles Name having this Denomination of the Church inserted in it Catholick Church was not compos'd by them but by some Holy Bishops of a later standing in the Church yet must it be confess'd that the Name is very ancient and of an early Date it being found in the Oriental Creeds particularly those of Jerusalem and Alexandria and in the Inscriptions of St. James St. Peter St. John and St. Jude's Epistles which are all styl'd General or Catholick Epistles 2. Names are oftentimes arbitrarily and at random and falsly impos'd on Things and therefore nothing can be concluded from them The Church of Sardis had a Name to live but was dead the Church of Laodicea gloried that she was rich but was poor many on Earth are call'd Gods who are but mortal Men Simon Magus was call'd the great Power of God but was a Child of the Devil Mahomet a great Prophet but was an Impostor Diana the great Goddess of the Ephesians but was an Idol our Blessed Saviour foretold that many should come in his Name each saying I am Christ but were Deceivers Thus you see Things and Persons are not always as they are call'd nor do I believe the Papists are willing that their Church should be thought in reality to be according to the signification of some Names that are too liberally bestow'd upon her the Bishop of Rome calls himself Christ's Vicar but others Antichrist the Church of Rome styles her self the Catholick Church but others the Whore of Babylon I do as little justify the fastening such odious Names upon them as approve their arrogating to themselves the other glorious Titles yet this I am pretty well assur'd of that a Man of ordinary Abilities may say as much to prove the Pope Antichrist and the Romish Church an Harlot as the whole Colledg can to justify the pretence of the one to be Christ's Vicar or of the other to be his undefiled Spouse 3. Names are oftentimes impos'd on things and so us'd as Marks of distinction only without any farther design of representing their Natures and Qualities by them thus we call the Romanists Catholicks not that we think they are truly so but in Complement or Irony in complyance with common use or by way of Discrimination from other Christians and in the same respects it may be suppos'd that they call us the Reform'd And if they think this is a good Argument to prove them Catholicks we have the same and 't will hold as strong to prove us
Novel Name and disputing that their Religion vvas the truer because they were strengthened and defended by the Authority of Antiquity So vve reade in Arnobius (a) Lib. 2. and in Symmachus (b) Ad Valentin Theodos Arcad. and Prudentius (c) In Agone Romani Martyris and many others vvhom I omit contenting my self vvith St. Austine alone because he gives a most pertinent Answer to this poor Pretence vvhich will as well serve us against the Papists as it did him against the Pagans (d) Quaest ex Vet. Novo Testam ent Q. cxiv Who contended that what they held was true because of its Antiquity As if saith he Antiquity or ancient Custom should carry it against the Truth Thus Murderers Adulterers and all wicked Men may defend their Crimes for they are ancient Practices and began at the beginning of the World. Though from hence they ought rather to understand their Errour because that which is reprehensible and filthy is thereby proved to have been ill begun c. nor can it be made honest and unreprovable by having been done long ago But this is a part of the Devil's Craft and Subtilty as he excellently observes in the same Place who as he invented those false Worships and sprinkled some jugling Tricks to draw Men into them so he took such course that in process of time the Fallacy was commended and the filthy Invention was excused by being derived from Antiquity For by long Custom that began not to seem filthy which was so in it self The irrational Vulgar began to worship Doemons or dead Men who appeared to them as if they had been Gods Which Worship being drawn down into Custom of long Continuance thinks thereby to be defended as if it were the Truth of Reason Whereas the Reason of Truth is not from Custom which is from Antiquity but from God who is proved to be God not by long Continuance or Antiquity but by Eternity Let this be applied to our present Business and it is sufficient to shew that bare Antiquity cannot be a Note of Truth For there are very ancient Errors Which is so evident that it is a Wonder such a Man as Bellarmin was should let this pass the Muster among the Notes he reckons up of the Truth of his Church which he could intend for no more than to make a show not for any substantial Service Of which this is a Demonstration that he had no sooner named ANTIQVITY as the Second Note of the Church but discerning it would stand him in no stead he immediately sets it aside and cunningly slides to another thing with which he endeavours to blend and confound it For thus he argues L. iv de Ecclesia c. v. Without doubt the True Church is ancienter than the False as God was before the Devil And consequently we reade the good Seed was sown first before the Tares But who doth not see that these two things are widely different the one from the other Antiquity and Priority that which is Ancient and that which is First Whatsoever is First is undoubtedly true but whatsoever is Ancient is not always so unless it be of such Antiquity that it be also First There is a double Antiquity therefore one in respect of us the other absolute and in it self This last sort of Antiquity is the same with what is First Unto which we are desirous to go to which we are willing to stand and by which we would be judged By the Rule which Tertullian lays down in several of his Books * L. iv contra Marcion c. 5. Adv. Praxeam c. 2. De praescript c. xxx We would fain bring our Cause and Church to be tryed That is truest which was First that First which was from the Beginning that from the Beginning which was from the Apostles And in like manner that from the Apostles which in the Churches of the Apostles was most Sacred viz. That which they reade in their Holy Writings This is our Antiquity as he speaks in his famous Apology praestructa divinae literaturae †Apologia c. xlvii built before upon the Divine Learning This is the Rule of Faith which came from Christ transmitted to us by his Companions to whom all those who speak other ways will be found to be of later date But to this they of the Church of Rome will by no means agree they do not like to be tryed only by the Holy Scriptures which is the true Antiquity that is undoubtedly First before all other Traditions A very bad Sign this an Infallible Note all is not right among them that they dare not abide by the Scriptures but cry up other Traditions that is boast of what is later not what is first And what is after the First though it could be proved to be of great Antiquity cannot certainly be relied on Because there are Errors and Heresies so ancient that they sprung up presently after the first Truth Mere Antiquity therefore is not a good Proof For though the Devil be not first yet he is of great Antiquity being the old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that ancient Serpent who was a Liar as well as a Murderer from the Beginning And was so crafty as in Process of Time to make use of this Argument to prove he was the Ancient of Days that is God. And if there had not been something else whereby he might have been discovered to be a Serpent who could have contradicted him Or confuted his Doctrine and Worship if they had been to be tried by bare Antiquity Which is a Proof so insufficient that God Himself as ye heard before out of St. Austin is not proved to be God by Antiquity but by Eternity Truth and Error were born so near together that after a long Tract of Time they could not be distinguished merely by their Age. No sooner was Man created but this Serpent by his Subtilty beguiled Eve. And immediately after our Redemption he attempted again to corrupt Mens Minds from the simplicity that is in Christ 2 Cor. xi 3. 1 Thess iii. 5. And accordingly as there was a Church of Christ so there was together therewith a Synagogue of Satan Rev. iii. 9. There were Depths of Satan also and a Mystery of Iniquity which wrought even in the Apostles Days as well as a Mystery of Godliness and the deep things of God. Which wicked Doctrines running down to Posterity made use at length of the Plea of Antiquity to give them Countenance and Support Nor could it be denied tho it was proved to be a mere Deceit For it was refuted by the Fathers in such remarkable Words as these which give a deadly blow to the like Plea of the present Roman Church Custom without Truth is but the Antiquity of Error And there is a short way for Religious and Simple Minds to find out what is Truth For if we return to the Beginning and Original of Divine Tradition Human Error ceases Thither let
us return to our Lord 's Original the Evangelical Beginning the Apostolical Tradition And hence let the Reason of our Act arise from whence Order and the Beginning arose If therefore Christ alone is to be heard we ought not to regard what another before us thought fit to be done but what Christ who is before all first did For we ought not to follow the Custom of Man but the Truth of God since God himself speaks thus by the Prophet Isaiah In vain do they worship me teaching the Commandments and Doctrines of Men. Which very Words our Lord again repeats in the Gospel Ye reject the Commandments of God that ye may establish your own Tradition Thus S. Cyprian †Epist lxiii ad Caecilium fratrem lxxiv. ad Pompeium Ed. Oxon. With whom Tertullian ‖ L. de Veland Virg. c. 1. whom he was wont to call his Master agrees in many memorable Sayings No body can prescribe against the Truth neither Space of Times nor the Patronages of Persons nor the Priviledg of Countries From which things indeed Custom having gotten a Beginning by Ignorance or Simplicity and being grown strong by Succession pleads against Truth But our Lord Christ calls himself the TRVTH not CVSTOM Nor doth Novelty so much confute Heresy as Truth Whatsoever is against Truth that will be Heresy even old Custom Truth doth not stand * L. de Anima c. xxviii in need of old Custom to make it be believed nor doth Heresy fear the Charge of Novelty That which is plainly false is made generous by Antiquity For why should I not call that false whose Proof is false Why should I believe Pythagoras who tells Lies that he may be believed I omit all the rest having said enough to shew that if Antiquity it self be to be credited we ought not to depend upon Antiquity alone but seek for ancient Truth Which leads me to the second thing I undertook to shew that the present Church of Rome vainly pretends to true Antiquity i.e. to ancient Truth II. The Antiquity of a Church doth not consist in the Antiquity of the Place where it is seated For a new Worship may come into an ancient Place of Worship as the new Altar of Ahaz was introduced into the Temple at Jerusalem where he sacrificed to the Gods of Damascus 2 King. xvi 2 Chron. xxviii 23 Nor doth it consist meerly in the Antiquity of its Founders For the Apostles founded many Churches which had all the same Title to Antiquity in this regard and yet continued not such Churches as they left them but decayed some of them so fast that what Truth and Goodness remained among them was ready to dye even before all the Apostles were dead Rev. iii. 2. But it 's true Antiquity consists in the Preservation of the ancient Truth entire and uncorrupted which it received from the Apostles and which made it at first to be a Church Those things are truly ancient which persist in the same State after a long Tract of Time wherein they were at their beginning For if they have suffered any Change in that which belongs to their Being and Constitution they have lost their Antiquity and become another thing than they were at the first Now to know this we must enquire into the Nature of the thing it self and understand for instance what it is that makes a Society to be the Church of God. And all agree it is the Christian Truth In which if it have suffered Alteration that is doth not hold the same Christian Doctrine it did at the beginning but hath introduced Errors and Lies under the pretence of ancient Truth it is not the same Church it was at first and therefore hath not that Mark of true Antiquity which will prove it to be such as it pretends Now that this is the Case of the present Church of Rome is evident by that Alteration they have made in the ancient Creed Unto which they have added as many more Articles as there were at the first and thereby made such a Change in their Church for a Change is made by adding as well as taking away as makes it not to be the same ancient Church which the Apostles founded at the beginning This Charge they have no way to avoid nor can by any other means maintain that they are such an ancient Church as Christ and his Apostles setled but by this Ratiocination as Bellarmin calls it That in all great Changes of Religion these six things may be ever shewn 1. The Author of that Change. 2. The new Doctrine that was brought in 3. The Time when it began 4. The Place where 5. Who opposed it 6. And who joyned themselves to it None of which can be shewn in the Church of Rome since the Apostles times and therefore there hath been no Change at all made in it but it remains the same it was at first without any Alteration Which is a reasoning built upon grounds so notoriously false that it scarce deserves the Name of a poor Piece of Sophistry 1. For first it is contrary to all History and Experience which shews us there have been great Changes the Authors and the Beginnings c. of which cannot now be known Though no Man can doubt there hath been an Alteration made For the Body Spiritual and Civil too is like the Body Natural In which as there are some Diseases which make such a violent and sudden Assault that one may say at what moment they began So there are other which grow so insensibly and by such slow Degrees that none can tell when the first Alteration was made and by what Accident from a good Habit of Body to a bad Thus we are sure a Man is in a deep Consumption when we see him worn away to Skin and Bone though no body can tell the precise time when nor by what means nor where and in what Company his Blood began to be tainted And thus we are sure there is a Gangrene as St Paul calls Heresy when we see it corrode the Body of the Church though it crept in so secretly at the first and so indiscernably that it was not suspected nor can alway be traced to its first Occasion and Original No the Tares in the Field which is another Example whereby our Lord himself illustrates this matter had taken root before they were espied for they were sown in the Night while Men slept and could take no notice of it so that all that could be known was this that his Enemy had done it That is the Tares were not from our Saviour nor were first sown but were of a later and quite different Original But by what particular Instrument the Enemy sowed them at what hour of the Night by what hand and when did not appear for the matter was carried so secretly and in the dark that the Servants who knew of the sowing of the good Seed in the Field wondred to see the bad and ask'd
Whence hath it Tares They did not know that is how they came there no more than we may be able now to know how Errors came into the Church But that they were there they knew and were sure as we are sure there are false Doctrines in the Church of Rome that were not of our Saviour's planting 2. Nor do the Examples whereby they illustrate this Ratiocination serve to any purpose but to shew the Falseness of it They can name they say the Authors and Beginnings of all the ancient Heresies for instance the Heresy which affirmed there were two Persons in Christ was begun by Nestorius in the Year CDXXXI Which is not true for though then it took its Name from so great a Bishop who maintained it yet the Heresy had been before from an unknown Beginning it being mentioned by St. Ambrose in the foregoing Age in his Book of the Incarnation The like may be said of the Arian Heresy whose Beginning they date in the Year CCCXXIV but it was born long before among the Gnostick Hereticks and only got Reputation by so noted a Man as Arius Nay some of the learnedst Doctors in the present Roman Church have taken a great deal of pains to make the World believe that Tertullian and a Number of other ancient Fathers were infected with it So uncertain they are in their Discourses about these matters 3. Which if they were true would uphold the greatest Impieties For what will become of the Christian Religion if the Traditional Law of the Jews be true And according to this way of Reasoning it must pass for Truth that it came from Mount Sinai by word of Mouth as the written Law did for none can shew its Original much less name the Authors of the several Tradions and who opposed them c. Nay the Worship of the Heathen Gods was supported by this Argument as is excellently observed by Clemens Alexandrinus who tells the Gentiles Admon ad Gentes p. 36 37. That Fables and Time had advanced dead Men into the Number of the Gods. For though things present being familiar to us are neglected yet those which are past and gone being out of the reach of Confutation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the obscurity and uncertainty of Times have honour invented for them By which means those that are dead long ago glorying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a long time of Error are accounted Gods by Posterity The same may be said for the lying Oracles among them the Beginnings and first Authors of which cannot be traced 4. But we have an Instance of this in the Roman Church it self where there is an acknowledged Change and yet they themselves are not able to tell who first began it because it crept in by insensible Degrees The Communion I mean in one kind was not used for above a thousand years but being begun in some Churches they themselves cannot tell which nor when grew to be a general Custom not long before the Council of Constance in these Western Parts of the World and there was established as a Law. But it did not begin by the Decree of any Bishop nor was carried on by any publick Order and if you ask them who first set it on foot they will tell you that doth not appear Therefore the Second alone of those Six things being proved that new Doctrines and Practices have been brought in of which we are very certain there needs none of the rest But we are sure there was a time and Authors of them and People that embraced them though we should not be able for want of ancient Records that are lost or because things that come in insensibly cannot in every Age be noted and recorded to tell the very time and Place and Persons when and where and by whom they were introduced All which is not said by us because we are not able to give an account of the other parts of that Ratiocination but only to shew the Frivolousness of such Discourses as these in which they of the Church of Rome place their main Retreat For we can tell nay their own Authors have told us when and by whom many things were brought into their Church which were not there in the Beginning Polydore Virgil if I had room to insert his Words would furnish us with several Instances But I shall content my self with Two which were at no great distance the one from the other The First is their grand Article of Faith about the Papal Authority We know and have often told them by what steps it grew to the height wherein now it is or would be when the Bishops of Rome began to exceed their Bounds how they were opposed and snub'd who and by whom was first declared the Universal Bishop and Head of the Church Victor began the Dance Zozimus after some others followed it Boniface continued it Celestine carried it on Who met with so sharp a Rebuke from the African Bishops for his intrusion into their Affairs upon the pretence of a forged Canon of the Nicene Council as is sufficient to shew his Ambition and Craft was greater than his Authority The Attempts of the rest are as notorious and so is the Opposition they met withall till at last Boniface the 3d procured to himself from Phocas the Title of Vniversal Bishop and to his Church the Title of Head of all Churches All this we can justify out of Authentick Records but it is not in their Power to name so much as one Man that owned the Universal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop over the whole Church till that time that is till above six hundred years after our Saviour's Birth For though Bellarmin alledges an Epistle of Justinians wherein he calls the Church of Rome the Head of all Churches yet is signifies nothing but that they are at a loss for want of Proofs because as it is with great Reason suspected to be spurious so it can intend no more than Head of the Churches of the West because in an undoubted Edict of his he calls the Church of Constantinople by the same Name the Head of all other Churches i.e. Chief of those in the East Which is so certain that their own Pope Gregory not much above a year before this arrogant Title was assumed most vehemently disdained it or rather thundred against it Nor can they name one Man in the whole Church for so long a time that believed their present Definition of the Catholick Church much less the Power of the Pope to depose Kings which none challenged till Gregory VII that is till above a thousand years after our blessed Saviour Insomuch that their fore-named Champion †C. Bellarm. Tract de potestate Summ. Pontif. p. 27. being to prove this deposing Power out of ancient Authors is able to say no more than this I have alledged above LXX famous Writers some of which flourish'd more than 500 Years ago A goodly Business a glorious Shew of Antiquity instead of the
first five hundred Years after Christ to refer us to the last five hundred Which is to confess the Novelty of their most beloved Doctrines And consequently to quit this Note of Antiquity as in Truth he plainly doth in that Book where being pressed with this Argument That no such Power was claimed in the first Times of the Church he answers ‖ Ib. cap. 3. p. 69. That he hath not right Conceptions of the Church of Christ who admits nothing but what he reads expresly written or done in the ancient Church For the Church of later time hath Power not only to explain and declare but constitute and command those things which belong to Faith and Manners Which is as much as to say they need not trouble themselves about Antiquity for they can make Articles of Faith now which were not heard of in the Beginning 2. We have often also told them by what steps Images crept into the Church For they remained at first only in private Houses for Ornament or for Commemoration and not uncensured There being above 300 Years past before they came into any Church and then not without Opposition and for this end only to be of an Historical use to remind People of things past Which improved in 300 Years more to a Rhetorical use as we may call it to stir up Devotion in the People For which purpose Gregory the Great fancied they were profitable and tho he by no means allowed them to be worshipped yet he thought the People might look upon them and worship God before them And this looking upon them to help Devotion was improved in the time of the second Nicene Council into a downright worshipping of them which would not pass in these Western Parts for good Doctrine And when at last we know and have told them by what steps this new Worship advanced hither and grew to a greater Degree of Religious Respect than that Nicene Council admitted the most zealous Defenders of it could not agree about it nor do they know what to make of it to this day We could tell them of other things that are much newer for it is but a little more than 100 Years since unwritten Traditions were decreed to be a part of the Rule of Faith that is of the Word of God. But this is sufficient to shew that they vainly boast of Antiquity which is only ancient Error and some of it not very ancient neither As for ancient Truth that 's on our side whom they most injuriously accuse of following Novelties III. For the Religion of the Church of England by Law established is the true Primitive Christianity In nothing New unless it be in rejecting all that Novelty which hath been brought into the Church But they are the Cause of that for if they had not introduced new Articles we should not have had occcasion for such Articles of Religion as condemn them Which cannot indeed be old because the Doctrines they condemn are new tho the Principle upon which we condemn them is as old as Christianity we esteeming all to be new which was not from the Beginning For as for our positive Doctrine Polydore himself hath given a true Account of it and makes it the Reason why the Sect called Evangelick as he speaks increased so marvelously in a short time because they affirmed that no Law was to be received which appertains to the Salvation of Souls but that which Christ or the Apostles had given * L. viii cap. 4. de rerum Inventoribus And who dare say that this is a new Religion which is as old as Christ and his Apostles With whom whosoever agree they are truly ancient Churches tho of no longer standing than Yesterday As they that disagree with them are New tho they can run up their Pedigree to the very Apostles Thus Tertulian †L. de praescript c. xxxii discourses with whose Words something contracted I shall conclude As the Doctrine of a Church when it is divers from or contrary unto that of the Apostles shews it not to be an Apostolick Church tho it pretend to be founded by an Apostle So those Churches that cannot produce any of the Apostles or Apostolical Men for their Founders being much later and newly constituted yet conspiring in the same Faith are nevertheless to be accounted Apostolick Churches because of the CONSANGVINITY OF DOCTRINE THE END LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard 1687. The Third Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ DURATION Tertia Nota est Duratio diuturna nec unquam interrupta Bellarm L. iv c. vi IMPRIMATUR Apr. 30. 1687. GVIL. NEEDHAM HOW far the Church of God is beholden to the Industry of some Learned Men in the Church of Rome for the Notes they give of a Church is not my Business at present to examine But those of the Reformed Religion must acknowledg themselves obliged to them for so frankly quitting those Characters which are essential to every true Church and for taking up with such as either apparently belong not to their Church or belong to other Churches as well as theirs or lastly such as may be found in a false Church as well as a true This might easily be proved against them through the fifteen Notes which are offered by them to the World But I shall content my self to give an Instance of it in the Note of Duration which is made by them a necessary Mark of the true Church In Prosecution of which I shall consider I. What is to be understood by the Term Duration II. How far Duration may be said to be a Note of the true Church III. Whether the Church of Rome hath a sufficient Title to this Character § I. Duration according to Bellarmin is the continuance of a Church throughout all Times without Interruption and he adds that the Catholick Church is so called not only because it always hath been but also because it always will be So that this Duration doth include in it these three Things 1. The Being of a Church from the Beginning 2. The Continuance of that Church to the End. 3. The Continuance of that Church from the Beginning to the End without Interruption Let us now see how he applies it to the Case It 's evident saith he that our Church hath continued from the beginning of the World hitherto Or if we speak of the State of the New Testament it hath endured from Christ to this Year 1557. The Year when he wrote this But for all his Beginning its evident there is no Proof of what he affirms and his Assertion is very insufficient 1. That he takes it for granted that his Church and the Christian Church are one and the same and that there is no other true Church but his It 's evident our Church c. 2. That he has omitted two main Branches of his Duration viz. That part of it which was to the end of the World which is
have been or that the Note of Duration belongs not to them Either then they must disprove the Duration of those Churches or discharge it from being the distinguishing Note of the true Church Lastly I may add If Duration be the standing Note or the true Church Then those could be no true Churches which have not had that Duration and so they must un-un-Church the seven Churches of Asia c. which have now no Existence but are utterly extinguished For if they had been true Churches they would have had Duration but having not Duration they could not according to this Doctrine have ever been true Churches But I am not willing thus to leave the Subject and shall therefore § III. Consider whether the Church of Rome after all its pretence to Duration and its establishment of this Note of the true Church has a just and sufficient claim to it When we would know whether a Church has this Note of Duration belonging to it we must consider what there is in a Church that is capable of being tried by this Character and that is either as to Place Persons Order or Doctrine for by these is it that the Church doth exist and is made visible and so the Church that puts in a Claim to Duration must be able to shew some Evidence for it from hence as far as she admits them for Instances of that Duration she pleads for 1. As to Place When we hear so much of the Church of Rome it 's to be supposed that Rome is the principal Seat of that Church as well as the Pope of Rome is the Head of it But this they cannot pretend to Duration in for if we look backward we find not only the City of Rome frequently sack'd and destroyed and wholly depopulated as it was by Alaricus Gensericus and Totylas but even deserted by the Popes themselves who with their whole Court resided at Avignon for 70 Years together as is acknowledged Bellarm. de Pontif. l. 4. c. 4. If we look forward all that Bellarmine dares to offer upon the Point that the Chair of St. Peter shall not be separated from Rome is that it 's a pious and the most probable Opinion But if we consult others they say positively Vega Jesuita in Apoc. 18. com 7. §. 4. Rhem. Annot. in Apoc. ◠17.5 that Rome shall depart from the Faith and shall be an Habitation of Devils by reason of its Wickedness and Idolatry and be the Seat of Antichrist 2. If we proceed to Duration as it respects Persons where shall we expect that to be intire and uninterrupted if not in the Popes And yet if we may judg of Popes as Bellarmine doth of a Church De Not. l. 4. c. 8. §. dico secundo and that Heresie doth nullify their Elections and Successions as it doth the Verity of a Church there is nothing more shattered For if we look into the Catalogue of them we shall find Zepherinus a Montanist Marcellinus sacrificing to Idols Liberius and Faelix Arrians Anastasius a Nestorian Honorius a Monothelite John 23. denying a future Life with many others Go we on and where shall we find more or greater Schisms one Pope cursing another and undoing what his Predecessor had done as was the Case of Formosus Romanus Stephanus and Sergius Often two Popes together contesting for the Chair as it was for above forty Years at once and at one time three Popes that had such pretences to the Papacy that each had Learned Men for their Patrons De Pontif. l. 4. c. 14. §. Tricesimus septimus and it could not be easily judged which of them was the true and lawful Pope as Bellarmine himself acknowledges But this belongs to Note five of which more in its due place 3. If we proceed to Order either in Worship or Discipline the Case is so notorious as to the several Formularies used heretofore in that Church that it needs not to be insisted upon and it 's impossible for them to deny it 4. Therefore I shall proceed to Doctrine which indeed is the great Character by which a Church is to be discovered and tried And here that I may not either intrench upon what has been said before concerning the Variation of the Church of Rome in this Point from the Scriptures Vid. Note first and second and Antiquity or prevent what may further be said upon Note nine I shall compare the Church of Rome with it self if I can therein prove that it is not now what it hath been in many main Points De Not. l. 4. c. 6. §. Quamvis autem it will follow that it has no pretence to this Note of Duration for upon this Point of Alteration doth Bellarmine put the Issue What the Church of Rome doth hold 1. The Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches and to believe her so to be is necessary to Salvation Concil Trid. Sess 7. de Bapt. Can. 3. Bulla Pii 4. 2. The Pope of Rome is Christ's Vicar and hath the Supream Power over the whole Church and without Subjection to him as such is no Salvation Concil Trid. Sess 6. Decret de Reform c. 1. Bulla Pii 4. Apocrypha 3. The Apocryphal Books are Canonical and Tobit and Judith c. are as much the Holy Scripture as Genesis c. and whosoever rejects these as not Canonical is accursed Council Trid. Sess 4. Scripture and Tradition 4. Scripture alone is not a Rule of Faith without Tradition and Traditions are to be received with the like Regard and Veneration as the Scriptures Trid. Sess 4. Scripture in unknown Tongues 5. The Scriptures are not to be read in the vulgar Tongue without Licence because more Prejudice than Profit will redound from it Reg. Ind. Libr. prohib R. 4. Merit 6. Good Works do truly deserve Eternal Life and whoever holds the contrary is accursed Trid. Sess 6. c. 16. Can. 32. Indulgences 7. By Indulgences granted by the Popes and Prelates of the Church Persons are discharged from Temporal Punishment here and in Purgatory Trid. Sess 25. Bull. Pii 4. Purgatory 8. There is a Purgatory after this Life where the Souls of those that are not purged nor have satisfied for their Sins here are there to be purged and to give Satisfaction unless their Time be shortned by the Prayers Alms and Masses of the Living Trid. Sess 25. Sess 22. Can. 3. Service in an unknown Tongue 9. It 's required that Divine Service be performed in the Latin Tongue and whosoever saith it ought to be administred in a vulgar Tongue is accursed 10. In the Church of Rome they pray to Saints and Angels as their Intercessors Trid. Sess 25. Catech. Rom. par 4. c. 9. Images 11. Images are not only to be placed in Temples but also to be worshipped as if the Persons thereby represented were present Trid. Sess 25. Catech. Rom. par 4. c. 6. n. 4. Sacraments 12. There are
more evidently proved to be no true Catholicks than those of the Roman Communion may in all those Articles of Faith which are peculiar to themselves For as to Points of mere Belief how much more than the Apostles Creed can they shew us to have been received always every where and by all Christians But as for that large Addition of Tridentine Articles annexed to that Creed by P. Pius the 4th no unbiassed Person can believe they have ever done any thing like proving that any of them have been received always and much less every where and by all those whom themselves own for Catholick Christians 4. By this Note of a Catholick no Society of Christians can bid so fair for Catholicism as the Reformed Churches but especially the Church of England whose avowed Principle it is to receive nothing as an Article of Faith but what is contained in the holy Scriptures Artic. 6. or may be proved thereby Nor doth she embrace any one Doctrine as an Article of Faith but what is clearly expressed in those Books of whose Canonicalness there never was the least Dispute in the Primitive Church Secondly I proceed to shew that if we should acknowledg this to be a true Note of the Catholick Church instead of enabling the Church of Rome to make good her Pretension of so being it will destroy it And instead of doing Disservice to the Reformed Churches it will do them excellent Service and be a certain Argument of their being true Parts of the Catholick Church And 1. I will shew that it will not at all Advantage the Church of Rome as to that her Pretension and therefore can do us no Prejudice The Cardinal proves 1. That his Church began to fructify throughout the World in the Days of the Apostles from these Words of St. Paul Col. 1.6 The Truth of the Gospel is come unto you as it is in all the World and bringeth forth Fruit as it doth also in you c. But what is this to his Church Is the Gospel's bringing forth Fruit in all the World the same thing with the Church of Rome's so doing 2. He adds the Authority of several Fathers for this Church's being spread in their Time all over the then known World but gives us none of their Sayings except St. Prosper's The first Father he cites is St. Irenaeus in the 3d Chapter of his Book Edit Paris p. 53. But the Father here only saith That this Faith which he sums up immediately before and is but the chief part of the Apostle's Creed the Church disseminated throughout the World diligently preserves as if it were confined but to one House But how doth this concern the Church of Rome Which is not once mentioned with others here particularly named except we could be made to believe that wheresoever the Word Church is found that Church is still to be understood Next he cites Tertullian adversùs Judaeos Edit Rig. p. 189. and having search'd that Book these or none are the Words he means viz. Those Words of David are to be understood of the Apostle's their Sound is gone forth in all the Earth and their Words unto the End of the World For in whom have all Nations believed but in Christ who is now come The Parthians Medes Elamites and those that inhabit Mesopotamia Armenia Phrygia Cappadocia Pontus Asia and Pamphilia Egypt Africa and beyond Cyrene the Romans and Jews now in Jerusalem and other Nations as now of the Getuli and Moors all Spain divers Countries of the Gauls and those of the Britains which the Romans could never conquer are subject to Christ c. But I again ask What is all this to the Church of Rome more than to any other particular Church belonging to any one of the many Nations of which that of the Romans is one and two whole Quarters of the World here mentioned His third Father is St. Cyprian Edit Oxon. p. 10◠in his Book de Vnitate Ecclesiae But here is nothing he could fancy to be for his purpose except these Words The Church is one which by its Fruitfulness is extended into a Multitude As there are many Rays of the Sun and but one Light c. So the Church of our Lord which being filled with Light sends forth her Beams through the whole World is but one Light which is diffused every-where But though this be said of the Catholick Church is here the least Intimation that the Church of Rome is this Catholick Church After St. Cyprian follow several of the later Fathers their Books being only directed to But the narrow room I am confined to will not permit me to examine them nor need we look any farther to be satisfied how this greatest Man of the Roman Church condescended to the most shameful impertinence in citing Scripture and Fathers for the doing her Service But we must not overlook St. Prosper's Verses in his Book de Ingratis viz. Sedes Roma Petri quae Pastoralis Honoris Facta Caput Mundo quicquid non possidet Armis Relligione tenet i. e. Rome the Seat of Peter being made the Head of Pastoral Honour in the World whatsoever Country she possesseth not by her Arms she holds by her Religion But considering how early this Father lived viz. about the beginning of the Fifth Century he could mean no more than this That the Church of Rome the most Honourable of all other by means of that Cities being the ancient Seat of the Emperors keeps still possession of those places by the Religion they received from Her over which she hath lost Her Old Dominion And what is this but another plain Instance of most idle quoting of Ancient Authors Not to reflect upon Fetching Arguments from Poetical Flourishes But not to stand to consider how Ample the Roman Church was in the times of those Fathers nothing is more evident than that that part of Christendom she took up was but a small Spot of Ground compared with the Space those Churches filled which tho they held Communion with Her were distinct Churches from Her and owned no Subjection to Her. And it was about or above an Hundred Years after the youngest of those Fathers that the Pope was inverted by that Execrable Wretch Phocas a Blessed Title in the mean time with the Primacy over all Churches And Gregory the Great who died in the Beginning of the Sixth Century not only sharply inveighed against John Patriarch of Constantinople and his Successor Cyriacus for assuming to themselves the Title of Vniversal Bishops though there was no appearance of their designing any thing more thereby than an Addition of Honour not of Power to that Patriarchate but also called those who should affect such a Haughty Title Greg. Epist 37. 70. lib. 11. Ep. 30. l. 4. the Forerunners of Antichrist And as these Bishops taking this Title was a Demonstration that they acknowledged not the least Subjection to the Bishops of Rome so Pope Gregory's calling
often fallacious way of arguing however popular and that needs less Trouble in Examination from Persons to things whereas these will continue the same but they are changeable 1. But then it may be observed of the Roman Succession that the case seems so extremely chang'd since the first Times So great an Alteration there is in the Persons and in the Office to which the Succession is now come that it can hardly be look'd on as the continuation of the same The Episcopal Power is all that we can find for some hundred of years laid claim to and our Note is only concerned in it tho in some few single Acts it began by degrees to be stretch'd so as to put other Bishops upon their Guard and Protestations as in the case of Appeals by the Africans Yet were all Bishops owned to have an equal share in that all to be of like Power and Authority all alike Successors of the Apostles whether at Rome or in the meanest City as in the known Testimonies in St. Cyprian and St. Jerom c. But the Papal Power now challenged and exercised is so vastly and widely different from Episcopacy that scarce any Propriety of Speech can bring them under the same Name But to come to matter of Fact. Notwithstanding the high Elogiums given by the Antients on particular occasions to the Roman Church or Bishops and the very bold Efforts and very lofty Aspirings of some of these yet he must have other Eyes or other Spectacles than we can procure who can espy any thing like the Supremacy and Authority claim'd by the present Papacy in the Principles or Practice of the Church for more than five hundred Years which as hath been observed could not but have been as discernable in all the Histories of those Times as the Reference to the power of our Kings and manner of our Government must be in our own History 2. Farther indeed there seems no great Reason for them to be much concerned at the Succession of Bishops that are not very favourable to the very Order We know what great Opposition in their Council of Trent the Divine Right of Episcopacy met with from the chief Favourites of that See when the Determination was so strongly pressed by others De Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 8 9. l. 4. c. 24. And the Author of these Notes is pleated to determine the Government of the Church not to be chiefly in the Bishops but properly and intirely Monarchical in the Pope only and that he derives his Power immediately from Christ But the Bishops have theirs from him as to Jurisdiction which is Government 3. Moreover they have the less reason to except against any Churches for the want of this Apostolical Order when their very Catechism that multiplies Orders with much less Distinction of Office makes this no distinct Order but only a different Degree of the same Priesthood the supreme Order in their Church ascending only gradually from that of a common Presbyter to that of Bishops Arch-Bishops Patriarchs and the Pope himself Some of the intermediate we know admit no distinct Ordination Nay the pretended plenary Power of the Pope hath sometimes by particular Delegation empowered mitred Abbots but meer Presbyters to supply the Place of two of the Bishops if but one be present even in Ordination it self and that of a Bishop as Bellarmine in this very Note yields Many other Instances might be given of their endeavours to advance the first as it were on purpose to fence off the danger of a Rival To what use else should serve so many Priviledges and Exemptions long complained of Their chief Rise hath been upon the Depression of Bishops and robbing them of their ordinary Power So quite opposite is the true case from the Jelousies of some about this Primitive Order 4. Also they will have little cause to glory much in this pretended uninterrupted Succession when they consider how many Nullities according to their own Principles may dissolve and separate the closest Connexion thereof For besides confused Tumultuary and Simoniacal Promotions from which their own Writers will scarce free some of them That one Principle of the Intention of the Priest being necessary to the Effect of any Sacrament had need make them fearful of relying too much upon it For in case this were once wanting in some of the principal Sources through so long a Tract of time variety of Circumstances and different Temper of Persons which many will think no hard matter to suppose however can never be certainly proved otherwise by this Rule they cannot be secure of any Order yea scarce of any true Christian among them So I proceed to the Third Inquiry How insufficient a Proof this will afford them of any Great Advantage Inquiry 3. Indeed Bellarmin himself seems so Just as in part to yield this in his Answer to the Fourth Objection about this Note He says an Argument may be brought that there the Church is not where there is not this Succession but it cannot thence necessarily be gathered that there the Church is wheresoever this Succession is So that it seems no positive Proof with him Wherefore he thinks fit to exclude the Eastern Churches or break their Succession upon pretences of Heresy 1. For First This Succession is no sufficient Evividence of the Truth of the Doctrine of any Church Indeed were Tradition so infallible a Conveyance of Truth as some Men that talk of nothing below Demonstration would vouch Were it impossible for any new Opinion to creep into the Church Were it necessary that Men must believe to Day as they did Yesterday and so in short as it were at one Leap up to the very Apostles and that the passage of sixteen hundred years were able to make as little Alterations in the Memorials or Evidences of what Doctrines or Rules of Practice were first delivered by word of Mouth as the last Nights sleep does of what pass'd the Day before Then every Church of Apostolical Foundation and such were all then Planted had been and would still continue as Infallible as the Church of Rome thinks her self and we should not have had any dispute about their Tenets nor any such Exceptions against their Succession What Security theirs hath from the Defections which others are charged with or have been found liable to what Evidence may be produc'd that any Church or Company of Men in the Church may not add in process of Time some Doctrines and Usages very prejudicial to the Common Faith once delivered to the Saints And that the Resolution of our Faith is only with safety to be made into the Perpetuity and Infallibility of the Roman Church alone by it self or its Dependants we are yet to seek And much wonder that the Ancients in all their Disputes with Hereticks and Schismaticks should take so great a compass to confute their Adversaries from Scripture Reason and other Authorities beside what the See of Rome afforded and not with our
we of more than 200 Certainly the Argument from Succession here is much stronger the nearer it comes to the Original from which all the Authority and Virtue in the following are derived the Water may be supposed clearer and more natural the nearer to the Fountain-Head There is at least some danger from every Remove or Change made I am apt to think they themselves will hardly suppose they have a better Argument from Succession than those had 1200 or more Years since For if it be good now be sure it was so then But it will not follow alternately if then good it must hold so still The Case may be presum'd much different in the Succession of Ecclesiastical Dignities and Secular in this latter it may be suppos'd the Title gathers still more strength by the length of its Continuance is more confirm'd by long Possession many super induct Obligations but was it may be weakest in its Beginnings as in most particular Governments now when of a meer Human Original so far as we may with due Modesty and Reverence look that way But Spiritual Power in whomsoever where Legitimate can only descend at first from an immediate Divine Commission and that we may suppose gains nothing by passing through Human Hands and Infirmities being most strong and powerful in its first rise Indeed did the Cardinal only argue for a Temporal and Ecclesiastical Monarchy and would he be content to begin it after Pope Gregory the First and then to rise by degrees for a while Succession appears to me the best Argument they have However it is much easier to shew fair Evidences of the unaltered conveyance of the same Truth from one to another when it hath gone through so few Hands and that the eldest bears its Date but a very few Centuries of as Irenaeus expresly in the place cited l. 3. c. 3. and Epiphanius Hom. 27. Carpocrat p. 104. than it can be when they are multiplied to the present number and the Foot-steps of its continued Passage are almost worn out through so long a tract of Time and numerous cross Accidents Yet to give them their due the eminent Zeal of several of their first Bishops that Sealed to the Custody of the true Faith with their Blood being still as it were in view of their Persecutors their general Constancy thereto in which so many wavered or fell in the time of the Arian Persecution the Relief and Refuge they then and after afforded to such as suffered in that or like Causes as well as the Prerogative of their Place in the Imperial City and the current Tradition of their Churches first Foundation by the joint Labours of those chief Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul these gave them great credit in those Ages and while they used their Power so well every one was ready to enlarge it and to flee thither for Sanctuary when oppress'd In which case Men are very apt to speak bountifully of their Patrons And no marvel if they single out sometimes so venerable a Name and Authority to oppose and even to bear down the impertinent Obstinacy and peevish Presumption of every new upstart Schismatick or Heretick that would dictate to us strange and unheard-of Principles and unchurch all before or beside themselves and must begin the Date of it from themselves For thus most of the Citations mention'd are plainly levell'd And in such a Case we should judg the arguing sufficient still to silence such an insolent Boaster though we should begin the Succession no sooner than the time they ended and when we own Religion began to decline in some parts but sure not to expire Nay I could add though we should rise no higher than the Reformation it self as late as it was and how contemptuously soever they are pleased sometimes to speak of the happy Instruments thereof An extraordinary Providence also seems to have attended the Preservation of them so long under the Arian Gothick Kings and a strange temporal Felicity in being still Gainers in the end by all the Invasions and Calamities incident to so many Changes of Government by which most beside were Losers But I should think if they consulted Scripture Reason and Experience of former Examples with present sensible Observation more than any fancied Schemes and Models of their own what they would judg best to have done They might think it not unlikely at least be more willing to stand to the tryal whether it be not so that upon so long a continued and still growing accession of Wealth and Greatness to their Church many and great Corruptions might creep in which we charge them with and have only removed by the Reformation without turning them or our Ancestors out of the Church before or our selves since If the Favours they have so long enjoyed make them more industrious and cautious in the Examination of themselves to reform whatever they can find amiss and to be more charitably helpful and beneficial to others they will be far better employed than in grasping at still more Power and justifying all that they teach or do by the oft to us unaccountable Successes of Providence which the worst Causes have fled to for shelter and the worst Men when they had nothing else to plead God Almighty give us all Grace entirely to devote all our Studies and Labours to the Service of our Great Master and the best and most certain Benefit of his Church in the Furtherance of Sound Faith and Universal Holiness of Life in all true Piety Probity Charity and Peaceable Communion among all that in every place call on the Name of the Lord theirs and ours Which will afford us a far more comfortable Reckoning at the great Day of Account than to busie our selves in thrusting all beside out of the Church here and pronouncing Condemnation against them for hereafter or on the other side in carrying on still unaccountable Prejudices and endless Separations The God of Wisdom Truth and Peace will I hope at length give us a right Understanding in all Things THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Sixth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ Agreement in Doctrine with the Primitive Church Sexta Nota est Conspiratio in Doctrinâ cum Ecclesiâ Antiquâ Bellar. L. iv c. 9. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR May 19. 1687. Guil. Needham VVEE are very willing to own this for a true Mark of the Church its Agreeing with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we are so far from confuting Bellarmin for his giving of it that we do not doubt but he has hereby confuted himself and the whole Cause of the Roman Church for if we may be allowed to go back to the Primitive Church and to examine the Doctrine and Belief of that in order to find out what is the true Church at present then the pretended Infallibility of the present Church and the Necessity of receiving and believing all
that she imposes must be set by till it appears that she requires the same Doctrine and no other than what was taught and believed by the Primitive Church For according to this Note it does not appear which is the true Church till it first appears that it agrees with the Doctrine of the Primitive and till it appears that it is a true Church it cannot sure appear to be an Infallible one for it cannot he pretended that Infallibility belongs to any but the true Church and therefore it must be first known that the present Church agrees with the Primitive before it can be known that she is an Infallible Guide or Teacher So that we manifestly gain this first by this Note of the Church that all those big and blustering Claims to Infallibility must be postpon'd and laid aside till that of agreeing with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church be made out and when that is done we shall not have quite so much reason to question her Infallibility We desire nothing more than to have the matter brought to this Issue Whether the Doctrines of the Reformed or the Romish Church do agree best with the Primitive Since for Reasons well known to themselves and very much suspected by others they are so willing to goe off from Scripture and to decline the Judgment of that as incompetent and insufficient in most of the Controversies between us we are very ready to leave them to be decided by any other indifferent Arbitrator for we think it is a little odd and unreasonable they should make themselves the only Judges of what is in difference between us and therefore we are very ready to stand to the Award and Vmpirage of the Primitive Church and we are not in the least afraid to venture our whole Cause to the sentence and decision of That for tho the Scripture be our only Rule of Faith and Doctrine necessary to be believed by us because we know of no other Revelation but that and nothing but Revelation makes any Doctrine necessary to be believed yet we are very willing to take the sence and meaning of Scripture both from it self and from the Primitive Church too so according to Vincentius Lyrinensis to have the line of Scriptural Interpretation be directed by the Rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholick Judgment †Ut Propheticae Apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigatur Vincent Lyrinens contra haeres c. 2. that is to have the Primitive Church direct us in interpreting Scripture where it stands in need of it or there is any Controversy about its meaning Let the Scripture therefore as sensed by the Primitive Church and not by the private Judgment of any particular Man be allowed and agreed by us to be the Rule of our Faith and let that be accounted the true Church whose Faith and Doctrine is most conformable and agreeable with the Primitive We desire nothing more than to find out the true Church by the true Faith and we think this is the true way to find it out For Christian Faith is prior and antecedent to the Christian Church and that must be first known and supposed before we can know any such thing as a Church for 't is the Faith makes the Church and not the Church the Faith and therefore the true Church is to be known by the true Doctrine and not the true Doctrine by the Church as is some Folks way If a Church then has never so many other glorious Marks yet if it has not the true Faith according to the Rule before laid down it cannot be the true Church and if it have never so true a Succession of Pastors deriving their Power in an uninterrupted Line from the Apostles yet if it have not a true Succession of Doctrine too from them it is not a true Church So far indeed as it holds and professes the common Christian Faith so far for that very Reason it is a true Church and so far we allow the Roman to be a true Church and so far they cannot deny us to be one neither as the same Faith Fundamentals of Christianity are received and believed by both of us for this Faith being the same to both of us makes us both so far to be true Churches upon the same grounds but so far as we differ in Matters of Faith whether we or they be the true Church is the question between us and we are willing to have this determined by the Primitive Church If the Faith then and Doctrine of the Roman Church wherein it differs from us be the same with the Faith and Doctrine of the Primitive Church then that is the true Church If it be contrary and unagreeable to the Faith and Doctrine of the Primitive then it is not the true Church but a false and erroneous one And here we ought to make a particular enquiry and examination of all those Matters of Faith which are in controversie between us and bring each of them to the Test and Trial and see which Church does most agree in all those disputed Doctrines with the Doctrine of the Primitive Church for here we must be allowed to examine particular Doctrines that are in difference between us and every private Christian who is seeking for the true Church must if he would find it by this Mark of Bellarmine be allowed to inquire into and examine the Doctrines of the present Church and see whether they are agreeable to those of the Primitive or no and this he must do by his private Judgment and by the best means and helps he can use to this purpose for he is not yet supposed to have found out the true Church but to be finding it out by this Mark given of it and till he has found it out by this Mark and Direction he cannot be under its guidance and conduct so that he must make use of his own Reason and Judgment at least till he has thus found it that is he must have the Liberty to search and inquire into the Faith and Doctrines of the Primitive Church and to judg for himself as well as he can by his own best Discretion and the best helps he can use which Church does best agree in its Faith and Doctrines with the Primitive and according as he shall upon his own enquiry and examination find so he must choose that Church which he thinks is the truest but he must not give himself up to the absolute guidance and direction of any Church at least till he has by this way found out the true which is another manifest Advantage that we have by this Note against our Adversaries who are rather for bearing Men down with the bold pretence of Infallibility and the terrible fright of Damnation out of the true Church rather than suffering them according to this true Method to find it out And as he must thus use his own Judgment in an impartial search
venture their Cause to any other Sentence but that of Scripture which had so plainly decided for them and was indeed the most proper to be appealed to yet the greatest number and the most learned of the Protestant Writers have never declined the Judgment of the Primitive Church but next to the inspired Writings of the Apostles have always esteemed and been willing to be determined by it And we are well assured that the Ancient Church even the Roman it self as well as the whole Christian besides is in all material Points on the Protestant side and a perfect Stranger if not an utter Enemy to those new Articles of Faith and Corruptions of Doctrine which have been since brought into the Western Church and which we have for that Reason protested against because they were unknown and contrary to the Faith and Doctrine of the Primitive Church It would too much exceed the set Limits of this Paper to make this out so fully as might easily be done by going through the chiefest Points of Difference between us Bellarmine in his Discourse upon this Note goes wholly off from it and chuses rather to pursue Luther and Calvin and some other worthy Reformers through all the Paths of Calumny and Slander but I shall not follow him to take him off from those false and injurious Representations he hath made of their Doctrines If any Body has the curiosity to see the Art of Misrepresenting in its greatest perfection let him but read that Chapter but if he will see it as perfectly shamed and exposed let him read Bishop Morton's long and learned Answer to it * Apologia Catholica p. 61. to p. 278. We are examining the Doctrines and finding out the Marks of the Church and not of particular Men and had Calvin or others taught any such Doctrines as are very falsly there laid to their Charge I know none had been concerned in them but themselves and no Church could have been prejudiced by them any farther than it had received them I shall therefore keep more close to Bellarmine's Note tho not to his Method upon it and I assure a late Adviser †Advice to the â—onfuter of Belâ—â—mine 't is not the design of confuting him but setting Men right in the way to the True Religion and the True Church when others are so busy to draw them off by false Marks and Pretences which is the cause of this Vndertaking I confess it would be too prolix as Bellarmine says to produce all the Testimonies of the Ancients thereby to shew what was the Doctrine of the Primitive Church in every particular Point controverted between us I shall therefore offer only some plain and brief Remarks by which the sense of the Primitive Church may be undeniably known in most of the Controversies and by which it will appear what was the Doctrine of the Church then and how contrary that of the Church of Rome is now to it And here I should first begin with the most Primitive that is with the Apostolick Church which truly and only deserves the Title of being Mother and Mistress of all Christian Churches that ever were or shall be in the World it is as vain as arrogant for any later and particular Church to assume that to it self which is but a Sister-Church at most and younger than some of the rest and tho more fine and proud yet not half so honest and uncorrupt This Apostolick Church which was founded and governed by the Apostles over all the World is the true Standard of the Christian Church and as in revealed Religion That which is first is true according to Tertullian's * Id verum quod prius id prius quod ab initio ab initio quod ab Apostolis Tertul. de praescript l. 4. Axiom because it comes nearest to the first pure Fountain of Revelation so as he adds That is first which is from the Beginning and from the Apostles We should first then examine what was the Faith and Doctrine of the Apostolick Church the greatest and almost only account of which we have in their own Canonical Writings which are received and allowed as such by the whole Christian Church and in these our Adversaries find so little of their own late and new Doctrines that they cannot but own that these are insufficient to authorise and establish most of them without the Authority of the present Church and without the help of unwritten Traditions When we produce Scripture against our Adversaries we then produce the only Authentick Records of the Apostolick Church and the only certain account we have of the Faith and Doctrine of the most Primitive Church let them object therefore never so much against Scripture as a Rule of Faith yet whilst it contains the only sure Testimony of what was taught and believed by the first Christian Church so far as any of these Doctrines are not in Scripture so far they cannot appear to be the Doctrine of the Apostolick Church and whilst we hold all that Faith and all those Doctrines that are contained in Scripture we hold all that can be known to be so in the most pure and most Primitive Church and whatsoever they have added to Scripture which they will needs have to be but an imperfect Rule of Faith they have added so far as can be known to the Doctrine of the Apostolick Church for if Scripture be not the only Rule of that yet it is the only Historical Account we have of it But I shall not at present deal with them out of Scripture tho as it is only a Record and Evidence of the Apostolical Faith they will count this but a Trick I know to draw them into a Scripture Dispute which they are mighty averse to and which they design to avoid by an Appeal from that to the Primitive Church we will go on therefore with our Note as they I suppose mean and understand it and that we may not be too troublesom to them with Scripture and the Apostolick Writings we will go several Ages lower even down to those Times wherein the Church was in its glorious State under the first Christian Emperors and whether their Doctrines or ours were most agreable to those of this Primitive Church Let us now come briefly to enquire in some particular Instances and by some few short Remarks and Observations And First Was any such thing as their pretended Supremacy then allowed of when in the first general Council at Nice * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. Nicen. Can. 6. There was a limited Power assigned to the Bishop of Rome as there was to the other Metropolitans of Alexandria and Antioch who were to keep their Bounds set them by antient Custom which is utterly inconsistent with an Universal Supremacy over the whole Church by a Divine Right as is since pretended and claimed contrary to all Antiquity For the next General Council appoints the Bishop of Constantinople to have Prerogatives of Honour
diversa sentire inveniuntur quia super his varia ac penè adversa tradidisse videntur Doctores Lomb. Sent. l. 4. dist 17. That Learned Men were found to have different Sentiments about it and that the Doctors delivered themselves variously and differently upon it and therefore it could not be the Doctrine of the Church then but of this see a learned Treatise written on purpose Was the Roman Purgatory a Doctrine of the Primitive Church of which Alphonsus à Castro confesses There is almost no mention of it in any of the ancient Writers ‖ De Purgatorio fere nulla in antiquis Scriptoribus mentio Alfons de Castro contra Haeres l. 8. p. 115. Bp Fisher * Roffens contra Luther Art. 18. is of the same mind with him and that old Christian Custom of celebrating the day of their Friends Death as a Festival and Day of rejoycing because they were then released from all Pain and Sorrow †Nos non nativitatis diem celebramus cum sit dolorum atque tentationum introitus sed mortis diem celebramus utpote omnium dolorum depositionem Comment in Job apud Origen l. 3. is to me a plain Argument they did not in the least believe any such thing What shal we think then of Indulgences as they relate to Purgatory Had the ancient Church any such Notion of them But meerly as abatements of Canonical Penance and Purgatory I suppose is no part of that Does not Alfonsus own That they were received very late into the Church * Earum usus in Ecclesiâ videtur sero receptus Alfonsus de Castro l. 8. p. 115. And Cajetan say There is no Authority of Scriptures or of any Fathers Greek or Latin that bring them to our Knowledg †Cajet Opusc 15. c. Prayers and Oblations for the Dead I confess are a very antient Practice but I know no Doctrine the Primitive Church had concerning them but of the Communion of Saints which was both in the Church Militant and Triumphant and they are so far from bordering upon the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory that they utterly destroy it for they were offered for those who were owned to be in Happiness and could never be supposed to go to Purgatory to wit for Saints and Martyrs and Apostles and even for the Virgin Mary her self as appears by the antient Liturgies ‖ Lyturg. Aegyptiac Lyturg. Chrysost As to Prayers in an unknown Tongue this cannot I hope be said to be the Practice of the Primitive Church and if the Language of Rome had been as unalterable as she pretends her Faith is her Prayers had been in a known Tongue now but I doubt they are both equally changeable As to the Worship of Saints and Angels and the offering up Prayers to them and to the Blessed Virgin I shall offer but one Observation out of Antiquity which does for ever destroy all manner of Worship of what degree soever to any but the true God and that is the Charge of Idolatry which was laid by all the Orthodox Fathers against the Arians for worshipping and praying to Christ when they believed him not to be the true God but only a Creature tho of the most exalted Nature This does so fully shew the sense of the Church against all Worship be it of what kind it will to any Creature for it was not the highest and most sovereign Worship which the Arrians were supposed or charged to give to Christ that it is the plainest thing in the World that there could be no manner of Worship then to Saints or Angels or to the Blessed Virgin as there is now in the Roman Church But he that will see the clearest Account of Antiquity in this matter let him consult a most excellent Discourse concerning the Worship of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints with an Account of the Beginnings and Rise of it among Christians against Monsieur de Meaux As to the Worship of Images it is too well known at what time and with what opposition that was brought into the Western Church and how great a Part of it did then declare against them so that it was impossible that should have been the Doctrine of the Primitive Church which was with so great a strugle and violence brought into the Roman at the latter end of the 7th Century As to the first Ages it is plain from the Instance of Epiphanius and the Council of Eliberis that they would not suffer Images and Pictures in their Churches and at first hardly thought the very making of them to be lawful as appears from Clemens Alexandrinus But I must not insist on Particulars I offer only some few undeniable Breviates of Antiquity by which it cannot but evidently appear to any ingenuous Man that these Doctrines of the Roman Church which distinguish it from the Reformed were not the Doctrines of the Primitive Church but are plainly and notoriously contrary to the best Antiquity tho they are very apt to brag of that upon all occasions yet how little they esteem it and how conscious they are to themselves that it is not for their purpose and that it is truly against them I shall by some general Remarks unquestionably demonstrate and make them if they have any shame confess it themselves And First What mean their Expurgatory Indices whereby they have corrected so many Fathers and blotted out and expunged so many Sentences out of the Writings of the most antient Doctors of the Church and by new Additions made them speak contrary to themselves in so many places of their Works if they were not sensible that those ancient Authors who bring down to us the Doctrine of the Primitive Church were in many things Witnesses against them and bore evident Testimony against their new Opinions This is so plain a Confession that Antiquity is against them and renders them so much self-condemned that they intended to have kept these Indices very private and it was only by chance that we came to the first knowledg of them Our Learned James has acquainted the World with the Mystery of them as he calls it but it is so plain a Mystery of Iniquity that it needs nothing to discover the Fraud and Villany of it To raze ancient Records is a Crime of the highest nature and they who are guilty of it as the Church of Rome is in the greatest degree by thus purging and correcting the Fathers by an Inquisition the most cruel of any other and that appointed by the Council of Trent need no other proof to convict them that that Cause which stands in need of such Arts is not to be defended without them and this is such a Note of a Church that it brands and stigmatizes it with another Mark than that of Antiquity 2. Besides the correcting or rather corrupting so many Fathers which were genuine Monuments of Antiquity the counterfeiting so many false ones and obtruding so many spurious Authors upon the World is a
plain Evidence of the want of true Antiquity This is like suborning of Witnesses which is enough to make all the World suspect that what they are brought for and what they depose is not true it is no other than forging of old Writings and Instruments to help out the known Weakness of a crackt Title Thus the Decretal Epistles were counterfeited to prop up the Pope's Spiritual Power and Constatine's Donation to establish his Temporal The Cheat of the first was so evident from the Style being so sordid and so unlike those Ages and yet being so like it self in all parts as shew'd it to have throughout but one Author that tho they were formerly made use of and did great Service yet they are now laid by as too gross to be owned by most of the Learned Men of that Church and the other tho it be still defended by some of them yet has such marks of Forgery as makes most of them confess it but great numbers are there of forged and spurious Authors whole Testimonies are still produced by these Writers for those Doctrines and Opinions which are destitute of true Antiquity a Collection of which is given us by our James in his Bastardy of the false Fathers and all those Criticks who have wrote Censures upon the Fathers Works cannot but own it I cannot charge this upon any publick Act of the Church as that of purging and correcting the Fathers but most of their Writers who bring such large and false Musters of the Fathers are guilty of it and particularly some of their late Books amongst us * Consensus Veterum Nubes Testium We have a very great and early Instance of this notorious way of Forgery in the very Head and Governours of that Church and that was in falsifying the Nicene Canons and thrusting in a Canon of a particular Synod among those of a General Council thereby to claim a Power of Appeals to themselves which was such an Imposture as shows what some Men will do to gain Power and Authority over other Churches and what an unfaithful Preserver a Church may be that pretends to be infallible not only of Oral Tradition but even of Writings too for they had Copies without question of the Council of Nice and if the other great Churches of Constantinople Antioch and Alexandria had not had authentick and agreeing Copies to the contrary the Churches of Africa had been run down by one of the most palpable Forgeries in the World and the Church of Rome would no doubt have made a great deal more use of it afterwards than upon that particular occasion But 3. Tho Antiquity is to be sometimes supprest and stifled that it may say nothing against them and sometimes suborned and counterfeited that it may bear false Witness for them and tho they generally make a fair show and a great noise with the pretence of it yet they cannot but often betray the little Esteem and Regard which they have of it thus to give an Instance or two In the famous Question of the Virgin 's immaculate Conception tho the Fathers are acknowledged to be generally against it and their own Bishop Canus †De Sanctorum Auctoritate l. 7. loc Theolog. c. 1. Lovan reckons up St. Ambrose St. Austin St. Chrysostom and a great many more who expresly assert her being conceived in Original Sin and says that this is the unanimous Opinion of all the Fathers who happen to make mention of it (a) Sancti namque omnes qui in ejus rei mentionem incidere uno ore asseuerarunt beatam Virginem in Peccato originali conceptam hoc vid. Ambig hoc August hoc Chrysost c. Ib. yet he declares this to be a very weak and infirm Argument which is drawn from the Authority of all the Fathers and that notwithstanding that the contrary Opinion is piously and probably maintained and defended in the Church (b) Infirmum tamen exomnium authoritate argumentum ducitur quin potius contraria sententia probabilitèr piè in Ecclesiâ defenditur Ib. and Bellarmine says (c) Inter Catholicos non sunt numerandi Bellarm. de Amis grat l. 4. c. 15. they are not to be reckoned among Catholicks who are of another Opinion tho it be contrary it seems to all Antiquity Thus at other times Bellarmine shifts off the Authority of St. Cyprian when he plainly opposes that of the Pope and says that he mortally erred and offended in so doing (d) Videtur mortalitèr peccasse Bellarm l. 4. de Romano Pontifico c. 7. and concerning Justin Martyr Irenaeus and others their Opinion he says cannot be defended from great Error (e) Eorum sententiam non video quo pacto ab errore possumus defendere Bellarm. de beat §. l. 1. c. 6. when it is against his own thus also of St. Hierom he was of that Opinion but it is false and it shall be refuted (f) Videtur Hieronymus inâ—eâ sententiâ fuiâ—se sed falsa est c suo loco râ—fâ—llenda Bellarm. de Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 8. And to mention no more tho they stick not upon all occasions to slight and contemn Antiquity when it will not make for them Baronius one of their greatest Searchers into Antiquity but as great a Corrupter of it who had taken that Oath I suppose prescribed by Pope Pius 4th not to receive or expound Scripture but according to the uniform Consent of the Fathers yet doth unwarily but ingenuously confess that the holy Fathers whom for their great Learning we justly call the Doctors of the Church yet the Catholick that is Roman Church doth not always follow nor in all things the Interpretation of Scripture * Nam sanctissimos Patres quos Doctores Ecclesiae ob illorum sublimem eruditionem merito nominamus in Interpretatione Scripturarum non semper ac in omnibus Catholica Ecclesia sequitur Baron Annal. Eccles an 34. n. 213. p. 238. Colon. They can go off it seems from their Oath and from the Fathers too when they think fit and they are not always bound to keep so close to Antiquity as they give out at other times and pretend they do But in the last place 4. The Determinations and Decrees of the present Church are the only things they stick to and 't is the Authority and Infallibility of that which they relie more upon and a thousand times more regard than all Antiquity or the whole Sense of the Primitive Church They pretend indeed not to determine any thing contrary either to Scripture or to the Primitive Church but they make themselves the only Judges of both they tells us they make no new Doctrines nor no Innovations in Faith but they keep to themselves the Power of declaring what Doctrines are new and what are not and then I can see little difference between their making and their declaring new Articles of Faith since 't is their declaring makes them to be believed
and received as such when they were not to be so before and how then does that differ from making them Articles of Faith Bellarmine speaks plainly out tho against his own Note when he says The Church of latter time hath Power not only to explain and declare but constitute and command those things which belong to Faith †Tract de potest Sum. Pontif. If the present Church has a Power to make more Doctrines and Articles be believed as necessary to Salvation than were believed by the Primitive Church then it may make Additions to the Christian Faith and make that necessary to be believed at one time which was not at another if it has not this Power let them declare it and not count others Hereticks who receive all the ancient Creeds and hold the Faith of all the ancient Councils and believe all those Doctrines that the whole Primitive Church in all Places and at all times ever held Here with Lyrinensis we fix and set our Feet and here we resolve to stand and keep our Ground and not be moved with every Wind of Doctrine that shall blow out of a new Quarter and that a small part of the present Church shall declare to be an Article of Faith when It was never so declared by the Primitive To say that they have made no new Articles of Faith in their Church but only the same Articles made Explicit which were Implicit before in the Primitive Church is as if they should say there are no new Men in the World since Adam or Noah but only the same Men that were before Implicit in their Loyns are now explicitly born into the World. Thus the Church tho it be never so fruitful in producing Doctrines and Articles of Faith that never were before in the Church yet makes nothing new and however spurious its Doctrines may be and however degenerating from the Faith of our Forefathers yet it must be said to be of the same Kind and Species Faith it seems in the Primitive Church was but an Embrio or like a small Seed or Kernel implicitly containing all the Parts entire but in little but when it is grown up and enlarged by the explicit Declaration of the Church then it may swell into a mighty bigness and increase even into the largest Tridentine Bulk and be it never so unlike the former yet it must be called the same still But if this implicit Faith was sufficient for the Primitive Church why may it not be so for the present and what need have we of a more explicit Faith to save us now than they had to save them then All the essential Articles of Christian Faith are to be explicitly believed at all times and 't is strange that we must be now obliged to a more explicit Faith and a more implicit Obedience than the Primitive Church was ever acquainted with But after all I hope those Doctrines that are contrary to the Doctrines of the Primitive Church were not then implicitly believed by it and if they were not I am sure most of the Doctrines of the Roman Church as different from the Reformed were not her implicit Doctrines but unless Error may be folded up with Truth and one part of a Contradiction may be involved in the other the late Corruptions and Decrees of the Roman Church in her Trent Articles were no way contained in the quite different Doctrines of the Primitive Church And thus because I have gone too far with this Discourse I must abruptly take leave of Bellarmin and his Church tho I resolve by God's Grace to keep always to this his true Note of the Church and therefore to that Church in which I am which is the most agreeable to the Primitive of any in the World both as to Doctrine and every thing else THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Seventh Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The Vnion of the Members among themselves and with the Head. Septima Nota est Vnio membrorum 〈…〉 inter se cum Capite Bellar. L. iv c. 10. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR May 26. 1687. Guil. Needham THE Church as the Cardinal observes is called in the Scriptures one Body one Spouse one Sheepfold But he that infers from hence that Unity is a proper Mark of the True Church ought to be very well assured that the Head and Members are united no-where but in the Body of Christ and that the Harlot cannot be One as well as the Spouse c. But the World has hitherto been persuaded that bare Unity is a Character to be found upon Societies of different Natures and contrary Designs that of it self it infers neither Good nor Evil and may belong to a Body of Rebels no less than to an Army of Loyal Subjects Unity is then indeed a good Mark when 't is a Duty as 't is a Duty when the Terms of Union are so For which Reason the Union of the Church is of all others the most excellent because all Men ought to follow that Truth and Goodness which are necessary to Salvation and these are best preserved and maintained by Union among those who follow them For which Reasons also 't is celebrated in the Gospel with variety of Expressions But to argue from hence that the Union of Members among Themselves and with their Head is a proper Note of the true Church is just as if I should conclude upon seeing a thousand Men marching in good Order and with equal Pace after their Leader that therefore of necessity they must be going to York Notwithstanding therefore this Argument from Vnity being attributed to the Church the Cardinal did not think fit to leave his Mark so very loose and common but slips into the mention of those things wherein the Unity of the Church consists as he pretends He tells us that the Head with which the Members are united is the Pope And as for their Union among themselves he afterwards proves that all Catholicks must needs agree in all Points of Faith since they all submit their own Sense to the Sense of one and the same chief Pastor guiding the Church from the Chair of Peter with the advice of other Pastors So that now we know what he means by the Union of the Members to their Head and among themselves that is to say the Union of the Members of the Roman Church to the Pope as to their Head and their Union among themselves in believing all that he teaches from the Chair of St. Peter c. Which Note does for its part make good what was observed at first concerning the general Design of these Notes which is not so much to describe to us the proper Characters of a true Christian Church as to prove that the Church of Rome is the only True Church Whatever the Cardinal insinuated at first he seemed to be very sensible that the Union of the Members
with the Head and among themselves was too large a Note to fit no other Society but a true Christian Church Now if in restraining his Note he had understood Christ by the Head and by the Union of the Members to one another an Agreement in the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints this indeed would have served for the finding out of a True Church but then this was too large for the Cardinal's Purpose which was to find no other Church to be True but the Roman And therefore by the Head it was necessary to understand the Pope and by the Union of the Members an Agreement in all that Doctrine which is taught by the Roman Church For it was to be hoped that this would mark all the Roman Communion in but it would most undoubtedly mark all other Christians out of the only true Church For this is the admirable reasoning to which it leads That is the true Church which acknowledges the Pope for its Head and for its Faith professes the Doctrine whatever it be that is taught in the Church of Rome And from hence it must needs follow that the Church of Rome is the only True Church Quod erat demonstrandum And if the Cardinal had left the Matter thus in shorf he had in my mind done better for his Church and his reasoning had been less exceptionable than he has made it in the pursuance of his Enlargements When a Man has to do with an untractable piece of Matter it often happens that the more he strives to fashion it to his own Purpose the farther he is from it And so this great Man by labouring over-much to make this his Mark of Unity utterly unserviceable to any other Church has given it that Figure at last which makes it unfit for his own as we shall see in convenient place For I shall endeavour to make out these three things I. That the Unity here offer'd is no true Note of the Church II. That if it were yet the Roman Church has it not III. That that Unity which is indeed a Note of the Church we have and that in a much greater degree than they I. That the Vnity here offered is no true Note of the Church which I shall shew concerning both his Instances of it And First Concerning Vnion with the Pope as Head of the Church That this should be a Note of the Church is a pretence that hath neither Scripture Reason nor Antiquity for it but all against it 1. For Scripture the Cardinal offers not any proof from thence of his Presumption which yet had been very requisite to a point of so vast a Consequence if the Scripture had afforded any Testimony to his purpose That the Pope should be the Head of the Church and the Center of its Unity that Union to him should be an essential Character of the Church and the very Being of it depend upon him But that the Scripture should not give us the least intimation of it is a thing so perfectly unaccountable that the very silence of the Scripture in a matter of this high nature is to us a sufficient Argument that the Apostles knew nothing of any such Constitution Especially since they did not forget to make plain and frequent mention of another Head of the Church to which all the Members are to be united viz. our Lord Jesus Christ They tell us Eph. i. 20 22 23. That when God raised him from the dead he gave him to be HEAD over all things to the Church which is HIS BODY That as there are many Members in one Body so we being many Rom. xii 4 5. are ONE BODY IN CHRIST That as the Body is one and hath many Members so also is CHRIST 1 Cor. xii 12 27. i.e. Christ and the Church the whole being denominated from the Head for we are the BODY OF CHRIST We are told That he is the Head Eph. iv 16. even Christ Vers 23. from whom the whole Body is fitly joyned together c. That he is the Head of the Church and the Saviour of the Body That he is the Head of the Body the Church Col. i. 18. And much more to this purpose might be added Now when the Church is so frequently declared to be one Body and to this one Body one Head is so frequently assigned and no more What can any Man who is not possest with prejudice make of this but that there is no other Head of the Church besides him who is so often mentioned as such and that by the same Reason that any Man goes about to add another Head to the Church he might if he pleased find out another Church for the Head Nor does it help at all that they pretend the Pope to be but the Vicarious and Ministerial Head of the Church since if without Union to him we are out of the Church and have no part in Christ it was necessary that this pretended Vicarious Head should have been as plainly and frequently expressed as we know the True and Real Head to have been Nay it was something more necessary since a very slender intimation might have been sufficient to assure us that he who is the Image of the Invisible God Col. i. 15 18. by whom all things were created and by whom all things consist is also the Head of the Body the Church Ver. 14. That he in whom we have redemption through his Blood who is the Saviour of the Body and for our sakes humbled himself to the Death of the Cross should be also the Head of the Body and be exalted to be Head over all things unto his Church He I say in whom infinite Power and Goodness met But that there should be another Head given to the whole Church to be united to which was no less necessary than Union to Christ himself And that this Catholick Head should be no other than a sinful Man and he very often none of the best this was so far removed from self-Evidence or even Probability that it certainly needed very express mention if not frequent inculcation Now that he should be frequently mentioned as Head of the Church who in comparison needed not to be mentioned at all And that no mention at all should be made of another Head of the Church that needs it very much is for them to give an account of who make Union to this later Head no less necessary to a Part in the Body of Christ than Union to the former Which account will be much harder to be given inasmuch as there is no mention at all of this pretended Head where there was the most fair and inviting occasion for it that can be well imagined Thus St. Paul shewing what Gifts Christ bestowed upon his Church after his Ascension saith He gave some Apostles and some Prophets Eph. iv 11 12 c. and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the edifying of the Body of
Ignorance our Adversaries know by some Experience And we may say without need of blushing for the matter that they have felt some Learning from this Church which their Union to the Pope hath of late helped very few of them to And if we may conclude any thing from the Examples of those within their own Communion we shall find that the more closely any of them are united to this supposed Head their Piety and Learning does not flourish one jot the more for it Let the Learning of the Gallican Church be compared with that of Spain or Italy Let the Piety of the Regulars especially of the Jesuits be weighed with that of the Secular Clergy and I believe it will appear that this Union is no such excellent advantage either towards Piety or Learning that they should appeal to Experience to shew the Necessity thereof either to the one or the other And thus much for their Union to the Pope 2. Neither is the Union which they pretend to among themselves as Members any certain Note of the Church The Cardinal was not content to describe their Union by thinking the same concerning all Doctrines of Faith but will have it to exclude also Discord and Dissension and falling into Sects and Parties For since he denies such Union to be found amongst Pagans and Hereticks he must be supposed to affirm it of the Members of his Church if he talks to any purpose Now admitting it were so 1. This is no more than what any Society may have as well as the true Church and any other Church as well as the Roman The Members of every Church are thus far united that they all agree in professing the common Belief of the Society to which they belong But about other Doctrine they either fall into Dissension or not as it happens And for some considerable time they may agree very well and at length fall out In which case according to Bellarmin's Note they would be the true Church while they agreed whatever their Faith should be which is most absurd It is not whether Men are united among themselves in what they believe but whether that wherein they are united be the right Faith that is to be considered Union in a false way is a confederacy in Error and the more that Men are united in it the more wise or prudent they may shew themselves to be but never the more Orthodox And though the Cardinal produces that Saying of our Saviour Every Kingdom divided against it self Matth. xii is brought to desolation to shew that Discord is a Sign of the Kingdom of the Devil yet he has manifestly perverted the Place inasmuch as our Saviour's Discourse there proceeds upon the contrary supposition viz. that Satan is not divided against himself 2. As there may be this Union out of the true Church so it may not be within it which makes it plain that this is no certain Note of the Church It is undeniable that there were Divisions in the first Apostolical Churches and consequently that to be Members of the Catholick Church it is sufficient that in those things wherein the Unity of the Faith consists all speak the same thing And if the Cardinal meant that the breaking of a Church into Parties and the Rise of Heresies and Schisms out of it is a certain Note of a false Church he might as well have said that there never was a true Church in the World no not in the Apostles times And if for this Reason he would unchurch the Protestants he did in effect put as good an Argument as this against the Reformation into the Mouth of a Turk or a Jew against Christianity that there is no Truth in it at all and because Christians are so divided one against another therefore none of them are in the right For a more particular Consideration of this Argument I refer the Reader to the Apologetical Vindication of the Church of England lately published Thus much for the first part of this Discourse which was to shew that the Unity here offered is not a Note of the Church I proceed to shew II. That if it were yet the Roman Church has it not Which is probably true of the First and most certainly true of the second Branch of the Cardinal's Unity 1. It is probable that the Roman Church wants the First and that there is now no true Pope nor has been for many Ages for that Church to be united to For by their own Confession a Pope Simoniacally chosen a Pope intruded by Violence a Heretick and therefore sure an Atheist or an Infidel is no true Pope And many such there have been of one sort or other whose Acts therefore in creating Cardinals c. being invalid it is exceeding probable that the whole Succession has upon this account failed long ago Besides there have been about 25 Schisms in the Church of Rome the last of which continued no less than 50 Years wherein two and sometimes three Popes pretended to St. Peter's Chair created Cardinals had their several Parties and Abettors c. During which Schisms it would be a madness to say that the Roman Church was united to the Pope as Head when they were all together by the Ears which of the Anti-Popes was the true one Now while there was no certain Pope there could be no certainty of the validity of any Acts necessary to continue a Succession of true Popes But this Case having happen'd so often and sometimes continued for many years the uncertainty must have at last grown into an utter improbability that they have a Pope and therefore according to the Cardinal that they are a Church unless it be all one whether the Church be united with a Nominal Pope or a Real Pope with a True Head or a False Head or any Head whatsoever But 2. It is undoubtedly true That the Roman Church has not the second Branch of Unity viz. that Union of the Members to one another which the Cardinal pretends Whether by it he means an Union in all points of Doctrine of great Consequence amongst those who remain in the Communion of his pretended Catholick Church or such an Union of their Members as shall prevent the breaking away of some from the Communion of the rest She has not the former Unity For if Philosophers Hereticks c. have had their Sects and Parties and been at great Dissensions among themselves so have the Members of the Roman Church too He pretends that all the Sacred Writers of their Church do wonderfully agree Now to let pass his Presumption in supposing the ancient Doctors of the Church to be one part of these their Writers we will for the present admit it and only ask If they agreed so wonderfully with the Fathers what need there was of an Index Expurgatorius upon the Fathers to make them and the Fathers of Trent agree something better He pretends that the Decrees of their Lawful Councils agree in *
In omnibus Dogmatibus inter se conveniunt all Doctrines Just so the Councils of Constance and Basil decreeing That all Power even the Papal was in things appertaining to Religion to be subject to the Council agreed with the Abolition of the Pragmatick Sanction by the Lateran Council under Leo X by which the Council is made to truckle to the Pope As to which and other Instances of the like sort no help is to be had from that Qualification of Lawful Councils since what the Jesuits will not own to be a Lawful Council is by other Parties in that Church owned to be so And that Church must needs be at wonderful Unity within it self that cannot so much as agree what Councils are Lawful and what are not And yet if they were so agreed their Church-Unity is not to be bragged of when there are enough amongst them to make an unlawful Council and to determin otherwise in a point of so vast Consequence as that above-mentioned than they ought to do For if in the same Communion one Council determines one way and another the contrary way that Communion cannot be said to agree ever the more for one being a lawful and the other an unlawful Council Whereas he pretends that the Decrees of Popes are also at Unity with one another one would expect that in the next place Fire and Water should be brought in for an Example of Agreement too For they may be made to agree as soon as the Decrees of many Popes Leo and Gelasius condemned receiving in one kind De Consecr Dist 2. cap. 12. Have there been no Popes since that condemned the contrary Nicholas IV determined that Christ was a Beggar Extravag Joh. Tit. 14. cap. 4. and had Right to nothing but John XXII comes not long after him and makes it Heretical so to say It has been so frequent a practice for Popes to overthrow the Decrees of their Predecessors that it were endless to recount the particulars As for the Writers which they may justly claim to themselves how Bellarmin should come to fancy such a wonderful Agreement is very strange who in his own Controversies has observed so many notable Differences amongst them De Concil lib. 2. cap. 14. alibi Was it not Bellarmin that observed several Catholick Writers to have agreed with the Hereticks in asserting the Council to be above the Pope And that as those did not agree with themselves so neither did the other side of Canonists and School-men that asserted the contrary And this is no trifling Question neither Such Disagreement is noted by the same Cardinal upon other material Points viz. Concerning the Pope's Temporal Power Whether Vows of single Life are dispensable What Worship may be given to Images Whether Images of God may be made or not Whether Extream Unction and other of their Sacraments were instituted by Christ Whether Intention be necessary to a Sacrament Whether an express purpose of forsaking Sin be necessary to Contrition Whether good Works be truly meritorious And concerning many more Questions in most of which some or other of themselves have held as Protestants do against the rest of their Church Not to insist upon the Disputes between the Thomists the Scotists and the Occamists which were not all about Trifles the Question between the Dominicans and Franciscans about the Conception of the Virgin was by themselves esteemed of such Consequence that there have been Revelations about it against Revelations and if we will believe them Miracles against Miracles To which we may add the flaming Contentions between the Jansenists and the Molinists See Veteres Vindicat. c. 10. both which grew to such a height that it has been all along almost as dangerous to the Interest of the Roman Church to let their Controversies go on as to go about to decide them I confess the Divinity of the New Methodists the French Expositor and the English Representer has as yet occasioned but little disturbance in that Communion for which I know a good Reason But this I will say that if their New-Popery can in all Points be received with the Old See Defence of Exp. of the Doctrine of the Ch. of England p. 90. I do not see but from this time forward their Unity may be inviolable now that they have got the Knack of making Contradictions agree with one another But to all such Instances as these Bellarmine hath supplied them with a ready Answer That they differ not in those things that belong to Faith. Upon which cautious Answer one would be apt to enquire how nearly a Question in Religion must be allied to the Faith before it may be said to belong to it The Cardinal himself tells us now and then of something held by Catholicks that is fere haereticum as he calls it almost heretical in which case the Question should be also almost of Faith and may be said to belong to it But if he means simply that they all agree in Matters of Faith as he says afterward and that all Catholicks say the same thing about Doctrines of Faith as we were told before we are willing to hear him But then we expect that the Church of England the Lutherans and the Calvinists should be heard too when to the Papists charging them with some Differences they make the same Answer that they have all the same Faith especially since when they come to prove the Truth of what they say they will shew that the Matters wherein they differ do not break the Unity of the Catholick Faith which is something a better Argument than the Cardinal produces for the Unity of his Party in matters of Faith viz. that they all profess to believe that which shall be judged necessary to be believed in the Roman Catholick Church For to say no more to this at present notwithstanding this Profession we are very sure that some of them take those things to be matters of Faith which others do not if we may believe them of which the Infallibility of the Pope and the Deposing Doctrine are notorious and undeniable Instances But now if by the Vnion of the Members should be meant such a Union as will hinder the separation of some from the rest then this Note must not by any means be pretended to in the Church of Rome from which so many Churches that once were in Communion with her have broken away Indeed he does not expresly say that he means this by the Union of the Members among themselves but some such thing he must mean or else by virtue of this Note he does impertinently run down the Lutherans as being Hereticks because they have begotten so many Sects which as he pretends charge each other with Heresy And then it may as truly be said that the Church of Rome in whose Communion we were before the Reformation wants the Mark of Unity because so many have broken away from her as that any other Churches want it because some
Direction of not being tossed to and fro c. 3. Are condemned by Tertullian who bids us adhere to what is first And 4. By Vincentius Lyrinensis And 5. Have given ill Example by which the Reformers can justify themselves And lastly Have plainly condemned several Popes and the whole Lateran Council under Innocent III as not sufficiently knowing what the Church was since their Notion of it could not content those which came after them A great Injury and of dangerous Consequence Lastly Upon a Comparison of one with the other P. 432 c. and of both with the Antient Doctrine and Discipline of the Church he looks upon Bellarmin's Definition as the better of the Two because it may be so mollified by the Help of the Word Praecipuè chiefly which is in it as to admit of a tolerable Reconciliation with the Definition of the Antients which as he shews can no way agree with that of Canisius And upon the whole he concludes P. 450. That however Bellarmin's might be preferrable if either of them were necessary yet it will be hard for Catholicks to make their Complaints of Innovating which they heap upon Hereticks to appear just so long as they themselves shall retain such a Novel Definition and that if Gregory VIIths Rule were observed viz. That nothing should be drawn into Example or Authority which is contrary to the Fathers then even this his Definition tho it had been received yet ought to be rejected To this purpose that Accurate Writer as he is deservedly called by ‖ Letter to Bp. of Linc. p. 319. F. Walsh has argued to the utter confusion of the Cardinal's Argument from Union with the Pope as Head or of the Members among themselves For how can that be a Note of the True Church now which never was thought to belong to the Nature of it for 1500 Years together and which their own most Learned Lovers of Antiquity and Pious Opposers of Novelty do not think essential to it at this Day And where is the so much boasted Consent of the Members amongst themselves in all Matters of Faith I believe the holy Catholick Church is an Article of Faith. I would know of those Gentlemen who are at such perfect agreement amongst themselves what this Church is Bellarmine answers one thing Canisius another so contrary that if one speaks true the other must needs have told me that which is false And while the Definition of the former is followed by some and that of the later which is the worse is more generally received Launoy and many more of the most Learned sort stick to the Antients who are as different from both as they are from one another And yet after all we must be told that they are perfectly agreed in all matters of Faith and that this invisible unintelligible Union shews plainly that the Roman is the true Church One would hardly think that they are in earnest unless by Union they mean an equal Resolution to carry on the Dispute as long as they can contend and no longer Which kind of Union is to be met with almost every Term in Westminster-Hall where one may see two Parties prosecuting one another with all imaginable vigour who yet resolve to be quiet when the Bench has made them so Not that the Party who is cast in the Suit must needs change his Opinion of his own Cause because the last Verdict was against him but that if a new Trial will not be granted he is bound to acquiesce in the Judgment of the Court because it has a Sheriff with the Posse Comitatus to put it into Execution Thus they that make the Sentence of the Pope and they that make the Sentence of a Council the Sentence of the Church are united in a Resolution to stand to the Arbitrement of the Church there being a certain sensible Obligation upon them to profess that they will acquiesce in its Determination But in the mean time they may undoubtedly quarrel amongst themselves about Questions of such mighty Importance as that we mentioned even now and this without breach of Union amongst themselves till the Sentence of the Pope or the Sentence of a Plenary Council or the Sentence of both comes to part them Which yet will be long enough first if each side of the Question be abetted with numerous and able Parties that are at present both of 'em resolved to submit absolutely to the Church lest one of them upon an unseasonable Sentence should be provoked to change its Resolution And thus as we observed before the Question about the Immaculate Conception has been left undecided so long lest by determining that a more dangerous Question should be raised by the disobliged Party But if it should so happen that the Church cannot well avoid declaring her self in such a Case this new-fashion'd Union goes forward still tho she speaks so ambiguously that each Party fancies the Sentence to be on its own side which was done often at Trent with great Application and Art Particularly in the Decrees concerning Grace and Assurance of being Justified c. Which being finished Soto and Vega differed not only as much but something more than they did at first for now they had a new Question to debate viz. on which side the Council had decreed and so they fell to writing great Books upon it against one another But for all this they were admirably agreed because they agreed in submission to the Council I proceed to shew III. That that Vnity which is indeed a Note of the Church we have and that in a much greater degree than they Which Point will I hope yield some Discourse that will be more useful than barely to discover Mistakes and expose Sophistry For here I shall represent as well as I can the true Grounds and Notions of Church-Unity and then see who has most reason to pretend to it they or we 1. There is the Vnity of submitting to one Head our Lord Jesus Christ which is the Foundation of all other Christian Unity and therefore mentioned by St. Paul amongst the principal Reasons why the Church is one Body Eph. iv 5. One Lord. 2. There is the Vnity of professing the Common Faith that was once delivered to the Saints which is grounded upon the Authority of the Scriptures and summarily expounded in the Antient Creeds And therefore to One Lord the Apostle in the forementioned place adds one Faith. 3. There is an Unity of Sacraments in the Church One Baptism by which we are all admitted into the same state of Duties and of Priviledges undertaking the Conditions of the New Covenant and gaining a Right to the Promises thereof Thus saith St. Paul 1 Cor. xii 13. By one Spirit we are all Baptized into one Body And the like Unity is inferred from the other Sacraments 1 Cor. x. 17. We being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all partakers of that one Bread. And again
meerly Unity that is a Mark of the true Church but Unity in the true Faith nor is Unity the Mark of a pure Church unless it be upon Terms of Obedience to God of Charity to one another of keeping the Faith unmixed with Errors and Innovations and the Worship of God free from material Defects and forbidden Practices From hence also the Folly of that conceit may be easily discerned that in this divided State of Christendom there must be one Church which is the only Church of Christ exclusively to all the rest that are not in Communion with her Which is as much as to say that because there is not that Unity amongst Christians which there ought to be therefore there is none at all and because they are not united in one Communion therefore they are not united in one Lord one Faith one Baptism That fond Principle now mentioned is advanced by the Romanist for the sake of this Inference that because we grant the Church to be but one and withall acknowledg them to be a true Church therefore we being divided from them can be no true Church our selves That is to say because we acknowledg that they have that one Faith in which all that are united belong to the Church therefore we are out of the Church our selves who have the Unity of that Faith too and moreover the Unity of observing all the Institutions of Christ and the Unity of Catholick Terms of Communion c. which they have not If some part of the Church gives just cause of Offence or if another takes Offence where none is given this is indeed contrary to the Duty of the Members of the Church but not utterly inconsistent with their being Members of it And if St. Paul was in the right when he said If the Foot shall say because I am not the Head I am not of the Body is it therefore not of the Body It will be also true that tho the Foot should say to the Hand thou art not of the Body because thou art not the Foot the Hand would be of the Body for all that As for the Unity of Communion which they boast so much of in the Church of Rome I say 't is an Unity of Communion among themselves but 't is not the Catholick Unity of Communion because the Terms of it are many of them unjust and unlawful whereas we of the Church of England having as much Unity of Communion among our selves as they have this also to say as we have abundantly shewn that the Terms of our Communion are every one of them just and lawful and therefore ours is a Catholick Unity If there are some Protestants that will not communicate with us it is no more our Fault than that the Papists refuse to do so And tho in point of Interest this tends to weaken yet in Controversy it cannot prejudice the common cause of Reformation That part of the West that has left the Church of Rome may labour under Discords that affect their very Communion while she her self does not and yet in the Cause against her they may be all in the Right Where Truth is maintained against a corrupt Church there may yet be Disobedience to Authority overvaluing Questions of no great moment a greater stress laid upon Opinions and Practices than the Cause will bear and this shall be sufficient to break Christian Communion And at the same time gross Errors may be maintained and with one consent imposed upon the World by the other Church and all the while the Differences how weighty soever that happen by the bye may be so over-ruled by Force and Power and the sensible Interests of this World that they shall not affect their Communion with one another But for the Reasons already laid down it were a fond thing to chuse a Church by the Mark of such Unity In short If we would in all Respects keep within the Unity of the Church this must be done by professing true Doctrine by leading good Lives by a charitable Spirit and Behaviour towards all Christians by frequenting Prayers and Sacraments and by submitting to the Authority of our lawful Guides in all things of Indifference and Expedience And then we may be sure that whatever others do we keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace And though the Church after all is not that one Body in all Respects which it ought to be and which it would be if all Men did their Duty yet that we our selves are such Members of that one Body as we ought to be and as all others ought to be likewise Now all this Unity we may keep in the Communion of the Church of England but we cannot keep it all in the Communion of the Roman Church as the Terms thereof now stand But if this Unity be not enough when once the Romanists can prove that Union to the Pope as Head of the Church and Union to the Roman Church in all that she believes and teaches is also necessary to our Being of the Church or even to our maintaining that Unity which ought to be amongst all Christians we will also acknowledg the Pope's Supremacy and believe as the Roman Church believes but not till then THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Eighth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ Sanctity of Doctrine Octava Nota est Sanctitas Doctrinae Bellar. de Notis Ecclesiae L. iv c. 11. IMPRIMATUR June 4. 1687. Hen. Maurice SEeing the New Covenant is the Charter upon which the Church of Christ is founded and all the Blessings which this Covenant promises are appropriated to that Sacred Society to be in Communion with it is doubtless a matter of vast importance to the Souls of Men and it being so it is not to be imagined but that the blessed Jesus the most concerned and careful Friend of Souls that ever was hath been sufficiently mindful to leave such plain and easy Directions behind him how we may find his Church and satisfy our selves whether we are in Fellowship with it or no as that neither the Learned nor Unlearned may be left in the dark for resolution in such a momentous Enquiry But how much the Church of Rome hath made it her Business to snarl and perplex several Points of Religion which our Saviour left plain and obvious enough to all Capacities is too notorious and in nothing more than in this how to discover and find out the true Church In order to which her most Learned Doctors and particularly Cardinal Bellarmin have given us certain Notes by which as they pretend the true Church may be distinguished by honest and diligent Enquiries from all false Churches whatsoever But how far these Notes are from performing what is promised for 'em hath been sufficiently proved upon a very fair Examination of the Seven first of ' em I proceed therefore to the Eighth viz. Sanctity of
true Catholick Church is only the whole of all those simuular parts or all true Churches together whatsoever the Catholick Church is besides its being the whole all the true Churches must be of which it doth consist and consequently if that be unerring these must be so also for how is it possible that the whole which consists of all the parts should be unerring unless all the parts are unerring if therefore not to err in its Profession be a true Note of the true Church all true Churches must necessarily partake of it and consequently all those must be false Churches which profess any Error than which there is scarce any Proposition in Religion more notoriously false 'T is true whatsoever Church errs in any Fundamental Article of Religion doth thereby cease from being a true Church because those Articles are the very Foundations upon which every true Church stands and therefore when any Church removes them or any of them it must necessarily sink from the very being of a true Church into a false and heretical Communion but there are many Errors which do not at all touch or in the least affect the Fundamentals of Religion and these a true Church may possibly profess and yet maintain her Foundations firm and unshaken and so long as a Church professes all those Truths which are necessary to the being of a true Church it is so far a true Church tho together with that it should profess contrary to some other Truths which are not necessary to the being of a true Church for how can its professing any Error which doth not contradict any Truth which is necessary to the being of a true Church make it cease to be a true Church or how can that be a false Church upon the account of its Profession which professes all those Truths which are necessary to the founding and constituting a true Church If the profession of every Error in Religion be sufficient to destroy the verity of a Church then the profession of every Truth must be necessary to found it because every true Church being founded upon Truth there is no Error can destroy it but what takes away the Truth which founds and therefore unless it be founded upon the Profession of every Truth it cannot be destroyed by the Profession of every Error and consequently none can be true Churches but such as profess every true Proposition in Religion which being admitted the Profession of every true Church must contain almost as many Articles as it self doth contain Communicants And indeed if none can be true Churches but such as profess no Errors no two Churches whatsoever can differ in any Opinion tho never so inconsiderable but one of the two must be a false Church because where-ever there is a difference in Opinion there must be an Error on one side or other as for instance There was a very early difference in Opinion between the Eastern and Western Churches about the time of the Celebration of Easter in which if either of them were in the right to be sure the other must be erroneous and if neither both Did then the erring Church continue a true Church or no notwithstanding its Error if it did then a true Church may err in its Profession and yet be a true Church still if it did not then both were false Churches because tho each believed that the other err'd yet for a great while they mutually owned each other for true Churches in which if every Error destroys the verity of a Church they both of 'em err'd and thereupon both cease to be true Churches And if we enquire into the Church of Rome which now pretends to be the only true Church in the World we shall find that in several instances it professes now quite contrary to what it profest heretofore Vid. Note 3d p. 65. Either therefore the Profession of some Errors is consistent with the being of a true Church or the Roman Church must either have been a false Church heretofore or be a false Church now and seeing the Roman Church now consists of several Churches some of which profess contrary to one another as particularly in that celebrated Question Whether the Pope be Superiour to a General Council or a General Council to the Pope it 's certain that if either of 'em are in the right there must be an erroneous Profession on one side or other And if the Roman Church err in any of its parts how can it be unerring in the whole which is nothing but all the parts together for if she allow any Church to be a true Church or part of the true Church which professes any Error she errs herself supposing an unerring Profession to be a true Note of the true Church and consequently is herself a false Church if she doth not then in receiving Churches which differ in their Profession she receives into her Communion some that are no true Churches which I doubt will go as far towards the unchurching her as the Profession of most Errors whatsoever In short therefore if not to err in its Profession in any matter be a Note of the true Church all true Churches must necessarily partake of it and consequently none can be true Churches which in any point whatsoever profess erroneously which as I have proved is utterly false and which if it were true would perhaps as much damnify the Church of Rome in the Opinion of any sober and honest Enquirer as any one Church now extant in the World. 2. Secondly Every true Note ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of things of which it is a Note and not common to things of another kind otherwise it is impossible that it should truly distinguish the one from the other But this Note of not erring in its Profession is not peculiar to true Churches for seeing there may be a Schism without any Error in Faith or Heresy we must either allow Schismatical Societies of Christians to be true Churches which the Church of Rome to be sure will never admit or that it is by no means peculiar to true Churches not to err in their Faith. That which may be common to Schismatical Communions with the true Church cannot be peculiar to the true Church supposing Schismatical Communions not to be the true Church or the true parts of the true Church but the Cardinal himself owns that there have been Schisms which did not err in their Faith and yet were without the true Church for so in his forecited Cap. 2. There may be Doctrine pure saith he from all Error in a false Church for so pure Schismaticks as heretofore the Luciferians and Donatists had in the beginning very sound Doctrine among 'em and yet were without the true Church Where by the way it 's evident the good Man had quite forgot that Sanctity of Doctrine was hereafter to be one of his Notes of the true Church for if as he tells us in this very Chapter the Notes of
the true Church are such as are proper and peculiar to it it 's plain that his Memory fail'd him either when he made Sanctity of Doctrine to be one of these Notes or when he allowed this Note to be common to false Churches with the true Seeing therefore there have been Communities of Christians in the World which have not err'd in their Faith and yet were neither the true Church nor any true parts of it and seeing what hath been may be again how is it possible for any honest Enquirer after the true Church to find any one Church in the World to which this Note of not erring is proper and peculiar The Catholicks did not err in their Faith the Donatists and Luciferians did not err in theirs how then is it possible to discover by this Note of not erring in Faith which of the three were the true Church seeing that that can be no true Note of the true Church which is not peculiar to it and that not erring in Faith was common to 'em both 3. Thirdly Every true Note ought to be more known than the thing which it notifies for how can we know a thing by that which is as unknown to us as the thing it self If therefore not to err in any point whatsoever be a true Note of the true Church the truth of every Article comprized in the Profession of that which is the true Church must be more known than that it is the true Church which considering how very large and extensive the publick Professions of Churches now are cannot be supposed without making the true Church to be one of the darkest and obscurest things in the World. For besides that according to the Principle of the Cardinal and his Church it is the true Church only can fully instruct a Man in the truth of all those Points of which the unerring Profession of the true Church consists and therefore a Man must have found the true Church and been instructed by it before he can be certain that those Points are all true of which more hereafter Besides which I say it is to be considered that there are sundry Doctrines now professed by most Churches of which ordinary Capacities can make no certain Judgment I confess if the publick Professions of the Churches now in being were confined to the Fundamental Articles of Religion it were an easy matter for an ordinary Enquirer to satisfy himself concerning the truth of 'em because whatsoever is fundamental is so plainly revealed that probity of Mind together with sound Intellectuals are the only Accomplishments that are requisite to Mens attainment of the knowledg of it but seeing the generality of the publick Professions of Churches do together with such Doctrines as are fundamental comprehend such as are not yea and sometimes such as are very remote from Fundamentals and seeing many of these are not so plainly revealed but that pro and con they are involved with such difficulties as have perplexed even the most learned and judicious Enquirers to satisfy one's self fully that such Professions as these are in all points true without the least intermixture of Error requires great Sagacity as well as Probity of Mind For there is scarce any one Church now extant in the World but what professes some Doctrines which in some other Churches are hotly controverted and opposed and seeing there are sundry Churches in the World which in sundry Points profess contrary to one another and there are scarce any two Churches which in all Points are agreed it is certain that a great part of 'em must in one Point or other be erroneous and seeing the Church of Rome doth in several Articles differ from all other Churches in the World either she by this Note must be a false Church or there is no true Church in the World but her self Now in the midst of such a vast multiplicity of Professions how is it possible for an ordinary Enquirer to conclude with any certainty which of 'em is true and which false especially considering that as to some of the Points in which they differ there are such fair probabilities pro and con as are sufficient to suspend any modest Judgment from determining it self one way or other And that others of 'em depend upon such Scholastical Niceties and are defended and opposed by such subtile and metaphysical Reasonings such critical Senses of Texts and ambiguous Accounts of Ecclesiastical Antiquity as that scarce one Man in a thousand is capable of making any certain judgment concerning them If therefore before I can conclude that this or that is a true Church it must be more known and evident to me that it doth not err in any Point whatsoever than that it is a true Church doubtless to determine which is the true Church is one of the most obscure and difficult Points in the World and I must be a very learned and judicious Divine before I can modestly pretend to have found it To what a miserable uncertainty then are Mankind abandoned when 't is as much as their Souls are worth to be in the true Church and yet are left to seek it by such an intricate Note as this whereby scarce one Man in a thousand is capable of finding it 4. And Lastly Every true Note ought to be inseparable to the Thing which it notifies for there is nothing can notify or make known a Thing without which the Thing may be what it is and if that which is the Note of it may be separated from it it may be the very same Thing which it is tho it hath not that Note If therefore this Note of an unerring Profession be not inseparable from the true Church it may be the true Church tho it be not unerring in its Profession Wherefore before I can be certain that any Church which pretends to be the true Church is the true Church I must be certain that this Note of not erring is inseparable to it But before I can be certain that this Note is inseparable to any one Church now extant I must be certain not only that it doth not err now which as I have shewed above the generality of Men can never be but also that it never hath erred nor ever will for as the Cardinal hath stated the matter the thing of which we are to enquire is not which of the Churches now extant are true Churches or parts of the Catholick Church but which of 'em are the true Catholick Church If we were only to enquire which of 'em are true parts of the Catholick Church all that we had to do was to satisfy our selves which of 'em at present have the true Notes of a true part of the Catholick Church but as for particular Churches it is agreed of all hands that they may be true parts of the Catholick Church at one time and yet not be so at another so that as to particular Churches all that I need to enquire is only this Whether at
they are we can never be certain whether any one Church in the World doth profess 'em or no for how can we know whether or no a Church professes we know not what And unless we certainly know that these Principles are true we can never be certain whether that be a true Church which professes 'em for seeing it is the profession of the true Principles of Religion that makes a true Church it is impossible for us to know whether any Church be a true Church till we know whether the Principles it professes are true So that before a Man can be secure that he hath found the true Church by this Note he must be certain either that every thing it professes is true or at least that the main and fundamental Principles of its Profession are true Neither of which he can be certain of according to the Principles of the Church of Rome For First She decries Mens private Judgment of Discretion as utterly insufficient to make any certain distinction of Truth from Falshood in matters of Religion Secondly She allows no sufficient Rule without the true Church to guide and direct our private Judgment of Discretion Thirdly She resolves all Certainty as to matters of Faith into the Authority of the true Church Fourthly She authorizes the true Church to impose upon us an absolute necessity of believing such Things as before were not necessary to be believed First The Church of Rome decries Men's private Judgment of Discretion as utterly insufficient to make any certain distinction of Truth from Falshood in matters of Religion Seeing we are to seek the true Church by Notes our certainty that we have found it must wholly depend upon our certainty that we have found in it the Notes of the true Church but tho there is no one thing in the World of which we are more concerned to be certain than that we have found the true Church and are in Communion with it because no less than our Eternal Salvation depends upon it yet it is only our own private Judgment of Discretion that by applying the Notes of the true Church can ascertain us in this Point For while we are in quest of the true Church we have no other way to find it but by carrying the Notes of it along with us and by examining and judging by our own private Discretion which Church these Notes do belong to either our private Discretion is sufficient to assertain us in this Matter or it is not if it be not we can never be certain which is the true Church if it be it must be sufficient to assertain us in all other necessary Points of Religion because one of the Notes by which we are to seek the true Church and that a principal one too is Sanctity of Doctrine or an unerring profession of the true Religion at least in all necessary points But before we can be certain which Church this Note belongs to we must be throughly satisfied in our own private Discretion what this unerring Profession is which we can never be till we are certain of the Truth of all the Particulars of it and when we are certain of this we are certain at least as to all necessary points of true Religion which must all be included in every unerring Profession of it So that before we can be certain of any Church that it is the true Church we must be certain that it doth not err in its profession and before we can be certain of this we must be certain of the Truth of all those particular Doctrines whereof its Profession is composed and of this we have as yet no other way to be certain but only by our own private Judgment of Discretion because till we have found the true Church its impossible we should conduct our selves by its Authority and in the absence of the true Churches Authority we have nothing to conduct us but our own private Discretion either this our private Discretion therefore is sufficient to assertain us of the Truth of all the particular Doctrines whereof an unerring Profession of Religion is composed or it is not if it be it must be sufficient to assertain us as to all necessary points of Religion if it be not as the Church of Rome affirms it is not it is impossible we should ever be certain that we have found the true Church again either therefore the Church of Rome must allow that certainty in all at least in all necessary Points of Religion is attainable by the free and honest use of our own private Judgment of Discretion which as I shall shew by and by she can never allow without undermining her own Foundations or she must leave Men hovering in eternal Uncertainty as to one of the most necessary Points of Religion viz. which is the true Church Secondly The Church of Rome allows no sufficient Rule without the true Church to guide and direct our private Judgment of Discretion Seeing the Constitution of the true Church is not natural but entirely founded upon Divine Institution this Question Which is the true Church is not to be resolved by Principles of Nature but by Principles of Revelation and therefore without some revealed Rule which is every way sufficient to guide and direct our private Discretion we shall never be able to find out which is the true Church because without such a Rule we have nothing but the Principles of Nature to go by which in this Enquiry are utterly insufficient to direct us But while we are out of the Church we have no other revealed Rule to direct us in our Enquiry after it but only that of Scripture for as for Tradition the Church of Rome teaches that the true Church is the sole Conservator of it and that tho it be a part of Divine Revelation yet no Man is obliged any farther to believe it than the true Church hath defined and declared it And seeing I can have ho certainty what is a true Tradition till such time as I am got into the true Church How can Tradition be a Rule of Faith to me while I am out of it Or How can that be the Rule of my Faith whilst I am in quest of the true Church which I have no other Obligation to believe but only the true Churches Authority Whilst therefore I am out of the true Church the only Rule I have to go by in my Enquiries after it is Scripture And this the Church of Rome tells me is insufficient both because it is not full enough and because it is not clear enough Which if true I can never be certain I have found the true Church by this Note of an unerring Profession 1st She teaches that the Scripture is not full enough as not containing in it all necessary Doctrines of Faith and Manners but that there are certain unwritten Traditions in the Church of equal Authority with it by which its defects are supplied And if so How is it possible I
should find the true Church by the direction of Scripture For since according to this Note that can be no true Church which doth not unerringly profess all necessary Doctrines of Faith and Manners when I have found a Church which professes all such necessary Doctrines as are in Scripture I cannot be secure that it is a true Church supposing there are other necessary Doctrines out of Scripture viz. in the unwritten Traditions because then the profession of these will be altogether as necessary to its being a true Church as the profession of those All that the Scripture can satisfy me in is only this whether such a Church profess all the necessary Doctrines in Scripture but if there are any necessary Doctrines out of Scripture it 's certain that the profession of them is as necessary to the being of the true Church as the profession of those that are in it And therefore before I can be certain that it is the true Church I must be fully satisfied that it professeth both which I can never be unless I have some other Rule to go by besides this of Scripture 2dly The Church of Rome teaches that the Scripture is no sufficient Rule in respect of clearness the Sense of it being so obscurely exprest that we can never be certain what it is without the Interpretation of the true Church Which if true it 's utterly impossible for one who is out of the true Church ever to find it by the direction of Scripture For according to this Note that only is the true Church which doth not err in its Profession at least in any necessary Point either as to Doctrines of Faith or Doctrines of Manners But before I can know whether any Church doth not err in its Profession I must be certainly informed what the true Profession is or what are those Doctrines of Faith and Manners of which this true Profession consists as to which the Scripture can never certainly inform me if it be not sufficiently clear For if I can never be certain what the true sense of Scripture is without the Interpretation of the true Church How is it possible that while I am out of the true Church I should ever be certain of its Sense as to all the particular Doctrines which the true Profession of Religion contains So that according to this Principle the Scripture is so far from being a sufficient Rule to one that is out of the true Church that it is perfectly useless to him in his Enquiry after it for either it can certainly direct him to the true Church or it cannot if it can it must be sufficiently clear to inform him of its own Sense without the Interpretation of the true Church concerning all those Doctrines of Faith and Manners whereof the unerring Profession of the true Church is composed and if so this Principle of the Roman Church is erroneous if it be not to what purpose doth it serve unless it be to lead him into an endless Maze of Uncertainties wherein the further he wanders the more he will lose himself So that if a Man hath had the misfortune to be born and bred out of the true Church in an Heretical or Schismatical Communion and is enquiring his way in by this Note of an unerring Profession he hath no other Rule to instruct and inform him what this unerring Profession is but only that of Scripture which according to the Principles of the Church of Rome is insufficient for his Purpose How then is it possible he should ever be certain that he hath found the true Church when the only Rule he hath whereby to enquire what that unerring Profession is whereby he is to seek it is utterly insufficient to resolve him Thirdly The Church of Rome resolves all Certainty as to matters of Faith into the Authority of the true Church and indeed this is the fundamental Principle of Popery viz. That the only ground of Certainty as to matters of Faith is the Authority of the present true Church teaching and proposing ' em Till such time therefore as we have found the true Church and do believe upon the Authority of its teaching we can never have any true Certainty of the matters which we are to believe And yet before we can be certain that we have found the true Church by this Note of an unerring Profession we must have very good certainty as to all matters of Faith for we can never be certain upon the Authority of any Church that what we believe is true till such time as we are certain that it is the true Church nor can we ever be certain that it is the true Church until we are certain that it doth not err in its Profession or which is the same thing that all the matters of Faith which it teaches and professes are true So that the certainty of our Faith after we have found the true Church and do believe upon its Authority must depend upon the certainty of our Faith while we were seeking it and did believe without its Authority Because before we can believe with any certainty upon the Authority of any Church we must be certain that it is the true Church but we can never be certain that it is the true Church till we are first certain that its Profession is true as to all the matters of Faith contained in it To make the matter more plain I will briefly represent it in a short Dialogue between a Protestant and a Papist Protest You tell me I can never be certain as to matters of Faith unless I believe upon the Authority of the true Church Pap. I do so and upon the Truth of this Proposition all my Religion is founded Protest But I beseech you May I be certain as to matters of Faith if I believe upon the Authority of any Church tho I am not certain whether it be the true Church or no Pap. To what Purpose do you ask this Question Protest Because if I may then in believing upon the Authority of the Church of England which you say is a false Church I shall be as certain as to matters of Faith as you who believe on the Authority of the Church of Rome which you say is the only true Church Pap. Why then I tell you you can never be certain as to matters of Faith in believing upon the Authority of any Church unless you are certain it is the true Church upon whose Authority you believe ' em Protest Why so Pap. Because it is not the Authority of a Church merely that is the true ground of Certainty but the Authority of the true Church otherwise the Authority of all Churches true or false would be equally a true ground of Certainty And therefore you can never be certain that the Authority of that Church upon which you believe is a true ground of Certainty unless you are first certain that it is the true Church Protest I do allow your Reason But then pray
how shall I be certain that it is the true Church Pap. Why this you must examine by certain Notes of the true Church whereof one and that a principal one is Sanctity of Doctrine or an unerring Profession of the true Religion Protest But Good Sir can I not be certain that it is the true Church till I am first certain that it doth not err in its Profession Pap. No. Protest Why then I must be certain of the Truth of all those matters of Faith whereof its Profession consists before I can be certain that it is the true Church Pap. You must so Protest But pray how shall I If that be true which you told me just now viz. That there is no true ground of Certainty but the Authority of the true Church For how is it possible I should ever be truly certain when as yet I know no true ground of Certainty Pap. Why have you not the Authority of the true Church Protest But as yet I am not certain that the Church upon whose Authority you would have me believe is the true Church and till I am certain of this with what Certainty can I depend upon her Authority Would you have me be certain that whatsoever she professes is true upon her own bare Word and Authority before I am certain that she is the true Church If so why may I not as well believe any other Church to be the true Church seeing there is no other Church but what will pass its Word for the Truth of its own Profession as well as yours If not you must allow me to have some other ground of Certainty as to Matters of Faith besides the Authority of the true Church For before I can securely rely upon the Authority of any Church as the true ground of Certainty I must be certain that it is the true Church and my Certainty that she is the true Church must depend upon my Certainty of the Truth of all those Matters of Faith comprised in her Profession So that before I am certain of the Truth of her Profession it is too soon for me to rely upon her Authority as the only ground of Certainty and when I am certain of it it is too late because I am certain already Fourthly And Lastly The Church of Rome gives Authority to the true Church to impose upon Mens Minds a necessity of believing such things as before they were not obliged to believe For she makes the Church's Authority not only a concurrent motive of Faith but the very formal reason of it so that we are not only obliged to believe what the Church declares but we are therefore obliged to believe it because she declares it 'T is true some of the Roman Doctors tell us that the Church hath no power to make new Articles of Faith but only that seeing there some old Truths in Scripture and the unwritten Tradition of the Church which the Church hath not yet declared and which therefore Men are not yet obliged to believe the Church hath Authority when ever she thinks meet to declare 'em and thereby to oblige Men under pain of Damnation to believe 'em but others of 'em and particularly Cardinal Bellarmin de Potest Sum. Pontif. tell us That the Church of later Time not only hath power to explain and declare but also to Constitute and Command those Things which belong to Faith. And indeed the difference between declaring and constituting or making an Article of Faith is only Verbal For an Article of Faith is a Truth that is necessary to be believed And therefore if the Church by declaring a Truth which was not necessary to be believed makes it necessary to be believed it thereby makes that Truth an Article of Faith which was not an Article of Faith. And so to declare and to make is the very same thing But in this they are all agreed that the true Church hath power to make those things necessary to be believed which were not so before And if this be true no Man can ever be certain by this Note of an unerring Profession that he hath found the true Church For before I can be certain of any Church as for instance the Roman that it is the true Church I must be certain that that Church's Profession is true but when I proceed to examine the particular Articles of it as I must do before I can be certain of the Truth of the whole I shall find there are several of them of the Truth of which in the opinion of several even of her own Doctors I have no sufficient ground to be certain either in Scripture or Tradition which while I am seeking the true Church are the only Rule I have whereby to examine them as particularly Transubstantiation Seven Sacraments Necessity of Auricular Confession Roman Purgatory and Indulgences Vid. Note the Sixth pag. 125. c. And if these Roman Doctors pretend to be certain of them upon no other Reason but because their Church which they are sure is the true Church hath declared them How shall I be certain of them who am but an Enquirer whether it be the true Church or no And therefore as yet cannot be supposed to be sure that it is for without her Declaration they themselves confess I have no sufficient ground to be certain of the Truth of them And till I am sure she is the true Church her Declarations are no ground of Certainty to me And as I cannot be certain that these Articles are true till I am sure that the Church which declare them is the true Church so supposing that the true Church hath power to impose upon me a necessity of believing such Things as before I was not obliged to believe I cannot be certain that they are false because no Authority can be supposed to have a right to impose upon Men such a necessity of believing but what is infallible and cannot impose what is false on them unless it be supposed that Men may be rightfully obliged to believe what is false If therefore the Roman Church be the true Church as for all I yet know it may then for all I yet know it hath Authority from God to impose upon me a necessity of believing whatever she declares and consequently for all I yet know she is Infallible But as for my self I know that I am a fallible Creature and therefore whatsoever Infallibility declares to me must certainly be true whatsoever Probabilities yea or seeming Demonstrations I may have against it how then can I be certain that any Article is false which is declared to me by a Church that for all I yet know is Infallible if it be Infallible I am sure that whatever it declares is true And if it be the true Church it must be Infallible Supposing that the true Church hath Authority to impose new Necessities of believing but whether it be the true Church or no is the Thing I am now enquiring by this Note of
no doubt to be made but that it would generally obtain But when Mens Inclinations and Circumstances are so various nothing is more manifest than that the receiving or rejecting Truth is a thing too uncertain to be made an infallible Note of it When it is argued on behalf of Christianity that so many thousands were on the suddain converted to the Faith the force of such an Argument does not lie in the bare prevalency of the Doctrine but in its prevalency when placed in such Circumstances as it at the first preaching of the Gospel was and when Men of mean birth and education as has already been observed did without force or fraud on the suddain make so many proselytes to a Religion which was so directly contrary to those Opinions to which the World had been so long accustomed a Religion which was likely to bring such great Inconveniences upon those who embraced it This indeed was very remarkable and could be ascribed to nothing but the Power of Truth which was only able to bring about so wonderful an Effect In a word Men being oftner guided by Fancy Prejudice and Interest than by Reason makes them more capable of Error than of Truth and when they have once received it not only unwilling to part with it but zealous to propagate it as much as they can The Agreeableness of any Doctrine to their wicked Lusts and Affections is most likely to win upon them The craft and cunning of those who lie in wait to deceive may 〈◊〉 easily mislead unstable Minds into gross Mistakes before they are aware 〈…〉 Force the enjoyment of present Preferment or the hopes of it may make them profess what they do not believe to be true and then seek for Reasons to defend it Since then there are so many things beside Truth which may induce Men to admit any Doctrine the bare admitting of it tho never so universally can be no Note of the Truth of that or of the Church that teaches it God has endued us with a capacity of finding out Truth but at the same time he has made us fallible Creatures and liable to be imposed upon so that it stands us in hand to be aware how we are deceived and the more care we take in a concern of this Nature the more we discover our own Sincerity and Zeal for Truth But let there be never such clear Discoveries thereof it is in our power wilfully to shut our Eyes against them nay when we have adhered to Truth for some time we may be tempted either wholly to forsake it or to intermingle gross Errors with it So that it is as improper to conclude the prevalency of any Doctrine to be an Argument of the Truth of it or of the Church that professeth it as that any Cause is just because successful Such is God's infinite Wisdom and Goodness that as he does oftentimes bless with unexpected Success an honest and just Design and they who are sagacious in tracing the Footsteps of Providence do easily discover it so does he likewise frequently exert his Power after an extraordinary manner for the propagation of Truth But on the other hand as he often permits an unjust Design to prevail and prosper so likewise does he suffer Error to multiply and increase And when he does at any time exert his Power after an extraordinary manner for the propagation of Truth he still deals with Men as with Rational Creatures so that such his Power may be resisted nay may be so far resisted as may make him punish with Infatuation such their Resistance as he served the Pharisees upon the account of their Obstinacy whose Eyes he blinded and whose Heart he hardned John 12.40 41. that they should not see with their Eyes nor understand with their Heart and be converted And as happened to those whom the Apostle makes mention of whom because they received not the love of Truth that they might be saved 2 Thess 2.10 11. God sent strong Delusions that they might believe a Lie. Since therefore such is the Temper and Constitution of Mankind as to be daily subject to Errors and to be liable by the just Judgment of God to be at last hardened in them nothing can with any certainty be determined concerning the Truth of any Church from the Prevalency of any Doctrine professed in it 3. Plain Matter of Fact shews the Insufficiency of this Note For the Histories of all Ages make it evident what an influence Error has often had upon Mens Minds and that altho Truth may have happened sometimes to have prevailed yet that it has been as often refused and gross and most impious Opinions preferr'd before it How soon were our first Parents when their Minds were in their greatest strength and vigor and not as yet biassed by any Misapprehensions of things Gen. 3.5 6. by the cunning Artifices of Satan tempted to believe a Lie After which first and grand Mistake how did their whole Stock degenerate when every Imagination of Man's Heart being evil Gen. 6.5 6. it repented the Lord that he had made Man on the Earth Afterward God chose to himself out of the rest of the World a peculiar People and to secure them against the Idolatry and Superstition of those who dwelt near them he gave them particular Statutes which by Threats and Promises and mighty Wonders which he wrought for them he obliged them to observe Yet how soon did they forget God and turned after Idols So that in the time of Ahab according to God's own account there were but 7000 who had not bowed unto Baal If the Efficacy of the Doctrine had been a Note of the true Church I do not see why the Priests of Baal had not as much reason at that time to have insisted upon it as the Romish Priests can have now At our Saviour's coming the Pharisees had infected the whole Nation with their Traditions and so obstinately did they adhere to them that notwithstanding the many Miracles which our Saviour had wrought for them notwithstanding the Holiness of his Life and Conversation few believed on him according to the Prophesy of Isaiah made mention Joh. 12.38 Lord who hath believed our Report of which our Saviour himself complains John 5.43 I am come in my Father's Name And ye receive me not if another shall come in his own Name him ye will receive And in the 11th of St. Matthew ver 20 c. he does most severely upbraid the Cities wherein most of his mighty Works were done because they repented not And does openly declare that it would be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of Judgment than for them If any Doctrine was likely to have been efficacious one would have thought the Doctrine of our Saviour when taught by himself had been so and yet we find that no Prophet was ever less respected than he was even among his own Country-men The same thing happened likewise to St.
Paul as we read Acts 13.45 and Act. 28.24 c. After Christianity had for above 300 Years been strugling to get ground in the World how strangely did Arianism on the sudden prevail against it One would have thought that after People had for some time been confirmed in the Truth they should not have been easily tempted to embrace so gross an Error But yet such was the Efficacy of this Heresy that as Theodoret relates the Emperour Constantius in a Discourse with Liberius Bishop of Rome urgeth it as an Argument against his Intercession on behalf of Athanasius Pray saith he how big a part of the World are you Theod. lib. 2. Hist Eccl. c. 16. that you alone pretend to stand up for a wicked Man so he called Athanasius and to disturb the Peace of the whole World Which the Bishop was so far from thinking a good Argument that he immediately replied The true Faith loseth nothing by my being alone for there were formerly but three found who resisted the King's Commandment Dan. 3.18 Neither did the same Heresy prevail only at home amongst the Orthodox Christians but was likewise victorious abroad amongst the Idolatrous Nations of which the same Author gives us a notable Instance when he tells us that one Vlphilas a Bishop of great Authority amongst the Goths Theod. lib. 3. c. ult being corrupted by Eudoxius perswaded that whole Nation to embrace it About 300 Years after so general a defection from the true Faith by Arianism the Impostor Mahomet arose Paulus Aemyl l. 2. de gestis Francorum Calvis Chronol ab Ann. 631 ad An. 718. whose Doctrine in the space of an hundred Years over-run a great part both of the East and South and did continue so far to prevail that when Brerewood made the Computation of such as had received it he reckons them to be six parts of thirty into which he supposeth Brerewood's Inquiries c. 14. the whole World to be divided whereas he allots but five parts to the whole number of Christians of what denomination soever As to this Particular the Cardinal urgeth that Mahumetanism is propagated by Force of Arms and not by the Efficacy of its Doctrine In answer to which Assertion besides that the World is not ignorant how little reason the Cardinal had to make this Objection and that Mahomet must have first converted those by his Doctrine whom he afterwards made use of to convert others by Force I shall set down this remarkable Instance whereby it will manifestly appear how much the Mahometan Missionaries even without the assistance of any outward Force may sometimes prove too hard for the Roman Ones Bati King of the Tartars having wasted the Christian Territories returns into Scythia leaving all Europe in a great Consternation Pope Innocent the 4th in the Year 1246 from the Council of Lions sends a company of Religious Men a long Journey to him to exhort him to worship the one living and true God and his only Son Jesus Christ the Saviour of the World and to abstain from shedding Christian Blood. When the Tartar had heard the Pope's Request he promised for five Years not to trouble the Christians Laur. Surii Comment p. 25. But as soon as the Pope's Messengers were gone some Saracens came exhorting the Tartars to embrace the Mahometan Sect rather than Christianity and what they said had such Effect especially upon the Emperour that they embrac'd Mahometanism and keep to it still In this case the two Doctrines had very fair play for the Tartars were prejudic'd on neither side neither could any Force be made use of to compel them to receive one Doctrine more than the other If either had the advantage it was that of the Romish Church for that had got the start but was soon wholly rejected and the other has ever since been embraced Were not those Instances which I have mention'd sufficient to shew what little Judgment can be made of the Truth of any Church from the Reception which its Doctrine has met with in the World I might here add the Conversions wrought by those of the Greek Church whom the Church of Rome accounts Hereticks Frumentius sent by Athanasius converted the Indians Moyses an Alexandrian Monk the Saracens And concerning the Conversion of the Moscovites Paulus Jovius thus speaks Above five hundred Years since says he De Legatione Moscovit the Moscovites worship'd the Heathen Gods Jupiter c. but then were they first initiated in the Christian Rites when the Greek Bishops out of an inconstant temper began to dissent from the Latin Church and it so happened that the Moscovites in the same sense and with a most hearty Belief followed those Religions Rites which they had received from their Greek Teachers I might likewise make mention of the great Efficacy of the Reformed Doctrine which in the space of fifty Years when Bishop Jewel set out the Defence of his Apology notwithstanding the great Opposition which had been made against it had over-run whole Nations Defence of Apol. p. 36. and mightily prevailed even in those Kingdoms where the Princes and Governours were still Popish The distinction which Bellarmin makes that Hereticks do not convert Men to the true Faith Bill de Not. l. 4. c. 12. and that the Goths were cheated into Arianism That they pervert Catholicks is nothing to the purpose For if by Hereticks Men may be converted or cheated into what is false if Catholicks may be so easily perverted then the Effect which any Doctrine has upon Mens Minds can be no Note of their being Members of a true Church who profess it If the Doctrine which they who are converted have received be a true Doctrine this indeed is a good Note of a true Church and we are willing to stand and fall by it but their bare Conversion is no Note at all because as to its being received or not received Error has had the same fate in the World as Truth it self has had And of this the Cardinal himself was enough sensible who having forgot what he had made to be the ninth Note of the Church does repeat in an Oration at the end of his Controversies this Objection of the Reformists How is it possible say they that that Doctrine should not be from God Orat. in Scholis habita edit In. 8o. Ingolst 1593. which in so short time has over-run so many People Provinces and Kingdoms And then makes this Answer If it be lawful to philosophise after this manner we shall have much more reason to wonder why the Alcoran of Mahomet in so great a part of the World has so easily prevailed Having thus in the general shewn that Efficacy of Doctrine can be no Note of a true Church it necessarily follows that the Efficacy of the Doctrine professed in the Church of Rome can be no Note of its being so But yet that I may further shew what little reason that Church of all
in their own Tongue to have it in Latin they stoutly resisted him So that the Pope that he might keep up his usurped Authority was forced to pretend that he gave them leave to have it in their own Language But amongst all his Instances the Cardinal had least reason to have mention'd the Conversion of the Indians and Jews For as for the Indians the unheard-of Cruelties which even the Popish Historians relate to have been used towards them and their gross Ignorance after their Conversion are a sufficient Evidence how little they were beholden for it to the Doctrine which was taught them One would wonder how it were possible for Mankind to be guilty of such inhuman Barbarities as Bartolomaeus Casas who was a Bishop and lived in India relates the Spaniards to have committed In abhorrence whereof Acosta has a Discourse on purpose to shew the Unreasonableness of making War against the Barbarians L. 2. c. 2 c. De Ind. salut procur upon the account of Religion He afterwards discourses of the Capacity of the Indians asserting that they ought to have better Instructors sent them That those which they then had had been of such little use to them that after the space of forty Years there were scarce any found amongst so great a number of Converts who understood two Articles of the Creed L. 4. c. 3. p. 358. or had any apprehension what Christ Eternal Life or the Eucharist meant But this concerning the Conversion of the Indians has already been mentioned in Note the fourth As for the manner of converting the Jews I shall only make mention of one Instance which happened in the time of Heraclius the Emperour who writ to Dagobert the King of France that he would command all the Jews in his Dominions to turn Christians Aimoin iv 22. and either to banish or slay those who would not who accordingly did so banishing as many as would not be baptized Since Erasmus who knew these matters well enough has so freely declared that altho their Conversion be a thing much to be wished for yet that such Courses were taken by some to effect it that of a wicked Jew Erasm Annoâ— in Mat. 23. it often happened there was made a Christian much more wicked than he was before his Conversion Having thus shewn the weakness of the Cardinal's Arguments all that I shall add upon this Subject shall be only this That the mean Account some of our new Converts have given of Themselves and the Motives of their Change looks not very favourable upon this Ninth Note and makes it suspicious that the Efficacy of Doctrine was not the only thing that did the work But that on the other hand since the chiefest Patrons of the Romish Cause do at this time endeavour to disguise their Religion with so much Artifice and to represent it as like ours as they can they do really think their Doctrine by its own Worth and Excellency then most likely to prevail when it is made appear to be most akin to that of the Reformed Churches THE END ERRATA PAge 212. line 26. read sets it in Page 223. line 22. r. the Church LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Tenth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ HOLINESS of LIFE Decima Nota est Sanctitas Vitae Auctorum sive primorum Patrum nostrae Religionis Bellarm. L. iv c. 13. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR June 22. 1687. Jo. Battely IN this Argument it may suffice if it be shown I. What the Notion of Holiness is II. That Holiness is not properly a Note of the true Church III. That if it were a Note of the true Church yet it would not so belong to the Roman as to distinguish it from all other Churches and to appear upon it as the Infallible Character of the only Fold of Christ I. For Holiness it is of two kinds Holiness of Calling and Dedication of Mind and Manners By Holiness of Calling and Dedication I mean the Separation of Persons from the unbelieving and wicked World and the incorporating of them by Baptism into the Spiritual Society of the Christian Church And by such means the dedicating of them to the Service of Christ according to the tenour of the Evangelical Covenant In this Sense St. Paul told the Members of the Church of Corinth (a) 1 Cor. 6.11 that they were wash'd and sanctify'd or by their Christian Calling or Dedication made Sacred and Holy. By Holiness of Mind and Manners to which Bellarmin here gives the Name of Probity a Vertue commended by him but coldly obey'd I understand the habitual private and publick Practice of Christian Religion as it proceeds from the true Principle of it the Love of God as it is measur'd by the True Rule of it Right Reason in Conjunction with the Revealed Will of God And as it is directed to its proper Ends the Glory of God and the Good of all reasonable Creatures For this kind of Holiness St. Paul (b) 1 Thess 5.23 makes pious Application to God in behalf of the Thessalonians saying The very God of Peace sanctify you wholly and I pray God your whole Spirit and Soul and Body be preserved blameless to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ Now II. Neither of these kinds of Holiness can be properly called a Note of the true Church For the first Kind It is confess'd that the Christian Church is Holy and it was called Holy in the Creed before the Epithet of Catholick was inserted into that Sum of Faith (c) S. Cypr. Epist 70. p. 190. cum dicimus h. e. Baptizandis credis in vitam aeternam remissionem Peccatorum per Sanctan Ecclesiam And the Supream Pastor of the Church lov'd it in such extraordinary manner that (d) Ephes 5.25 26 27. He gave himself for it that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of Water by the Word by Baptism and Assent to the Doctrine and Conditions of the Gospel That he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing any thing which may seem uncomely to Christ to whom she as Supream Head is united That it should be Holy and without blemish This Holiness of Dedication is elegantly set forth after the manner of the Oriental Poesy in the Book of the Canticles in which is represented the Spiritual Marriage of Christ and his chaste and unblemish'd Church Though some Romanists have wrested these and other places which speak of her Dove-like and undefiled Nature and apply them to that which they please to call the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin (e) V. Coron preuves par l' Escriture du contenu en la foy Catholique p. 1. So ready are they who upbraid the Reformed with Interpreting Scripture out of their own Heads to do the same thing themselves and with a much greater mixture of
Extravagance That the Church is Holy we daily profess Nevertheless such Holiness of the Church cannot properly be called a Note of it for it appertains to its Essence and Constitution and shews what a Church is and belongs to every Church whether Greek Abyssine Roman or English and is not according to Bellarmin's Sense of a Note an External Mark by which we may distinguish betwixt Churches and upon grounds of good Assurance discern any true one from such as are false For the Second kind of Holiness that of Mind and Manners neither is That so far as Man can take Cognizance of it a certain Sign by which we may find out the true Christian Society For First The Officers of the Christian Church invite Men of all Nations and Conditions to come into the Bosom of it and admit them upon their Profession of the common Christianity not being able to penetrate into the Secrets of their Hearts or to foresee whether they who are now in good earnest will persevere or fall away They may therefore admit into the true Fold such as are Wolves in Sheeps-cloathing For Novatian himself did not deny that Men could be secretly wicked before and at Baptism tho he was so rigid as not to believe the Sins committed after it to be forgiven Hence our Saviour compar'd his Church to a Net which contained in it good and bad Fishes And the bad may either soon appear or be long conceal'd under the close Vail of Hypocrisy So deceitful a mark of Incorruption in the Monument is the superficial Whiteness and Ornament of it Bellarmin himself does here furnish us from Theodoret with the Instance of Nestorius who by the help of a pale Look set Speech and grave Apparel deceived both the People and the Officers of the Church and by such Arts lifted himself into an Episcopal Chair Now he is not a Christian who is meerly one outwardly neither is that compleat Baptism which is outward only in the Flesh But he is a Christian who is also one inwardly And Baptism is that which is likewise inward in the Spirit whose praise is not only of Men but of God. Besides where there is no such gross Hypocrisy there may be a specious shew of Holiness not uniform and entire yet proceeding from devout temper some Seeds of natural Reason and some few Principles of Christian Religion whilst the rest are not embrac'd Thus it was with the Sect of Priscillian who by some kinds of real Strictnesses upbraided the looseness of that Age. Yet the Catholick Christians did not from the regularity of their Lives infer the soundness of their Party Likewise there are some Practices which both the Persons and the Spectators judg to be Holy which are not so Such a Practice was that of Ignatius Loyola (f) Masseius in vitâ Ignat. l. 1. p. 74 75. who gave an Alms readily to a poor Man and to all the rest who upon that poor Mans Report press'd immediately upon him till he had emptied all his Stock and was forc'd that Night to beg Bread for himself This Charity how indiscreet soever it was mov'd the poor to cry out with much Admiration as Storyeth Maffeius A Saint a Saint Seeing then the weak will mistake the very Nature of Holiness and the most judicious can only see the external part of it it is not safe arguing for the goodness of the Cause from the seeming goodness of the Life It is true we ought to use a Judgment of Charity But in a Case where we are proving our Faith it becomes us to proceed upon more unquestionable Grounds Secondly Under the same Constitution People may live sometimes with more and sometimes with less Morality If therefore we should prove the State or Church by the manners of the Members the same Constitution at different Times would be good and bad and vary as Men do Bellarmin speaks of the Holiness of Doctrine and the Efficacy of it but it is not irresistibly efficacious And often we find worse Men under better Means and better Men under worse Thus it falls out in Civil Societies where the Model remaining or being improv'd the Vertues of the Subjects decline It did so towards the latter end of the Roman Empire in which tho the Laws remain'd the Dregs of Romulus began to rise again Thus it was in the Church of Israel which was always as God had fram'd it a true Church But if Holiness of Life had been made a Note of it it might in some Junctures have been called a Church but oftner no Church at all Before their Captivity there was a general Corruption of Manners and their Reformation upon their Deliverance was imperfect And the Sense of God's Goodness to them began to wear off and tho they did forbear to adulterate the worship of the true God with mixtures of Idolatry yet they admitted of the formal Religion of the Pharisees which made void real and solid Piety Insomuch that when our Saviour visited the World he could scarce find any Probity in it There are many ways by which Men under the same Constitution may lead more or less virtuous Lives Such are The good or bad Examples of Great Men strict or loose Discipline Affliction or overgrowth in Wealth and Power War or Peace And the last of these is too often tho not the just Cause yet the occasion of Security and of the growing of a kind of slothful Rust upon those who are at ease St. Cyprian (g) S. Cypr. Ser. de Lapsiss p. 123. Ox. Pax longa corruperat jacentem fidem poenè dixeram dormitantem c. speaking of the little quiet the African Church had for a few Years from Severus to Decius tho not without some trouble from the Heathens complains of the Corruption which it bred among Christians Thirdly Add to this that unless a Man do first understand the Nature and Doctrine of the Christian Church he cannot know what Sanctity is and what that is in the Life of any Man which he is to take for the Holiness of a Christian So that the way to be well assured about a true Church is to take our measures not from the Lives of the Members but from the Doctrines of their Society And one might imagine that Cardinal Perron himself (h) Card. Perr Reply to King James l. 4. c. 6. in this Argument had more regard to the Doctrine than the Life when he alluded to an Expression in the Canticles in this fanciful manner The Church sings and will always sing I am black but I am fair that is to say I am black in Manners but fair in Doctrine Which blackness of Manners if he intended as a spot of Beauty upon his fair Doctrine he did not see with Christian Eyes But III. Admitting that Holiness of Life were a Note of the true Church the Roman Church would not from this Concession derive any great advantage It is true and it is granted First That at the
Lives in a very barbarous manner The Consciences of those People having mov'd them to bear testimony against the Corruptions of Rome (e) V. Thuan Hist l. 6. ad An. 1550. p. 186 187. Aemil. 1.6 de Reb. Gest Franc. For some other Orders every Eye cannot see that contempt of the World which is so much talked of and so seldom found The readiest way in the Ecclesiastical State to grow considerable in the World is first to enter into some of the Orders And for Example sake it was some while ago the boast of some Men that there had been of St. Benedict's Order (f) Valaterani Anthrop l. 21. p. 753. 24 Popes 183 Cardinals and 1570 Abbots The Austerities and Mortifications of such Orders are generally mention'd as Proofs of their extraordinary Holiness Yet you will find even among the Heathens as great Rigours as amongst the severest in their Cloysters The Jesuits in their late Voyage to Siam have furnish'd us with an Instance in the Talopins of that Country who in such strictnesses seem not inferiour to S. Bruno himself They have an Estate of Life not much unlike to his call'd Vipasana g Voyage de Siam l. 6. p. 412. on nepent rien wir de plus austere c. in which they keep perpetual silence and give themselves up to the Contemplation of Holy Things The Jesuits assure us that they reproach'd the Romans for want of sufficient veneration of Sacred Images Holy Writings and Priests (h) Ib. p. 410. They tell us that for that which concerns their Manners and Conduct of Life a Christian can teach nothing more perfect than that which their Religion prescribes That it forbids the Impiety of every Thought That what are Counsels among Christians are with Talopins indispensable Precepts That they forbid the use of any Liquor which may intoxicate That they drink no Wine upon any occasion That they are extreamly scandaliz'd at Christian Priests for drinking it That they are charitable to Beasts and relieve them in their needs (i) P. 414 415 416. That they take great pains in preaching and educating Youth in their Monasteries shaving them putting them on a Habit causing them to fast forbidding them to sing or play or hear Singers or see publick Spectacles or use Perfumes or love or touch Money or delight in what they eat but to mix something unpleasant with it (k) P. 418. They report further concerning the Talopins themselves that they observe many Rules of Strictness besides those by which their Scholars and the Laity are obliged That they frequent their Pagods look not on Women speak not to them live on Alms but go not into the Houses expose themselves to the open Heavens several Nights in February in the midst of the Fields keep a solemn Fast of three Months preach every day of that season recite a kind of Chapelet preach sometimes from morning to night each in his turn for six hours together without wearying the Hearers (l) Ib. p. 418 419 420. 422. They cast a Ring into the Sea and it is calm if we have Faith to believe it They have places to which great Numbers of Pilgrims travel upon the score of Devotion They have Images which they carry abroad for the procuring of good Weather They have they say a Relick of their God Sommonokhodom who is ascended a portion of his Hair (m) Ib. p. 412 413 415 410. So that if mere monastick Sanctity be a Note of a true Religious Society you may find out by it such a Society at Siam Last of all There are many Things in the Roman Church it self which by helping forward an ill Life do in part deface this Mark of her Sanctity Such as charming Consecrations Indulgences Dispensations and other abuses of the Seal of the Church Doctrines about Masses Attrition Purgatory and Papal Supremacy Which last is very prejudicial to the Quiet of the World especially in the Deposing Point concerning which I take leave to use the Words of another with Relation to Bellarmin He was (n) Postscript to Transl of Maimb Hift. of the League p. 15 16 17. himself a Preacher for the League in Paris during the Rebellion there of K. Henry the 4th Some of his Principles are these following In the Kingdoms of Men the Power of the King is from the People because the People make the King. Observing that he says in the Kingdoms of Men there is no doubt but he restrains this Principle to the Subordination of the Pope For his Holiness in that Rebellion as you have heard was declared Protector of the League So that the Pope first excommunicates which is the Outlawry of the Church and by virtue of this Excommunication the People are left to their own natural Liberty and may without further Process from Rome depose him Accordingly you see it practis'd in the same Instance Pope Sixtus first thunder-struck King Henry the 3d and the King of Navarr Then the Sorbon make Decrees that they have successively forfeited the Crown The Parliament verifies these Decrees and the Pope is petition'd to confirm the Sense of the Nation that is of the Rebels But I have related this too favourably for Bellarmin For we hear him in another place positively affirming it as Matter of Faith If any Christian Prince shall depart from the Catholick Religion and shall withdraw others from it He immediately forfeits all Power and Dignity even before the Pope has pronounc'd Sentence on him And his Subjects in case they have Power to do it may and ought to cast out such an Heretick from his Sovereignty over Christians If therefore the Faith of Bellarmin be Faction whatsoever his Church is in it self it is certain as he has made it it can never be found out either as The Church or as A sound Church so far as we are to look for it by the Note of Holiness THE END LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Eleventh Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The GLORY of MIRACLES Vndecima Nota est Gloria Miraculorum Bellarm. de Notis Ecclesiae L. iv c. 14. IMPRIMATUR June 28. 1687. Guil. Needham HAD not the Cardinal either thought by the meer number of his Notes to have given the greater show to the Argument or wrote in pure Compliance to the Humour and Interests of the Age wherein he liv'd he would hardly have insisted upon this of Miracles especially in the method wherein he hath manag'd it For by instancing from the very First Age of the Church to the Fifteenth nay to the Sixteenth wherein Himself undertook the defence of it he hath interested himself in all the ridiculous Stories the Phantastick Legends which the Monkish Fabulous Ages have deliver'd the meer recital of which since he hath espous'd them might be a sufficient Exposure of his Argument And indeed had the Cardinal's Authors but us'd the same grave Care and Fidelity
Cardinal clearly distinguished between these two Notions his Reader might easily have seen how far the Light of Prophecy may be said to be a Mark by which to know the True Church viz. so far as to do Him and his Cause no manner of Service For in the latter Sense it may be admitted to be such a Mark inasmuch as the accomplishment of those Prophecies which concerned Christ shew'd that Jesus was He and that his Doctrine was of God. But then this Light of Prophecy comes no other way to be a Mark of the True Church than as 't is an Argument or if you will call it so a Mark of that Doctrine the Profession whereof makes the Church So that when we have made the best we can of this Note the Church is still to be known by the Religion it professeth tho that Religion is known to be Divine as by other Arguments and Testimonies so also by the accomplishment of Prophecies And yet even here we must be something cautious in laying down the fulfilling of Predictions as an Argument to prove the Truth of Christianity For there are some Prophecies both in the Old and New Testament that in part have been and will in time be fully accomplished by such Persons whose Doctrine we are by no means to follow For Antichrist was foretold as well as Christ and when he comes and fulfils all that has been said concerning him so long before the accomplishment of those Predictions is a Mark upon him not that we should receive but that we should reject him and his Doctrine So that 't is not barely the fulfilling of Prophecies but of such Prophecies only as described the Characters of that Person whom we were bound to hearken to and to obey in all Things that is an Argument of True Doctrine And in this Sense we are not unwilling to admit the Light of Prophecy to be a Mark of the True Church tho it be a very improper way of speaking Since the Doctrine it self which is demonstrated to be a Divine Doctrine comes to be the proper Note of the Church and the Light of Prophecy is left to be one of those Arguments by which the Doctrine is demonstrated to be Divine But this way of marking for the Church is very uncomfortable to the Cardinal's Friends because it will force them to acknowledg that 't is not the Church that makes the Religion but the Religion that makes the Church He therefore finding no advantage to his Cause by this Notion of Prophetick Light wholly insists upon the former and makes the Gift of foretelling things to come to be one Note of the Church and doubts not but to shew it in his own and will not allow it to be in any other So that these two Things must come under Examination I. Whether it be a Note of the Church II. If it be Whether he has sufficiently proved that they of the Roman Church have it and no others I. Whether it be a Note of the True Church The Cardinal offers to prove that it is by three Arguments huddled up together which being distinguished are these 1. That as Christ promised the Gift of Miracles so he also promised the Gift of Prophecy to the Church 2. That none knows Future Contingencies but God only 3. That it is a certain Note of False Doctrine if a Prophet foretells any thing and it does not come to pass Let us now see what all this will amount to 1. Christ promised the Gift of Prophecy to the Church no less than the Gift of Miracles To which it might be sufficient to say that as Miracles notwithstanding such a Promise are no Note of the Church so neither is Prophecy such a Note meerly because it was also promised And there is the same Reason for the one as there is for the other for neither the one nor the other was promised to last always in the Church And we have been told sufficiently that the Notes of the Church according to Bellarmin himself must be Characters that are inseparable from it Now the place by him produced is so far from proving that the Gift of Prophecy should flourish in every Age that there are pregnant Intimations in it of the contrary He refers us to the Prediction of Joel applied by St. Peter to the Church Joel ii 18. Acts ii 16. And because he refers us to it thither we will go and not as he does take Things for granted which ought to be discoursed but bring forth the Text and see what Argument it will afford The Apostles as the Chapter shews spake with Tongues to the amazement of all the Strangers that heard them But the Unbelieving Jews mocked and said they were Drunk Upon which Peter lightly passing by that absurd Reproach told them that this was that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel And it shall come to pass in the last Days saith God I will pour out of my Spirit upon all Flesh and your Sons and your Daughters shall Prophesy and your young Men shall see Visions and your old Men c. And again I will pour out in those Days of my Spirit and they shall Prophesy Now tho Prophecy in the strict Sense signifies foretelling Things to come yet it is here put for Supernatural Gifts in General and particularly for speaking Divine Things by Inspiration and likewise for speaking with new Tongues which is undeniably evident from hence that the Apostle's speaking of the wonderful Things of God in Tongues they had never learn'd was by St. Peter affirm'd to be foretold in this Prediction of Joel So that the Cardinal ought to have been very much afraid to make what was promised in Joel a Note of the Church for by this means he has made it unavoidably necessary for those of his Communion the Young Men and the Old Men c. to speak with Tongues by Inspiration which is in effect to unchurch his own Party And therefore I imagin his Followers will not follow him in this nor advance the Promise in Joel into a Note of the Church but will rather say that the fulfilling of it in the first Age of the Church was a Testimony to the Truth of Christianity and that the Prediction of Joel was accomplished tho the same extraordinary Gifts were not continued in every Age afterward 2. He says That none knows Future Contingencies but God only which if it should prove that a Church is there where the Gift of Prophecy is yet it does not prove that there is no Church where that Gift is not unless it be an inseparable Mark of the Church to have all those future Events made known to one or other in it which God only knows Our Saviour said of that Day and Hour when Himself should come to judg the World no Man knoweth but the Father only Does it therefore follow that God must have revealed it to one or other in the Church If because God only knows Future Contingencies
it follows that the Church must know them too by Revelation from him then it follows also that the Church must know all things that are to happen hereafter because it is God only that can communicate such Knowledg If he meant that those who have any degree of it must necessarily belong to the Church because God only can give it neither is this true as I shall presently shew Nor if it were could the Gift of foretelling some Things be for this Reason a Note of the Church unless also the want of this Gift should be a demonstration against any Communion that it is not a True Church which I am sure can never be proved from hence that none but God can bestow it 3. He adds that in Deut. 18. it is laid down for a Note of False Doctrine If a Prophet foretells any thing and it does not come to pass Now First This Argument is very impertinent unless as lying Prophecy is said to be a Note of False Doctrine so False Doctrine be also supposed a Note of a False Church which is a very dangerous Supposition to a Church that had rather be tried by any other Note than that of the Truth of her Doctrine for it seems if we can clearly prove by any Good Argument that she professeth False Doctrine it follows without more to do that she is no True Church But Secondly It is not said in the place cited by the Cardinal that False Prophecy is a Note of False Doctrine but that 't is a Note or rather an Argument that the Prophet had no Commission from God to say that such an Event should come to pass Nor does it follow from hence that the False Prophet must needs be a Heretick unless it be impossible for a Catholick or an Orthodox Professor to tell a Lye which I think no Man will be so hardy as to say Thirdly Much less is it said that a Prophet's foretelling rightly a future contingent Event is a Note of True Doctrine which had been necessary to make True Prophecy a Note of the True Church Nay on the other Hand there is express Caution given not long before against being seduced into Idolatry by true Predictions If there arise among you a Prophet or a Dreamer of Dreams and giveth thee a Sign or a Wonder and the Sign or the Wonder comes to pass whereof he spake unto hee saying Deut. xiii 1 2 3. Let us go after other Gods Thou shalt not hearken unto the Words of that Prophet For the Lord your God proveth you c. Which shews the Confidence of the Cardinal in pronouncing so peremptorily that there have been no true Predictions amongst Heathens and Hereticks unless perhaps for a Testimony to our Faith. For this Warning plainly supposed that such Predictions there would be not to confirm Believers in the Truth but to prove their Constancy under a Temptation to Error They must indeed be False Prophets as that signifies False Teachers who should endeavour to gain Authority to Impious Doctrines and to Idolatrous Practices by appealing to the Truth of their own Predictions But yet they were to be True Prophets in respect of the Events which they would foretell And therefore to pretend that Heathens and Hereticks never foretold any Contingency which came to pass but when Providence designed a farther Testimony to confirm us in the Faith is to speak gently a wretched Mistake And there is no more Difficulty in this Point than whether we are to believe God or Bellarmin But if there had been no true Prophecies amongst Heathens besides those which were designed for a Testimony to the Christian Faith yet even these are a manifest Argument that the Gift of Prophecy is no certain Note of the Church nay they prove it more evidently than any other Prophecies could do because those Predictions surely have the most unquestionable Truth which were made for a Testimony to True Doctrine Of which kind that there had been several amongst the Gentiles seems very probable from those Remains thereof which we meet with in Virgil and Tacitus Eclog. 4. De Divin â— Not to insist upon that famous Acrostic of Sybilla Erythraea in Lactantius and Eusebius which it is certain that Cicero had seen Apol. 2. Strom. l. 6. Ep. 49. Qu. 2. De Civit. Dei lib. 18. c. 47. nor what Justin Martyr and Clemens Alexandrinus say of the Books of Hystaspes I shall only note what St. Austin says of this Master viz. That Christ was not foretold in Israel only but in other Nations also And that Predictions concerning Christ may be met with in the Books of those who are Strangers to Israel and that it is not incongruous to believe that this Mystery was revealed to Men of other Nations Which Things saith he may be mentioned as Advantages on our side over and above what is necessary Now will any Man say that these Predictions did less shew a Prophetic Light amongst the Gentiles because they were true With what Conscience therefore could Bellarmin shuffle off those famous Predictions of Balaam a Heathen Soothsayer Numb xxiv 15 c. concerning Christ to which he adds those of the Sybills by saying that they were a Testimony to our Faith As if the Argument were not so much the stronger that the Gift of True Prophecy is not confined within the Communion of the Church Surely he could not be ignorant that the Old Testament it self is called the Word of Prophecy 2 Pet. i. 19. and that the main Predictions thereof were for a Testimony to confirm us in the Faith. But by the same reason that he strikes off the true Predictions of Heathens from being an Instance of Prophetick Light because forsooth they were for the Confirmation of our Faith he must also set aside the best Evidence of Prophetick Light within the Communion of the Church the Predictions whereof were no less but more than any others for a Testimony to our Faith. As to the Oracles of Apollo which he does well to reject from being True Prophecies we need not to offer them for the disparagement of this Note of Prophetick Light since they might be deceitful and yet the Light of Prophecy neither be always in the Church nor never amongst those that are out of it But when he tells us That Hereticks are deceived as often as they would foretell any thing and that this appears from the False Prophets in the Old Testament it is a pitiful thing that such a Man should think it enough to prove a Conclusion so general by a particular Instance He refers us to 1 Kings 22. where we find that Ahab's Prophets spake by a Lying Spirit But does this prove that Hereticks never prophecy truly There were some False Prophets amongst the Ten Tribes upon their Revolt therefore there never were any True Ones How came it then to pass that there were so many of the Lord's Prophets amongst them 1 King. xviii 4. that at one time
Obadiah hid an hundred of them There were some False Prophets amongst the Jews were all the Jewish Prophets therefore deceived when they pretended to foretell any thing We find that God charged the Prophets of Hierusalem no less than those of Samaria with Imposture with running before they were sent Jerem. xxiii 14 21 25 c. and prophesying when God had not spoken to them and with prophesying Lyes in his Name and a great deal more to this purpose Therefore by the Cardinal's Logick it appears by the False Prophets in the Old Testament that Catholicks are deceived as often as they would foretell any thing To conclude this Matter since the Cardinal seemed to take a particular delight in proving his Notes of the Church out of the Old Testament I shall leave this one Argument out of the Old Testament against his present Note of Prophetick Light. To make it a Note of the Church it is necessary that there should have been no True Prophecy but in the Church which is notoriously False because Balaam who was but a Heathen Diviner prophesied truly of Christ It is necessary also that this Gift should always have continued in the Church which is alike False because there was no Prophet amongst the Jews between Malachi and Zachary the Father of John the Baptist that is for about 400 Years together And thus much concerning the first Inquiry Whether Prophetick Light be a Note of the Church I come now to the Second II. If it be such a Note Whether the Cardinal hath sufficiently proved that they of the Roman Church have it and no others He pretends to prove that there have been Prophets in the Catholick Church which no Body denies But you must know that the Catholick Church is a Term of Art which these Masters to the Abuse of Names and Words as well as of Things and Persons are resolved shall signify the Roman Church Well let the Roman Church be their Catholick Church with us 't is but the Roman And now that we understand one another How does he prove that there have been Prophets amongst them Why he produces the Prophets of the Old Testament and those that prophesied for 500 Years after Christ Agabus for Instance who is mentioned in the Acts chap. 11 c. Now by this I perceive that it was warily done of the Cardinal and not in course to call his Church the Catholick Church for if he had produced the Prophets of the Old Testament and Agabus with the Prophets of the New to prove that the Roman Church has had Prophets it had look'd so simply that the Cardinal himself could not have born it But this is one of their old Fetches that when they would get any Credit by the Prophets and the Apostles they call themselves the Catholick Church and then because the Prophets and Apostles belonged to the Catholick Church they must belong to them and to no Christians of any Communion but theirs But how I pray comes it to pass that we have less Interest in the Prophets the Apostles and the Primitive Christians than the Roman Church has nay that we have none and they have all One thing I am sure of that if our Doctrines and theirs be severally compared with the Writings of those Renowned Antients it will not be hard to say who are their Children they or we and that they are our Predecessors and Parents and not theirs in all those Points wherein we differ from them And therefore since 't is in behalf of those particulars wherein we have left the Church of Rome that the Prophetic Light of the Old and New Testament is produced as an Argument that the Roman Church has had Prophets we have some reason to think that the Cardinal by producing the Prophets of both Testaments in this Cause has given us a terrible Weapon against himself and by their Prophetick Light discovered that if the Roman Church and ours cannot be parts of the same Church then we who have the Prophets and Apostles with us in the Doctrine we maintain are a True Church exclusively to them and not they to us In the next place we are told of Gregory Thaumaturgus and Anthony and John the Anchoret whose Predictions are related by St. Basil Athanasius and Austin Now Gregory was Bishop of Caesarea Anthony an Aegyptian Monk and John an Anchoret in a certain Wilderness of Aegypt But how all this proves that there have been Prophets in the Roman Church is never to be made out otherwise than by supposing the Greek and the Aegyptian Churches to signify the Roman Church by the same Figure that the Catholick Church and that of Rome are all one The express Testimonies he brings are concerning St. Benedict St. Bernard and St. Francis. St. Benedict told Totila that he should reign nine Years and dye the Tenth which as Gregory saith happened accordingly St. Bernard foretold the Conversion of four unlikely Persons And which was very admirable as Bellarmin affirms when he was desired to pray for the Conversion of a certain Nobleman Fear not says he I shall bury him a perfect Monk in this very place of Claravall Upon which the Cardinal cries out How many Prophecies are there in this one Sentence For that he should one Day be a Monk and persevere therein to the Death and end his Days in a holy sort and that before St. Bernard 's Death and this in Claravall and that he should be buried by St. Bernard 's own Hands are six distinct Prophecies and all of them not without God's singular Providence fulfilled As for St. Francis He admonished the Generals of the Christian Army not to fight upon such a Day with the Saracens for God had revealed to him that upon that Day they would be beaten But they contemning the Admonition of Blessed Francis fought and were overthrown with a miserable Slaughter And many more things of the same kind the Cardinal assures us might be added And if he had none of a better kind than these he ought to have produced his many more and at least given us Number for Weight Now tho I could very willingly give him all his three Stories yet I am loth to be thought so silly as to take every thing of this kind for Gospel which we are told by Bonaventure that wrote the Life of St. Francis or by Gofrid that wrote that part of St. Bernard's Life where the Cardinal finds him a Prophet no nor by Gregory himself in the second Book of his Dialogues concerning the Life and Miracles of Benedict the Abbot The Story of the Blackbird that went off with the Sign of the Cross Dial. lib. 2. cap. 2.4 and that other of the little Black-Boy invisible to all till Benedict saw him that drew away the idle Monk from his Prayers with many more such rank Fables as these are do plainly shew that Pope Gregory had Credulity enough to have lived in the Age of Gofrid or in that which next
prosperous Life hath an honourable Death and Burial for I saw says Solomon the Wicked buried (h) Eccles 8.10 that is as Cardinal Cajetan expounds the Words in such a pompous Sepulchre as transmits an honourable Memory of them to Posterity I grant that the Notes of Divine Vengeance are in some Mens Deaths fairly legible But then as I have before observed from God's Judgments against this or that Person nothing can be concluded against that Church of which they are Members 2. Besides these general Declarations the Scripture further assures us by a particular Instance that a true Church may be without this Mark and that the Enemies of the true Church may have it Thus the Church of Israel was without it and the uncircumcised Philistins had it when the High Priest fell backward and brake his Neck and his two Sons Hophni and Phineas with thirty thousand of the Israelites fell in one day by the Sword of the Philistins (i) 1 Sam. 3. Again when Zedekiah the Defender of the true Church was taken his Nobles slaughtered his Sons slain before his Eyes his Eyes then put out and he carried Captive to Babylon and put in Prison till the day of his Death If this was then a Note of the Church the Babylonians were the only true Church of God for their Enemies had then the most unhappy Ends So contrary is this Note to what we find in Scipture Secondly Nor is it less repugnant to daily Observation and the History of foregoing Ages For 1. All the World can testify that the same kind of Death happens to Men of different yea of opposite Churches That as dies the Christian so dies the Jew as dies the Catholick so dies the Heretick That the Protestant and Papist lie down ALIKE in the Dust to use Job's Phrase (k) Job 21.26 That as they often agree in their Deaths who while they lived were of different Churches so they often widely differ who were united in the same One hath a natural another a violent Death one falls by the Hand of God another by the Hand of his Neighbour one goes off gently in a Calm another is hurried away in a Storm one lives out the Term of Nature another is cut off in the midst of his Days one dies leisurely another is snatched away suddenly one finds a Grave in the Earth another in the Sea another finds none at all but is exposed as a Prey to Beasts and Birds This is so obvious that it is needless to produce Instances for the Confirmation of it 2. Whosoever has any Acquaintance with the History of the Christian Church knows that for several of the first Ages at least the best Men had generally the worst Deaths That the Apostles of our blessed Lord were set forth as a Spectacle to the World suffered the Deaths of the basest Malefactors that St. Peter and St. Andrew were crucified St. James the Just stoned and his Brains knocked out with a Club St. Bartholomew flead alive That not one of the Apostles can be named who did not end his Life by an unnatural Death except only St. John who escaped it by Miracle for he was cast into a Cauldron of boiling Oil. That the first Bishops their Successors followed them in the like Tragical Deaths That St. Clemens Bishop of Rome was thrown into the Bottom of the Sea St. Simeon Bishop of Jerusalem crucified St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch exposed to the Lions St. Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna burnt at a Stake Yea that the Christians for the most part for three hundred Years together met with the most horrid Deaths One was torn in pieces by wild Beasts another was roasted on a Spit another was broiled on a Gridiron another had his Flesh scraped off to the Bones with sharp Shells and Salt and Vinegar poured into his green Wounds and for one of their bloody Persecutors an hundred Christians may be found who died a terrible Death These were the happy Ends that the first and best Christians were blessed with happy indeed if we respect the Cause for which they died and the blessed Reward they were crowned with but none ever more unhappy in the Eye of the World. As they had been of all Men the most miserable had they had Hope in this Life only so if this Note be true their Hope could not have reached beyond it 3. Nor is this Note more repugnant to Scripture and Experience than it is to Reason One prime fundamental Principle of Reason is That Contradictions cannot be true or that the same thing cannot be and not be This we are as sure of as that we our selves are or that any thing else is whatsoever therefore it be from whence it plainly follows that Contradictions may be true we are as sure that it is false and therefore that the Note now under consideration is so because if it be true the most palpable Contradictions will be true also Of those many that offer themselves I shall mention a few As 1. That that was a false Church which was most certainly the true Church For if the burning alive of Valens the Arian Emperor was a certain Sign that the Arian Faith is false the burning alive of many of the first Christians is as certain a Note that the Primitive Faith is false If it follows that Manichaeus was a damnable Heretick because he was flead alive must we not conclude that St. Bartholomew was as bad and by consequence all the holy Apostles because he suffered the same kind of Death 2. That a Church remaining the same without any Change in Doctrine Worship or Discipline may be to day a false Church to morrow the only true Church So the Church of Israel was a false one when the High Priest fell backward and brake his Neck within a few days after when the Hand of the Lord was against the Philistines and they were smitten with a foul Disease of which they miserably died it was a true Church again Thus the Church of Rome in the Year 1656 when a dreadful Pestilence for that is one of Bellarmin's unhappy Ends swept away three hundred thousands in three Months time in the Kingdom of Naples and made great havock at Rome and Genoa †Athanas Kircheri Scrutin Physico-Med Contag Luis quae dicitur Pestis P. 426. was a false Church but in the Year 1665 when the like dreadful Pestilence raged in London it became a true Church again Yea 3. That there is no one Church in the World but by this Note it may be and it may not be the true Church because the Opposers and the Defenders of any one and the same Church may have both of them unhappy and both of them happy Ends. Now as the Opposers have unhappy Ends it is a true Church as the Defenders have unhappy Ends it is by the fourth thing premised a false one Again as the Opposers have an happy End it is a false Church as the Defenders have
himself seems to be sensible of the weakeness of many of them when he acknowledges That the Moderns commonly assign but Four Ibid. and those taken out of the Constantinopolitan Creed where the Church is declared to be One Holy Catholick and Apostolick And these alone without the help of any other fictitious supernumerary Notes are abundantly sufficient to demonstrate that any Church to which they do belong is not certainly a true Church And therefore to gain credit to those he has thought fit to add he tells us they may be some way reduc'd to these Four. But for my part I do not understand how it can possibly be done And not to mention any of the rest I will instance only in this last Note I am about to examine Temporal Felicity which he cautiously restrains to Success in War for ought that I can perceive is not by any means reduceable to any of the Four. It will not evidence the Vnity of the Church for if this Note be allowed then Mahomet the Great Solyman the Magnificent Gustavus Adolphus and divers others were all good Catholicks in their time and instead of One we must have as many Churches as there have been Fortunate and Victorious Princes in the World that have fought for the propagation or defence of the most different Religions Neither is it any better Argument for Sanctity unless to such as can esteem Gain to be Godliness and account Turks and Saracens Holy Men. Much less can Catholicism be proved from it since good Success was never known to attend always upon the same side and the Catholick Church and Universal Empire whatever ambitious Men may dream are never like to be the same thing And least of all can we from hence gather any Church to be Apostolical The Primitive Christians were unacquainted with the Glories of Worldly Triumphs They subdued the Nations but it was with Spiritual Weapons They conquered the remotest parts of the Earth but it was by the Holiness of their Doctrine the Blamelessness of their Lives and the greatness of their Sufferings The Apostles did not march out to convert the World with Crosses on their Breasts and Javelins in their Hands One of them once drew a Sword in his Masters Quarrel but was presently commanded to put it up again with a severe Commination So that I do not see to which of the Four received Notes this of Temporal Felicity can be tolerably reduced I shall therefore examine it as it stands by it self But by the way I cannot but observe how subtilly the Cardinal has endeavoured to secure this Note which he must needs know was very liable to many material Exceptions And at once to prevent them all he tells us roundly That Catholick Princes never adhered unto God heartily but that they most easily triumph'd over their Enemies This he very confidently affirms but without any offer at a Proof But yet this will furnish him with an Evasion that may be always ready For whenever any of those Princes which he calls Catholick shall be shewn to have been unfortunate in their Adventures it may be quickly replied that they did not then heartily adhere unto God. And the contrary may be asserted with equal Assurance and so here is a Controversy started about a Matter of Fact which all the Men upon Earth are never able to decide For the Intentions and inward Dispositions of Mens Minds are discernible to none but the Searcher of Hearts And how then can this be pretended to be a Note by which we should know the true Church when the sole Condition upon which the Evidence of it is made to depend is to us altogether impossible to be known And this alone might be sufficient to evince the vanity of it but yet I shall endeavour to make it appear further by shewing I. That Temporal Felicity cannot be esteemed a Note of the Church II. That the Instances the Cardinal brings do not prove it III. And that there are many Examples of Infidels and Hereticks as he accounts them who have been as prosperous and successful in the World as any of his Catholicks If these things may be severally made out then the Church of Rome is like to get but little Advantage by this fifteenth Note I. And that Temporal Felicity cannot be esteemed a Note of the Church seems evident enough and that principally for these Reasons 1. Because God has no where promised it in all the holy Gospel and it is no better than vain Arrogance and a fond kind of Presumption to make that a Mark of the Church which is neither essential to the Constitution of it nor yet inseparably annexed to it by virtue of any Divine Promise The Jews indeed were encouraged in their Obedience by the Proposal of many Temporal Blessings and if they did faithfully and conscientiously observe the Law they were assur'd of great and miraculous Victories over their Enemies Five of you shall chase an hundred Lev. 26.8 and an hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight But Christianity which is a more Spiritual Religion that is established upon better Promises and has more full and express Revelations of everlasting Happiness than they had has no ground at all to flatter it self with the foolish Hopes of external Felicities and worldly Glories I cannot find one word in all the New Testament upon which such an idle Imagination can be probably grounded Nay on the contrary Distress and Afflictions seem to be the most ordinary Portion that our blessed Lord has been pleased to allot the best of his Followers in this Life He told his Disciples Joh. 16.33 2 Tim. 3.12 In the World ye shall have Tribulation Yea and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer Persecution The Expressions are plain and many more might be brought to the same purpose And if they could all be warrantably restrained to some certain Persons and Times yet they would afford but a very feeble Argument to prove that Temporal Felicity was a Note of the Church and if any better can be produced it is more than the Cardinal has done His Error in this is very like that of the Jews who anciently did and still do expect a Triumphant Worldly Kingdom in the days of their Messias But they are far the more excusable for as I said they had some Promises of Temporal Blessings and so might have some colour for such a Mistake But it is hard to frame any Apology for one who professes to believe in a Crucified Saviour that shall distinguish his Church by the same Character which they did without the least shew of a Promise to support it It is to be fear'd when he invented this that his eyes might be something dazled with Purple Robes and Red Hats or his Fancy intoxicated with the false Glories of extirpating Hereticks by force of Arms. 2. But be that as it will this Note must fail him again because for several Ages together the