A DISCOURSE Concerning the NECESSITY OF REFORMATION With Respect to the Errors and Corruptions OF THE Church of Rome AMONG the many Errors of the Church of Rome there is one especially that puts a baâ— not only to the Reformation of her self but of all other Churches which depend upon her and that is the Doctrine of her Infallibility If she cannot err neither she nor any other Church that follows her conduct can stand in need of being reform'd for where there can be no Error there can be nothing amiss and where there can be nothing amiss there can be no need of Reformation 'T is therefore needful to remove this Prejudice in order to the clearing of the way to the ensuing Discourse When the Romanists assert that their Church is Infallible and theirs only we may in reason expect that they should produce good Proof that their Church is so highly privileged above all other Churches This they say they do and their Proofs they tell us are so convincing that they may pass for no less than Demonstrations But alas when we come to examine them we find our selves strangely disappointed instead of Demonstrations we meet with nothing that amounts to so much as Probability Their pretended Proofs are taken from Scripture from Reason and from the Authority of the ancient Church I. Those from Scripture are many but all of them as impertinent as that of their Angelical Doctor to prove that all men are not equally bound to have an explicite Faith because 't is said Job 1. 14. that the Oxen were plowing and the Asses were feeding besides them For First They do not prove that any Church now in being is Infallible Secondly Much less that the Church of Rome is First They do not prove that any Church now in being is Infallible I say now in being because we grant that there was a time when even particular Churches were in their Guides Infallible viz. while the Apostles liv'd and took upon them the Government of particular Churches And many of those Scriptures which the Romanists produce for the Infallibility of their present Church peculiarly relate to that time and to those Persons For instance these Promises The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name he shall teach you all things John 1â— 26. and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you I have many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he shall guide you into all Truth for the shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall Joh. 16. 12 13. hear that shall â—e speak and he shall shew you things to come 'T is plain that these Promises are to be limited to the Apostles and those Disciples only who personally convers'd with our Saviour because they were made to those to whom he himself had spoken and to whose remembrance the Holy Ghost was to bring those things he had before told them to those to whom he had many more things to say which they were not yet able to bear to those who had been with Christ from the beginning to those from whom Christ was now going away and whom he had before told of his departure to those to whom the Holy Ghost was to shew things to come a Privilege which the present Roman Church does not I think so much as pretend to And for those other Scriptures which extend to succeeding Ages tho they do for the most part concern the Catholick only and not any particular Church yet they neither assert nor promise any such thing as absolute Infallibility Let it be supposed that St. Paul calls the Church the Pillar and Ground of Truth for these words may as well be connected with 1 Tim. 3. 1â— and apply'd to that Summary of Christian Doctrine which follows must the meaning needs be that the Church cannot err May it not justly lay claim to this Title 1. If it do not actually err tho it is fallible and may err If nothing may be call'd a Pillar that is capable of any defect St. Peters Church in Rome will have no Pillar left to support it Or 2. If it doth not err in things necessary to Salvation That may be truly call'd a Pillar that upholds all that is needful to the being of the House tho it do not support every little part but suffers here and there a Tile or a Stone to fall to the ground Or 3. If together with all necessary Truths it gives support to some Errors As we frequently see those Pillars that uphold the Building together with it they also support other things that are laid upon it and are no better than a nusance and incumbrance to it And such a Pillar of Truth the Romanists must be forc'd to grant the Universal Church hath sometimes been for has it not for some ages maintain'd those Doctrines which the present Church of Rome condemns as erroneous Tho the truth is the Church here spoken of was that in which Timothy was directed how to behave himself and that was the Church of Ephesus or in the largest sense that of Asia of Mr. Rycaâ—t's present State of the Greek Church p. 54. which Ephesus was the Metropolis and that this Church hath fundamentally err'd must needs be granted there being not one family of Christians now to be found in Ephesus From that Promise of our Saviour that the gates of Hell shall Matth. 16 18. not prevail against his Church They can by no means infer Infallibility till they have first prov'd that the gates of Hell prevail against every society yea against every person that is not infallible And when that shall be once prov'd the gates of Hell will be so largely extended and those who enter in at them so numerous that 't is to be fear'd St. Peter will never more be put to the trouble of opening the gates of Heaven for any man 'T is true Christ hath promised to be with his Church always even Matt. 28. 20. to the end of the World But if all those with whom Christ is present are infallible then every sincere Christian in the world is so and then what will become of the Popes Prerogative When the poorest Mechanick in case he be but an honest Christian will be as infallible a Guide of Controversies as he is now by his Flatterers pretended to be And as little to this purpose is that other Promise of our Saviour Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them For if Christ's being in the midst of Matt. 18. 20. them does make them infallible since 't is sure he will never be worse than his word 't is also certain that if but two or three only shall meet together in his name in London they will be when so met together infallible And if Infallibility may be had at home and at
that he should be clearly known If there be then such a Judge is not necessary for that means cannot be necessary without which the end may be attained 1. If Controversies which create disturbance to the Church cannot be determin'd without an infallible Umpire 't is also necessary for the determining of them not only that there be such an Umpire but that we be assured who he is for in this case not to be known and not to be are in effect the same thing so that let there be Judges infallible never so many our Controversies will be never the nearer an end unless we are able to discern who they are Now I cannot imagine at present how they can be known except one of these two ways only either by being clearly revealed by God in Scripture or by God's bearing witness to their Infallibility by Signs and Wonders But God hath neither expresly nor by evident consequence declared in Scripture that he hath any where constituted such a Judge much less hath he told us who he is and where we may find him till therefore they who pretend to it prove their Infallibility by unquestionable Miracles let them not expect that we should take them for such Nor can they in reason blame us for this since the disagreement in this point is so great among themselves that of all other questions it seems most to stand in need of an infallible Judge to determine it 2. If Controversies may be decided by other means then what need of an infallible Judge That cannot be necessary to an end without which the end may be obtain'd And that Controversies may be otherways determin'd is certain because they have been How were all the Controversies decided and the Heresies suppress'd which sprang up in the early Age of the Christian Church Were the Gnosticks the Valentinians the Novatians the Macedonians the Donatists the Arians suppress'd by those who took upon them to be Infallible No such thing was in those days talked of the Bishops and Councils that confuted them did not so much as pretend to any such Privilege The only means they had recourse to was the infallible Rule the Holy Scriptures this was the Judge to which in all their Questions they appeal'd and those who are so perverse as not to be determin'd by it should Elias come and take the Chair neither will they be determin'd by his Sentence for nothing can be objected to render the Scripture ineffectual to this end but the same may with equal force be objected against the Definitions of an infallible Judge And therefore 3. An infallible Judge is no such infallible means for the ending of Controversies as is by the Romanists supposed For 1. When there was such a Judge in the Jewish Church I mean our Blessed Saviour Did his Authority put an end to the Disputes between the Pharisees and the Sadduces and other Sects among them Yea did not that Church then fall into the most damnable Error by rejecting this infallible Teacher 'T will be said the reason of that was because they did not own his Infallibility Be it so and may not then any other infallible Guide be rejected Can it be imagin'd that any other Person 's Infallibility should ever be attested with more unquestionable Credentials than his was But 2. Neither those who have been own'd for Infallible have been so successful to this purpose among them who have own'd them under this Character For 1. The Apostles were thought Infallible by those Churches which they planted and yet Errors and Heresies sprang up in them and they were divided into Parties And tho St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians had endeavour'd to reduce them to Unity yet we find by his second Epistle that that had not put an end to their Divisions Those who know they have a Guide that cannot err may go astray as much as others in case they refuse to follow his conduct 2. The Romanists tell us that their Church cannot err and if they do indeed believe what they profess it will be as effectual for the ending of Differences among themselves as if it were indeed Infallible And yet are there not many Controversies among them And tho they upbraid us with our Divisions are not theirs as many And some of them such as are by the differing Parties reckon'd even Matters of Faith If then their Infallibility were such a Sovereign Cure of Divisions how comes it to pass that no Reconciliation is made between the dissenting Parties among themselves The truth is so far is their pretended infallible Judge from lessening that he encreases their Controversies for no sooner was he talked of but instead of deciding those that were already many were raised that were never before heard of And therefore 3. Such a work of the Holy Spirit upon mens Hearts as would make them meek and humble and charitable and heavenly minded sincere Lovers of Truth desirous to know the will of God and resolv'd to do it would be an expedient much more available for the healing of our Divisions and promoting of Peace than Infallibility of Judgment For from whence come Wars and Fightings among us come they not hence even from our Lusts Scarce ever was any Error broach'd that created disturbance to the Church but 't is manifest it took its rise from and was foster'd and maintain'd either by the Lust of the Flesh or the Lust of the Eye or the Pride of Life Let but mens fleshly worldly and devilish Lusts be once mortified and our Differences will be composed or if any remain they will be such as will be destructive neither of Peace nor Charity Should we therefore argue at the same absurd rate that our Adversuries do might we not as fairly conclude that God hath made every man Pious and Humble and a Doer of his Will as that he hath made one Man or one Church Infallible But now if that which is supposed by the Romanists were all granted If it were necessary to the Peace of the Church that all Controversies should be decided if they cannot be decided without some infallible Umpire and if it were certain that such an Umpire would give a final determination to them yet doth it hence follow that the Church of Rome must be that Umpire Suppose the Church of England were Infallible might it not be as serviceable to these Intents and Purposes III. This pretended Infallibility of the Church of Rome hath as little support from the Doctrine of the Antient Christian Church as it hath from Scripture and Reason Tho the Romanists are wont among those who will take their word to boast much of the Authority of the Fathers yet that they are not able to produce so much as one who speaks to their purpose may be reasonably concluded from the Performances of Cardinal Bellarmine in this matter * Bell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 4. all whose Allegations are so impertinent that the very reading of
IV. who was deposed by it If therefore a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot err it is infallibly certain and according to the Principles of the Church of Rome an Article of Faith That the Reformation of the Church was necessary Should we now pass from the Clergy to the Laity from Bishops Cardinals Popes and Councils to Secular States Kings and Emperors we should find That they were also highly sensible of the Corruptions and Abuses Usurpations and Oppressions of the Church of Rome and many of them zealous and active in their endeavours to reform them What great complaints were made by many of our Kings of England against the Encroachments of Rome How often did they petition the Pope for a redress but finding no relief from thence Edward the Third and Richard the Second did in part right themselves and their Subjects by the Statutes of Provisoes and Praemunire * 27 Edw. 3. c. 1. 25 Edw. 3. 16 Rich. 2. c. 5. 13 R. 2. c. 3. See Cook upon these Statutes Institut par 3. c. 56. Charles VII King of France as a Fence to the French Church against the Mischiefs which flowed from the Court of Rome set up the pragmatick Sanction which when Pope Pius II. endeavoured to overthrow he appealed from him to a General Council (b) Richer Hist Concil general l. 4. par 1. c. 1. p. 36 37 c. Lewis XI was indeed decoyed by the Popes fair Promises to revoke that Sanction but soon after seeing his errour he commanded it again to be observed * Richer Hist Concil general l. 4. c. 1. s 13. After the death of Lewis the three Estates of the Kingdom assembled at Tours besought Charles VIII who succeeded him to maintain the Pragmatick in its full strength †Id. s 15. Which he not only consented to but resolved to make a further progress in reforming the Church and to that purpose consulted the College of Divines at Paris (c) Id l. 4. c. 2. Lewis XII who followed next coyned his Money with this Inscription Perdam Babylonis nomen I will destroy the name of Babylon (d) Thâ—ani Hist l. 1 p 11. by which he plainly declared what his Judgment then was of Rome The zeal of Sigismund the Emperour for the Reformation was abundantly manifest by his indefatigable pains in procuring the Council of Constance and assisting in it By protecting the Council of Basil against the attempts of Eugenius and by labouring with other Princes to promote it but especially by that Reformation he made in many things himself Maximilian I. made bitter Complaints of many scandalous Abuses of the Roman Court and commanded the redress of them under pain of his heavy displeasure (g) Fascic rerum expetend aâ— fugiend s 170. The Emperor Ferdinand proposed to the Council of Trent by his Embassadors twenty Points concerning Worship Manners and Discipline which he desired might be reformed (h) History of the Council of Trent l. 6. p. 513. and in a Letter to the Pope and another to his Legates in the Council earnestly pressed for an effectual Reformation (i) l. 7. p. 682. The Princes of Germany at the Diet at Nuremberg in the Year 1523. in their Answer to Cherogat the Popes Nuncio insisted upon the reforming of Abuses and correcting of many Errors and Vices which by long tract of time had taken deep root for the effecting of which they demanded a free and general Council And those intolerable burdens as they called them laid upon them by the Court of Rome they reduced to an hundred Heads (*) Sleid. com l. 4. Fascic rerum expetend ac fugiend History of the Council of Trent l. 1. which they called the Hundred Grievances of the German Nation and presented them to the Pope protesting that they neither would nor could endure them any longer To conclude this Head to so monstrous a deformed state was the Western Church degenerated that the Prince the Priest the Clergy the Laity Men of all Conditions and of all Nations Yea if the infallible Oracle Pope Adrian the Sixth spoke truth the whole World groaned after a Reformation (k) Richer l. 4. par 2. p. 130. Secondly The necessity of which will be further evident by taking a particular view of the Corruptions and Errors themselves which for methods sake and to avoid confusion shall be reduced to four general Heads 1. Corruptions in Doctrine 2. In Worship 3. In Manners 4. In Discipline In treating of which it will plainly appear that their Errors were not small and of light importance but so gross and in matters of such high moment that there was an absolute necessity of reforming them 1. Gross Corruptions in Doctrine Many Doctrines were imposed as Articles of Faith which have not the least Foundation in Scripture Reason or Primitive Antiquity and many others which are not only Strangers to all these but contrary to the common sense and Experience of Mankind I shall instance in some of them 1. The Infallibility of the Bishop or Church of Rome We have before seen that this Doctrine hath no Foundation in Scripture and by consequence can be no Article of Faith Yea that there is no pretence of Reason why the Bishop and Church of Rome should be infallible rather than the Bishop and Church of Constantinople and all those fine flourishes they are wont to make of the expediency of this Doctrine for the ending of Controversies and the safe conducting of Souls to Heaven may be as well accounted for by making the Church of England or any other Church infallible That no such Doctrine was owned by the antient Church we may be assured both because the Fathers in those many Heresies which in their times arose never betook themselves to this easie and compendious remedy for the suppressing of them but chose the more tedious and laborious way of confuting them by Scripture by Reason and Catholick Tradition and because the Asian and African Bishops did in some Points so resolutely dissent from the Roman Bishop and Church that they chose rather to break Communion than to comply with them therein Had any such thing in those dayes been believed would the African Illyrican and Dalmatian Bishops have renounced Communion with Vigilius Bishop of Rome for consenting to the condemnation of the three Chapters (a) Petrus de Marca dissertat de Epist Vigilii s 8. Would the blessed Polycarpus have dissented from Pope Eleutherius Irenaeus from Pope Victor S. Cyprian from Pope Stephen Can any Man who is not forsaken of his Reason imagine That such Men as these would have behaved themselves so towards the Pope as they did had they not thought themselves as infallible Judges as he But what need I contend for this when such great men of the Church of Rome as Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica Gerson Chancellor of Paris Almain Alphonsus de Castro yea Pope Adrian VI. himself teach us as even
Bellarmine himself acknowledges (b) Bâ—ll de Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 2. that the Pope may not only err but be a Heretick yea and teach Heresie too if he define without a General Council And when a General Council says 't is certain the Pope may err (c) Concilii Basil Respons Synodal de Authorit Concil general supra Pap. Richer l. 3. c. 2. S. 6. And what that Council says of the Pope is experimentally verified of a Council confirm'd by the Pope as hath been before prov'd Nor is this Doctrine to be rejected meerly because it is notoriously False but more especially because of its horrid Consequences as it opens the door to and gives protection to any other the most palpable Error both in Doctrine and Practice For if this be once granted there is no remedy but we must believe Darkness to be Light if the Church of Rome says it is so Yea a Thomas Becket a Garnet or any other the most execrable Traitor must be worshipt for a Saint when the Pope is pleas'd to canonize him 2. Their Doctrine of the Popes sovereign Power over the universal Church That every Christian under pain of Damnation is bound to be subject to him that no Appeals may be made from him that he alone is the supream Judge over all Persons in all Causes Ecclesiastical but that he himself can be judged by no man This Doctrine hath not only been defin'd by Popes themselves as well as their Flatterers and many hundreds of years together put in execution by them but hath moreover been establish'd by such Councils as are by the Romanists accounted General (d) Concil Florent p. 85â— tom 8. apud Binium Concil Lateranens V. Sess 11. And yet is not only destitute of all Authority from Scripture but much may be found in Scripture against it And not only in Scripture but 't is plain from Church History that the Bishops of Rome in the early Ages of Christianity had no Jurisdiction beyond their own Province that for the first 300 years there were but two only viz. Victor and Stephen that took upon them to censure Persons that were of another Diocess and that they themselves were severely censured for it by other Bishops That the eight first General Councils were all both call'd and confirm'd not by Popes but by the Emperors (e) Richer Hist Concil general l. 1. c. 13. p. 753. Review of the Council of Trent l. 3. c. 1. 2. That the Pope hath been oppos'd in many Councils and many Synodical Decrees have been pass'd full sore against his will (f) As in the Council of Chalcedon the second at Constantinople the Council of Constance of Basil c. That he himself was subject to the Laws of the Church and upon his transgression of them obnoxious to censure no less than other Bishops That no Appeals were allow'd to him by the African Bishops That by the ancient Canons every Bishop did order the Affairs of his own Diocess without dependence upon or Subordination to the Bishop of Rome and that all Causes were finally to be determin'd by Provincial Councils (g) Concil Constantinopol 1 Can. 2. Concil Nicaen 1 Can. 5. That many Popes have been anathematiz'd by other Bishops and many judg'd condemn'd and depos'd by Synods All which and many more things which might be mention'd are plainly inconsistent with this pretended universal Empire of the Pope But if nothing could be alleg'd from Scripture or the Doctrine or Practice of the antient Church to the contrary yet the intolerable Evils which unavoidably flow from it cannot but render this Doctrine detestable to all those who have any sincere Love either to Truth or Goodness For whereever this Doctrine is receiv'd a man must think himself in duty bound to entertain Error and to reject the Truth to put Virtue for Vice and Vice for Virtue in case the Pope require him so to do And that the Pope not only may but for many Ages hath commanded men so to do the sad experience of the Christian World is a proof too unanswerable 3. The Doctrine of the Popes Dominion over temporal Princes That if Kings and Emperors oppose themselves to him or turn Hereticks he may depose them absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and give away their Kingdoms to whomsoever he pleases This exorbitant Power hath been challenged by the Pope for many successive Ages (h) Dictates of Greg. VII Dictate 9. That all Princes should kiss the Popes Feet Dictate 12. That the Pope may depose the Emperor Dictate 27. That he may absolve the Subjects of wicked Princes from their Allegiance Binius tom 7. part 1. p. 362. Richer l. 1. c. 13. And when opportunity hath serv'd hath been frequently put in practice by them So Gregory VII excommunicated the Emperor Henry IV. and gave away his Kingdoms to Rudolphus Duke of Sweden (i) Baron an 1080. n. 8. 12. Gregory IX excommunicated the Emperor Frederick II. and absolv'd his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance (k) Bullarium Rom. Tom. 1. p. 89 90. Pope Paul III. excommunicated and deposed Henry VIII King of England and commanded all his Subjects under pain of a Curse to withdraw their Obedience from him (l) Bullar Rom. Tom. 1. p. 514. Pope Pius V. and Gregory XIII damn'd and depos'd Q. Elizabeth and absolv'd her Subjects from their Allegiance (m) Camdens Elizabeth This Doctrine and Practice has been defended by their learned Cardinals Baronius and Perron by their School-men Canonists and by the whole Order of Jesuits Yea 't is no more than what was decreed by divers such Councils as are generally own'd for lawful Representatives of their Church As by the third Lateran Council under Pope Alexander III. (n) Cap. 27. Relaxatos autem se noverint à debito Fidelitatis c. And by the fourth Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III. (o) Si vero Dominus temporalis requisitus monitus ab Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit c. Eadem nihilominus lege servata circa eos qui non habent Dominos principales c. 3. And tho some Romanists are now asham'd to own it yet no less a man than Lessius tells us that if Kings may not be deposed by the Pope then of necessity must the General Council of Lateran have err'd But what can be more manifest than that this Doctrine is contradictory to the Holy Scripture Which tells us in express terms that the King is supream (q) 1 Epist Pet. 2. 13. and commands every Soul to be subject to the highest civil Powers (r) Rom. 13. 1. Nothing can be more repugnant to the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers who taught that the Emperor was the supream Power on Earth that he was subject to God only and that all other Persons were put in subjection under him (Å¿) Tertull. Apolog c. 30. ad Scapuâ—â—m c. 2. that neither Prophet
of the Law and the Gospel let him be accursed (c) Proinde sive de Christo â—ive de ejus Ecclesâ—s â—ive de â—uacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitaâ—que nostram c. Aug. contra liâ—eras Petil. l. 3. c. 6. 'T is true the Fathers in their Contests with Hereticks do frequently press them with the Tradition of the Catholick Church But then it must be remembered that the Hereticks against whom they disputed were either such as denied the Authority of the whole or a great part of the Scripture or such as insisted upon Tradition and pleaded that in defence of their Errors that therefore they might beat them at their own Weapons the Fathers confuted them by Tradition too But they never set up Tradition as another word of God or sought thereby to establish any thing as an Article of Faith or a piece of necessary Worship that they thought was not to be found in the Scripture As the Church of Rome does which under pretence of Apostolical Tradition obtrudes upon the Christian World as Matters of necessary Belief and Practice such things as are but of yesterday such things as are doubtful and uncertain such as are childish and triâ—â—ing yea such as are false and impious plainly contrary to Scripture and to Primitive Doctrine and Practice That I may not be over tedious I forbear to mention many other Errors in Doctrine and proceed to the next general Head of Corruptions 2. The Church of Rome hath not only err'd in Doctrines of Faith but hath also grosly â—werv'd from that Rule of Worship which Christ hath given us and from the Practice of the Primitive Church and set up a Worship of their own invention in direct opposition thereunto I shall instance in some Particulars First In having their publick Worship in an unknown Tongue This is expresly condemn'd by our Church as a Practice plainly repugnant to the Word of God and to the Custom of the Primitive Church (d) It is a thing plainly repugnant to the â—ord of God and the Custom of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to administer the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the People Aâ—tâ—cles of Religion Anno 1562. Art 24. That it is plainly repugnant to the Word of God no man can be ignorant who knows what is written in the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which the Apostle so directly and with such variety of Arguments confutes this unreasonable Service that 't is as easie to make midnight and noâ—nday meet as to reconcile them one to the other Nor is it less contrary to the Custom of the Primitive Church That in the first Ages of Christianity every Christian Church had the publick Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments in their own Tongue I need not prove by citing the Testimonies of those Persons who liv'd in those Ages because the learned men of the Church of Rome do themselves confess it which is a Proof more convincing than a thousand other Witnesses Out of many which offer themselves I shall produce a few whose Authority is beyond exception Their great Aquinas grants That it was madness in the Primitive Church to speak in a Tongue not understood because they were rude in Ecclesiastical Rites and did not know those things that were done unless they were expounded But now saith he that all are instructed tho all things are spoken in the Latin Tongue they know what is done in the Church (e) Aqâ—in Comment in 1. ad Corinth c. 14. Sect. 5. Cardinal Bellarmine grants That in the Primitive times because the Christians were few all sang together in the Church and answer'd in the divine Offices but afterward the People encreasing it was left to the Clergy alone to perform Prayers and Praises in the Church (f) Bell. de â—erbâ—â—ei â—â—â— c. 16. Mr. Harding to this Exception of the Protestants S. Paul requires that the People give assent to the Priest by answering to his Prayers made in the Congregation returns this answer Verily in the Primitive Church this was necessary when the Faith was a learning and therefore the Prayers were made then in a common Tongue known to the People for cause of their further instruction who being of late converted to the Faith and of Painims made Christians had need in all things to be taught c. And again Whereas S. Paul seemeth to disallow praying with â— strange Tongue in the common Assembly because of want of edifying and to esteem the utterance of five words or Sentences with understanding of his meaning that the rest may be instructed thereby more than ten thousand words in a strange and unknown Tongue all this is to be referned to the State of that time which is much unlike the State of the Church we be now in They needed instruction we be not ignorant of the chief Pâ—ints of Religion They were to be taught in all things we come not to Church specially and chiefly to be taught at the Service but to pray and to be taught by preaching Their Prayer was not available for lack of Faith and therefore was it to be made in the vulgar Tongue for encrease of Faith our Faith will stand us in better stead if we give our selves to devout Prayer g Artic. 3. Divis 28 30. Thus we see he grants that the publick Prayers were in the Apostolical times in the vulgar Tongue and that 't was necessary they should be but nothing can be more false and absurd than the reason he gives why 't was necessary then and not now Add to these the infallible Testimony of Pope Gregory VII who tho he would not permit the Celebration of Divine Offices in the Sclavonian Tongue yet confess'd that the Primitive Church had them in the vulgar Language h History of the Council of Trent l. 6. p. 578. So that by the Confession of the Romanists themselves the Church of England has in this Point no further departed from the Church of Rome than the Church of Rome hath from the ancient Church If they can instance in any Church in the World that for above five hundred years after Christ worship'd God in a Language that the People did not understand we will yield the Cause And may it not justly be matter of amazement that for the serving of some poor worldly ends the Church of Rome should introduce a Practice that renders the Worship of God useless and insignificant That destroys not only the end of Prayer but is inconsistent with the nature of it That is so absurd and unreasonable that S. Paul thought they deserv'd to be reckon'd Mad-men who in such sort pray to God i 1 Cor. 14. 21. So evident is this that many great men of the Church of Rome acknowledge it would be better to have the publick Offices in the vulgar Tongue So Cardinal Cajetan confesses That according to the
Elements such an incredible Change were wrought yet no man can be sure that it is indeed wrought and by consequence that he is not guilty of foul Idolatry The reason is evident because upon the Principles of the Church of Rome the Consecration depends upon such a number of Uncertainties that no man can ever be certain that it is duly made For if he be not a true Priest that Consecrates if he do not pronounce the words of Consecration and pronounce them aright if he do not intend to consecrate but to abuse the People then no Consecration follows and consequently no substantial change is effected And if the Roman Doctrine be true is it possible for the People or for the Priest himself to know that he is a true Priest For no man can be so who is not baptiz'd by a Priest whose intention was right in baptizing him and ordained by a Bishop who intended to do what the Church does And who can tell whether the Priest that baptiz'd him or the Bishop that ordain'd him had a right Intention And can any man tell besides the Priest himself that consecrates whether he pronounces the words of Consecration or pronounces them as he ought when the words are utter'd with so low a voice that none can hear what he says And none certainly but himself and the Searcher of Hearts can tell whether the Priest when he pretends to consecrate may not intend to mock the People Now in these cases no Consecration follows but the Bread remains Bread still and a Wafer only is worship'd instead of Christ And if any say these cases are rare Let a Bishop of the Church of Rome answer (i) Bishop of Minori History of the Council of Trent l. 2. p. 241. Would to God says he they were so and that in this corrupt Age we had not cause to doubt they were many But suppose they are very few or but only one Let there be a knave Priest who faineth and hath not an intention to administer the true Baptism to a Child who after being a grown man is created Bishop of a great City and liveth many years in that charge so that he hath ordained a great part of the Priests it must be said that he being not baptiz'd is not ordain'd nor they ordained who are promoted by him So that in that great City there will be neither Eucharist nor Confession because they cannot be without the Sacrament of order nor order without a true Bishop neither can he receive order who is not baptized Behold millions of Nullities of Sacraments by the malice of one Minister in one Act only So many uncertainties does Consecration depend upon in the Church of Rome that it may seem highly probable that not one Sacrament in an hundred is duly consecrated and by consequence not one Person in an hundred that worships the Host but in so doing according to their own Doctrine he gives that worship to Bread that is due to God only It will not save them harmless nor so much as excuse them to say that they verily believe it not to be Bread but the very Son of God since if they do so their mistake must be grosly wilful there being no such exact likeness between Christ and a bit of Bread that any Man can mistake the one for the other who is not resolved so to do 6. To make a Picture of God is forbidden by God himself in the Holy Scripture Take ye therefore good heed to your selves saith God to the Jews for ye saw no manner of similitude in the day the Lord spake to you in Horeb out of the midst of the Fire lest ye corrupt your selves and make you a graven Image c. (a) Dâ—ut 4. 15 16. 'T is repugnant to the very nature of God who is a Spirit and can no more be represented by a bodily shape than a Thought can It is an intolerable reproach to and infinitely derogates from his peerless perfections It was judged an absurd and a wicked thing by the antient Christians as Cassander confesses and quotes S. Augustin for the proof of it (b) Cassand Consuâ—t Art 2â— We believe saith that Father speaking of Christ that he sits at the right Hand of God the Father and yet it is not to be thought that God the Father is circumscribed by a humane shape that those that think of him should conceive that he hath either a right-side or a left or for that the Father is said to sit is it to be supposed that it is done with bended Knees lest we fall into that Sacrilege for which the Apostle abhorrs those who changed the Glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of corruptible Man For such an Image of God it is unlawful for a Christian to place in the Temple much more detestable to place it in his Heart (c) Aug. de Fide Symbolo c. 7. Which Words plainly shew what the Judgment of Christians in this matter was four hundred Years after Christ It was condemned by the wiser sort of Heathens as a thing altogether unsuitable to the Divine Nature Yea that very Council which decreed that the Image of Christ and the Saints should be worshipped thought it not only unlawful but absurd and impossible to make an Image of that Being which is Spiritual Invisible and Incomprehensible (d) Concil Nicaen 2. Actione 4 Actione 7. in Epist Synodica ad Constantinum Iren. And Durandus one of their learned Schoolmen says It is a foolish thing to make Images to represent God (e) l. 3. dist 9. q. 2. And yet the practice of the Church of Rome not only now but many Years before the Reformation was to picture God the Father and the adorable Trinity and so generally hath this practice obtained that Bellarmine makes that an Argument to prove the lawfulness of it (f) Bell. de Imagin l. 2. c. 9. For now saith he such kind of Images are almost every where received and it is not credible That the Church would universally tolerate that which is unlawful He says they are almost every where received and that the Church did universally tolerate them but in that he says they are now received he plainly grants that they were antiently rejected 7. Another gross Corruption in the Worship of Rome which rendred the Reformation necessary was the Worship of Images This also the Church of England hath condemned as Idolatrous and proved it to be so by the Authority of Gods Holy Word and by the Testimonies of the antient Fathers (a) Homily against the peril of Idolatry I shall not mention the many Scriptures in which God prohibits and expresses his abhorrency of this sort of Worship and dreadfully threatens those who practise it for that would be to transcribe a great part of the Bible Whosoever can reconcile it with the second Commandment he need not doubt but he may make Perjury and Murther and Theft and false
Witnessing to become Vertues Which is indeed no more than the Church of Rome does For to break Faith with Hereticks to rob and falsely accuse them yea and to murther them too are in their Divinity great Virtues and necessary Duties So far were the Primitive Christians from worshipping of Images that many of the most learned of them thought it was a sin so much as to make them and others who did not scruple the making them yet thought it unlawful to have them in Churches though for no other use than Ornament And when some in the fourth Century thought they might be permitted in Churches they notwithstanding abhorred the thoughts of giving any manner of Worship to them All which are so fully proved by learned Men of our own Church (b) Bishop Taylor Dr. Stillingfleet c. that I forbear to insist upon them Though it is a matter that needs not proof because it is confessed by Cassander That the antient Christians had a great abhorrency for all Veneration of Images (c) Cassand Consult Art 21 It is certain the Pope himself was an enemy to Image-Worship for six hundred Years after Christ for Gregory the Great to a certain Recluse who desired the Image of Christ expresly answered That Images were not to be worshipped And in his Epistle to Serenus Bishop of Marseilles though he blame him for breaking the Images in pieces yet he praises him for that he would not suffer them to be worship'd he thought they might be of use for the instruction of the Ignorant but would not endure that they should be adored For it is one thing saith he to adore a Picture another thing to learn by the History of the Picture what is to be adored If any Man will make Images do not forbid him but by all means avoid the worshipping of them (e) l 9. Epist 9 But after that they were once brought into Churches Men came by little and little to worship them till at length it was established for a Law in the second Council of Nice that they were to be set up in Churches to the end that they might be worshipped and that with true and proper Worship and all those were anathemized who durst say the contrary which Decree was confirmed by the fourth Council at Constantinople and afterwards by the Council of Trent And though the Worship decreed by that Council was of an inferior nature yet in process of time it was advanced by the Church of Rome to that supreme Worship which is proper to God himself For before Luther's time the approved Doctrine of that Church was That the very same Worship was to be given to the Image that was to be given to the person represented by it and therefore to the Images of God and of Christ the Worship of Latria that is That Worship which belongs to God over all blessed for ever And such as their Doctrine was such was their Practice insomuch that Cassander complains That their Worship of Images and their vanity in making and adorning them was nothing inferior to that of the Heathens (f) Consult Cassand Art 21. de Imagin Simulachris We may add If there was any difference between Heathen and Christian Rome it seems to be this that the latter hath outdone the former in this piece of Idolatry Add to this 8. Their solemn Prayers to Saints departed and that not to intercede for them but to bestow upon them those Temporal and Spiritual Blessings they stand in need of which was the practice of the Church of Rome and made a part both of their private and publick Devotions long before the Reformation Now were it so good and profitable to invoke the Saints as the Council of Trent teaches it is strange that so great a Lover of Mankind as S. Paul when he so frequently commands us to pray and hath left so many directions concerning Prayer should wholly forget to teach us this Lesson Can it be supposed a Worship so pleasing to God when God hath not given us the least intimation in his Word that it is so For that it hath no foundation in Scripture we may be assured when so great a Man of the Church of Rome as Cardinal Pâ—rron acknowledges that neither Precept nor Example is there to be found for it and when other learned Doctors of that Church not only confess the same but also give us several Reasons why no mention is made of it either in the Old or New Testament But this is not all There is not only nothing in Scripture for it but much against it For we are there frequently taught to offer up our Prayers to God alone through that one Mediator between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus And had the Fathers been of opinion that Saints might be invoked could they have thought the Invocation of Christ a good Argument to prove his Divinity Would they have accused the Arians of Idolatry for worshipping him because they supposed him to be no more than a Creature Could they be so sottish as to deride the Heathens for worshipping dead men had they themselves worshipped such And would not the Heathens have retorted their Sarcasms When Heathens and Jews both so often reproached the Christians for worshipping one that was crucified had they worshipped not only him but his Apostles and Disciples too would they not much more have reproached them for that But what need of Arguments to prove it when the Fathers themselves plainly tell us that they made their Prayers to God alone (b) Clemens Alexand. Stromat l. 7. p. 721. Paris Edit 1629. Tertull. Apol. c. 30. Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 8. c. 27. 'T is unreasonable to say that the Fathers speak of supream Worship only which the Romanists themselves reserve to God while they allow an inferior Worship to others Because they were not aware of any such difference of Worship All religious Worship was in their account such as was due to God alone The distinctions of worship into supream and subordinate absolute and relative terminative and transient as they have no foundation in Scripture so the Christians of the first Ages were ignorant of they having no such different objects of Religious Worship to which these different Degrees were to be suited And forasmuch as the Romanists themselves make sacrifice proper to God it seems very absurd to make Prayer common to him with others For Sacrifices were not only accompanied with vocal Prayers and Thanksgivings but were themselves real Prayers and Praises they being sacred Rites by which they offered up their Petitions and Thanks to God as their very names Euctical and Eucharistical teach us And when Prayer and Sacrifice are considered apart and compared the one with the other God sets the higher value upon Prayer and desires that rather than Sacrifice (c) Psalm 50. If therefore Sacrifice be a Worship peculiar to God it follows à fortiori that Prayer must be so too As will be
nor Evangelist no nor Apostle and therefore not S. Peter himself was exempt from subjection to him (t) S. Chrysost ad Rom. c. 13. v. 1. And such as their Doctrine was such was their Practice tho their Emperors were Idolaters and implacable Enemies to the name of Christ yet they thought it not in the Popes Power to set them loose from subjection to them Nor did any Pope in those days pretend to such a Power And therefore they chose rather to dye when they had the greatest Provocations to resist and when the number of the Christians was so great that they were able with ease to have vanquish'd their Enemies (u) Cyprian ad Demetrianum 'T is a Doctrine that is contrary to the Confessions and Practice of the antient Bishops of Rome who took the Emperor for their Lord and Master and yielded themselves his most humble and obedient Servants and Subjects So did Pope Gregory the Great (w) Greg. M. Ep. 2. 62. and before Pope Gelasius I. (x) Gelasii Ep. 8. and after him Pope Agatho †Epist ad Constantinum Imp. Actione 4. Syn. 6. Vide etiam Richerium Hist Concil General l. 1. c. 10 S. â— 6. In short 't is a Doctrine that involves the highest Impiety against God the greatest Injustice toward men that subverts the Foundations of Government and is inconsistent with humane Society No man can recount the Usurpations and Rapines the Perjuries and Murders the Treasons and Rebellions the Confusions and Desolations it hath caus'd in the World 4. The next Instance shall be that which was likewise decreed by the Fourth Lateran Council * Cap. 1. viz. the monstrous Doctrine of Transubstantiation For the belief of which there is no better ground in Scripture than that the Church is transubstantiated or that the Rock in the Wilderness was substantially chang'd into Christ because the Church is call'd Christ's Body (y) Ephes 1. 23. and 't is said that the Rock which follow'd the Israelites was Christ (z) 1 Corinth 10. 4. But because 't is confess'd by many of their own learned Writers we may therefore take it for granted that this Doctrine cannot be prov'd by Scripture Yea that it is contrary to it is manifest because we find in Scripture that the Sacramental Elements after the words of Consecration were pass'd are call'd the Bread and the Cup as they were before (a) 1 Corinth 11. 26 27 28. And if we may believe our Saviour the Wine after it was consecrated and made the Blood of the New Testament was no other for substance than the Fruit of the Vine for after he had said This is my Blood of the New Testament he adds But I say unto you that I will not henceforth drink of the Fruit of the Vine c. (b) Matth. 26. 29. That the Fathers for seven hundred years after Christ believ'd the Elements after Consecration to remain the same for substance is beyond all contradiction prov'd by many Protestant Writers particularly in two short Discourses lately written upon this Subject (i) Letter to Lady T. Discourse against Transubstantiation And that the Popes themselves were of the same Belief in the fifth Century is evident For surely says Pope Gelasius the Sacraments we receive of the Body and Blood of Christ are a divine thing for which we are also by them made Partakers of a divine Nature and yet the Substance or Nature of Bread and Wine does not cease to be (k) Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus Corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per tadem divinae efficimur consortes naturae tamen esse non definit substantia vel natura panis vini De duab nat in Christo Biblioth Patr. Tom. 4. Yea so far was Transubstantiation from being the Doctrine of the Primitive Church that we can meet with nothing like it till near the end of the eighth Century and tho as soon as it was started it was vigorously oppos'd by the most learned men of that time yet by the help of the deplorable Ignorance and Superstition of that and the two next succeeding Ages it was by slow degrees nurs'd up and brought to its full growth till at length it came to be establish'd for an Article of Faith in the Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III. in the year 1215. Nor is it only destitute of the Authority of Scripture and the ancient Church but plainly destructive of our whole Religion by subverting the main Foundation upon which it stands For if that be indeed the Flesh of a Man which we see and feel and taste to be Bread what assurance can we have that there ever was any such Man in the World as Jesus of Nazareth or that he ever wrought one Miracle in it The cerrainty of which depends upon the certainty of our Senses and therefore S. John appeals to them as the great unquestionable Proofs of the Truth of our Religion (a) 1 Epist John 1. 1 2 3. We have therefore the same Assurance that Transubstantiation is False as that the Gospel of Christ is True Nor is it more opposite to Sense than Reason the belief of it implying ten thousand Contradictions To which we may add the horrible Impieties it involves That the glorified Body of our Saviour should be contracted to the crum of a Wafer that he should be perfectly depriv'd of Sense and Reason that he should not be able to defend himself against the Assaults of the most contemptible Vermin that he should be swallow'd down whole and if the Stomach of the Communicant chance to be foul or over-charg'd with Wine that he should be vomited up again Good God! what man who is not quite forsaken of Religion Reason and Sense who is not himself transubstantiated into something below either Man or Beast can believe these things 5. That the Marriage of Priests is unlawful This Doctrine the Church of Rome borrow'd from the antient Hereticks especially from the Manichees who allow'd Marriage to their Hearers as the Church of Rome doth to Lay-men but forbad it to their Elect (a) Hic non dubito ves esse clamaturos invidiamque facturos castitatem perfectam vos vehementer commendare atqui laudare non tamen nuptias prohibere quandoquidem Auditores vestri quorum apud vos secundus est gradus ducere atque habere non prohibentur uxores Aug. de moribus Manichaeorum l. 2. c. 18. as that Church doth to her Priests The first Pope we read of that condemned the marriage of Priests was Siricius almost four hundred Years after Christ though he seems by his Epistles if they are indeed his rather to disswade Priests from it than peremptorily to forbid it (b) Epist 1 4. apud Binium Pope Calixtus II. absolutely forbad Priests Marriage and in case they were married commanded them to be separated (c) Presbyâ—eris Diaconis Subdiaconis Monachis concubinas
habere seu Matrimonia contrahere penitus interdicimus contracta quoque Matrimonia ab hujusmodi personis disjungi Grat. dist 27. â— 8. Pope Innocent III. pronounced such marriages null and the Council of Trent anathematizes those who say they are valid (d) Sess 24. Can. 9. But one would think that God had sufficiently declared his approbation of such Marriages in that the whole World hath by his appointment been twice peopled by two married Priests first by Adam secondly by Noah And we are sure the Holy Scripture tells us That Marriage is honourable in all f Heb. 13. 4. And places it among the Qualifications of a Bishop That he be the Husband of one Wife having faithful Children (g) Tit. 1. 6. which saith S. Chrysostom The Apostle prescribed to this end That he might stop the Mouths of Hereticks who reproached Marriage declaring thereby That Marriage is no unclean thing but so honourable that a married Man may be exalted to the sacred Throne of a Bishop (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Hom. 2. in c. 1. ad Tit. And well might he think it not unbecoming a Bishop when our Lord thought it not unbecoming an Apostle no not the Prince of the Apostles as the Romanists will have him for it is without doubt that S. Peter was married in that the Scripture makes mention of his Wife's Mother (i) Matt. 8. 14. And Clemens of Alexandria tells us That it was certainly reported that when he saw his Wife led to death he rejoiced and having exhorted and comforted her he called her by her name and bid her remember the Lord (k) Clemens Alex Stromat l. 7 p. 736. Lut. 1629. and that he was not only married but begat Children the same Clemens in another place affirms (l) Stromat l. 3 p. 448. Yea that S. Philip and S. Jude were also married and had Children Eusebius is witness (m) Euseb Eccles Hist l. 3. c. 20 31. In like manner we find That many of the primitive Bishops were married so were Chaeremon Bishop of Nilus S. Spiridion S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Gregory Nyssen S. Hilary and many more Nor can it be said that they took Wives while they were Laymen and after they took upon them the sacred Ministry were separated from them since the Canons commonly called the Apostles did prohibit either Bishop Priest or Deacon to put away his Wife upon pretence of Religion (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 5. and if any such shall abstain from Marriage as in it self abominable command that he be corrected or deposed and cast out of the Church (o) Canon 50. which Canons though not made by them whose name they bear yet they are of greater Antiquity than the first Nicene Council And when in that Council it was moved That Bishops and Priests Deacons and Subdeacons might not cohabit with their Wives which they had taken before Ordination the Motion was presently dashed by the famous Paphnutius who was himself a single person (a) Socrat. Ecclesiast Hist l. 1 c. 11. Yea a long time after this Council we meet with many Popes who were Sons of Bishops and Priests Pope Theodorus Silverius and Gelasius I. were the Sons of Bishops Pope Boniface I. Felix II. and Agapetus I. were the Sons of Priests (b) Grat. dist 56. c. 2. Platina in vitis eorum And that we may not think this strange Gratian himself informs us That the Marriage of Priests was in those days lawful in the Latin Church as it was at that time when he writ in the Eastern Church (c) Dist 56. c. 13. Nor is this Doctrine to be rejected only as contrary to Scripture and to Primitive and Apostolical Practice but because of the abominable Fruits produced in the Church of Rome by it For when their Clergy might not have Wives which God allowed instead of them they took Whores which wickedness so far prevailed in that Church that no less a Man than the Cardinal of Cambray informs us That many Clergymen were not ashamed publickly and in the face of the World to keep Concubines (d) De reform Eccles And the Gloss upon Gratian says That it is commonly said That a Priest may not be deposed for simple Fornication because there are few Priests to be found without that fault (e) Communiter autem dicitur quod pro simplici fornicatione quis deponi non debet cum pauci sine illo vitio inveniantur Dist 81. c. 6. in Gloss And therefore Pope Pius II. had great reason to say That though Priests were by the Western Church forbid to marry for good reason yet there was stronger reason to restore Marriage to them again (f) Father Paâ—â—s History of the Council of Tâ—ent l. 7. p. 680. This many in the Council of Trent were sensible of Who alledged the great Scandal given by incontinent Priests and that there was want of continent persons fit to exercise the Ministry (g) P. 679 680. And therefore the Emperor and the Duke of Bavaria required That the marriage of the Priests might be granted (h) P. 514 526. And the Archbishop of Prague and the Bishop of five Churches desired that married persons might be promoted to holy Orders But this request would not be granted because if the Clergy once come to be married they will no longer depend on the Pope but on their Prince (i) P. 680 747. 6. The Doctrines of the number of the Sacraments of the Character impressed by them and of the necessity of the Priests intention defined by the Roman Church as necessary Points of Faith are such as cannot be derived from Scripture or from the Tradition of the Church as is freely acknowledged by many learned Men of their own Communion As the Word Sacrament is ambiguous so it is sufficiently known That the Fathers as they took it in a more strict or large sense so they either encreased or lessened the number of them And Cassander hath observed That we scarce meet with any Man before Peter Lombard who reduced them to a certain number (k) Consâ—lt Cassand Art 13. And that the number Seven hath no colour either from Scripture or the antient Church we may be assured by those goodly Reasons upon which it was established by the Council of Trent viz. There are seven Vertues seven capital Vices seven Defects which came by original Sin seven Planets and I know not how many sevens more (l) History of the Council of Trent l. 2. p. 234 235. and therefore there are seven Sacraments neither more nor less Risum teneatis As to the Character impressed by three of them viz. Baptism Confirmation and Order 't was so little understood by the Trent Fathers that they could not agree what it meant or where to place it One would have it to be a Quality another to be a Relation and of those who made it a Quality some said
1. Besides I say these and many other insuperable prejudices that lye against it as the matter is managed in the Church of Rome it wholly defeats its own design For what Man will be ashamed to do that which is done upon course by the best Men in their Church the Priest the Bishop yea the Pope himself not excepted And who will be afraid of the most formidable Sin when the Penance imposed for it is usually trifling and next to nothing so far from giving check that it is one of the strongest provocations to sin For what greater encouragement can a Man desire than to purchase a pardon upon such easie terms 10. I need not shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory as taught by the Church of Rome cannot derive its Pedigree either from the Scripture or the primitive Fathers because it is freely confessed by many of her own Members that it hath no foundation in either of them Yea a late learned Writer of that Church hath proved by great variety of Arguments that it is plainly repugnant to Scripture to Reason and to the judgment of the antient Church and exposed the vanity of those pretended Proofs which are commonly brought for it (d) Tho. Aug. ex Alâ—iâ—◠〈◊〉 Saxon. de media Animaâ—um statu And yet it is no wonder that the Romish Clergy so zealously contend for it that the Council of Trent hath established it and that Pope Pius IV. hath put it into the Roman Creed (e) Bull. super formam Jurament Confess Fidei because this is that by which they make spoil of the people and enrich themselves This alone hath erected and richly endowed many fair Abbies and Monasteries this hath founded many Colleges Chappels and Chantryes this hath set up and maintained the gainful Trade of Indulgences and Masses Let the people be once disabused and rightly informed in this Point Masses for the Dead will grow out of fashion and Indulgences will be despised as nothing worth For 11. The Doctrine of Indulgences is another new Article of the Roman Creed This is generally owned by the learned Romanists themselves In particular Durandus one of their famous Schoolmen acknowledges That little that is certain can be said concerning them because the Scripture speaks not expresly of them and the holy Fathers S. Ambrose S. Hilary S. Augustine and S. Jerom make no mention of them (f) De Indulgentiis pauca dici possunt per certitudinem quia nec Scriptura expresse de eis loqultur sancti etiam ut Ambrosius Hil. Aug. Hierom. minime loquuntur de Indulgentiis Durand l. 4. dist 20. q. 3. And Cardinal Cajetan grants That no sacred Scripture no Authority of the antient Doctors Greek or Latin hath brought the Original of them to our knowledge (g) De ortu Indulgentiarum si certitudo haberi posset veritati indagandae opem ferret verum quia nulla sacrae Scripturae nulla priscorum Doctorum Graecorum aut Latinorum authoritas scripta hanc ad nostram deduxit notitiam Opusc Tom. 1. Tract 15. c. 1. And no wonder because their Original bears a much later date than either the Sacred Scripture or the Authority of the antient Doctors for the learned Romanist before mentioned tells us That for ought he could find Indulgences were not thought on before the Age of the Schoolmen (h) De his Indulgentiis ante Scholasticorum aetatem quod sciam â—nspicio nulla De mâ—dio Animarum statu Demens 27. That is till twelve hundred Years after Christ and therefore no mention is made of them by Gratian or the Master of the Sentences It is true That in the Primitive Church severe and long Penances were imposed upon scandalous Offenders the rigour of which upon weighty Considerations was sometimes moderated by the Bishop and this Relaxation was called by the name of Indulgence But the Popish Indulgences are quite of another nature for they suppose a Treasure in the Church made up of the Merits of Christ and the Saints the Saints must be added to supply the defect of Christ's Merits which is wholly at the Popes disposal which therefore he dispenses to others as he thinks fit to discharge them from those Temporal Punishments to which they are obnoxious for their Venial Sins in Purgatory Nor are these Indulgences as the Practice of their Church is limited to the Souls in Purgatory and to those Punishments which are due to venial Sins only but granted to all Persons indifferently who will pay for them and for all Sins be they never so enormous To such an excess of Abomination were the Doctrine and Practice of Indulgences grown about the time of the Reformation such an intolerable Reproach were they to our Holy Religion that the more sober Romanists themselves cry'd shame on them (i) Espencaeus in cap. 1. Ep. ad Tit. Onus Ecclesiae c. 15. Eras l 30. Ep. 57. 12. Another Error and that which is indeed the main Foundation of many of those already mention'd and of many more which follow under the next Head is this That unwritten Traditions ought to be added to the Holy Scriptures to supply their defect and ought to be receiv'd as of equal Authority with them Whereas the Scriptures themselves which the Romanists acknowledge to be an infallible tho but an imperfect Rule do frequently bear witness of their own Sufficiency as to all Matters necessary to Salvation (a) Psal 19. 7. John 20. 31. 2 Tim. 3. 16. I say all Matters necessary to Salvation because we do not assert that all things belonging to Rites and Ceremonies and to the external Polity of the Church are contain'd in them except only in general Rules by which the particular Determination of them is committed to the Discretion of our Governors but we affirm that there is no Article of Faith or Rule of Life that is necessary to be believ'd or practis'd that is not either in express words contain'd in them or by evident consequence may be deduced from them so that supposing them to be the Word of God we need no other Rule in such Matters And 't is certain that the ancient Fathers were of the same Judgment I shall produce the words of S. Austin only In those Matters saith he which are plainly placed in Scripture all those things are found which contain Faith and the Manners of Holy Living viz. Hope and Charity (b) In iis quae aperte in Scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi spem sc atque Charitatem De doct Christiana l. 2. c. 9. In which words he affirms not only that all things belonging to Faith and Manners are contained but that they are plainly contain'd in the Scripture And in another place the same Father says If an Angel from Heaven shall preach to you any thing concerning Christ or his Church or concerning any thing which belongs to Faith or Life besides what you have received in the Writings
Doctrine of S. Paul 't is more for the edification of the Church that the publick Prayers should be said in a Tongue common to the Clergy and People than in Latin k Ex hac Pauli doctrina habetur quod melius est ad edisicationem Ecclesiae orationes publicas quae audiente populo dicuntur dici lingua communi Clericis Populo quam dici latine Comment in c. 14. Ep. 1. ad Corintle And Mr. Harding says I grant they viz. the People cannot say Amen to the Blessing or Thanksgiving of the Priest so well as if they understood the Latin Tongue perfectly l Artic. 3. Divis 29. And Father Paul thought the Latin Service a great Corruption and Abuse as we may see in his History of the Council of Trent m l. 6. In which he also tells us That in the Roman Pontifical there remaineth yet a Form of the Ordination of Readers in the Church in which it is said that they must study to read distinctly and plainly that the People may understand n Ibid. To conclude this upon these and such like Considerations The Emperor at the Council of Trent requir'd That Divine Service might be so said that it might be understood both by him that said it and by him that heard it †History of the Council of Trent p. 513. 2. Another Corruption is the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass The Church of England doth not quarrel at the name of Sacrifice she not only grants but asserts that the Eucharist is a commemorative and representative Sacrifice And this was the meaning of the ancient Fathers who frequently call it a Remembrance or Commemoration a Resemblance or Representation of the Sacrifice which Christ once offer'd upon the Cross o Euseb Demonst Evang. l. r. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Hom. 17. in Epist ad Heb. And this is as much as Cassander seems to mean by it p Cassand Consult Art â— 24. de Sacrificio Corp. sang Christi But this will not satisfie the present Church of Rome but Christ as they will have it is truly and properly sacrificed that is according to their own notion of a Sacrifice Christ is truly and properly put to death as oft as the Priest says Mass For in a true Sacrifice as Bellarmine tells us q De Missa l. 1. c. 2. c. 27. the thing sacrificed must be destroy'd and if it be a thing that hath Life it must be kill'd And so indeâ—d many of the Romanists roundly assert that Christ every day is by the Mass-Priest Which besides that it is contrary to the Doctrine of the ancient Church and to the words of the Apostle who tells us That Jesus Christ offer'd not himself often as the High Priest enter'd into the Holy place every year with the Blood of others for then must he often have suffer'd from the Foundation of the World But now once in the end of the World hath he appear'd to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself And as it is appointed to men once to dye but after this the Judgment so Christ was once offer'd to bear the sins of many r Heb. 9. 25 26 27 28. And again That after Christ had offer'd one Sacrifice for ever he sate down on the right hand of God And that by one Offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified s Heb. 10. 10 12 14. And whereas the Apostle argues the perfection of Christ's Sacrifice above those of the Law because those were offer'd year by year but the Sacrifice of Christ's Body was offer'd once for all If Christ be dayly sacrific'd in the Mass the Sacrifice of Christ must be much more defective than those of the Law for one Sacrifice of Expiation for the whole Congregation of Israel was thought sufficient for the whole year Whereas the Sacrifice of Christ's Body is repeated every day Yea for one single Person he may be sacrificed a thousand times over and this Sacrifice so often repeated and a thousand times more may perhaps be of so little Virtue as not to procure the release of that one poor Soul out of Purgatory Consider further that this is inconsistent with the end they assign of Sacrifice which is to testifie our subjection to God which cannot be done by offering up God himself in Sacrifice for what we offer in Sacrifice we are not subject to but have the disposal of and dominion over it Besides all this 't is a piece of Worship more absurd and impious than was ever practis'd by the most barbarous Heathen they indeed sometimes offer'd their Sons and Daughters in Sacrifice but we never read that they were so sottish as to make a Sacrifice of their God And therefore our Church hath deservedly condemn'd the Sacrifices of Masses as blasphemous Fables and dangerous Deceits (a) Articles of Religion anno 1562. Aâ—t 31. 3. The solitary Mass in which the Priest alone who Consecrates Communicates can no way be reconciled either with the Doctrine and Institution of Christ who when he had broken the Bread gave it to his Disciples and said take ye eat ye and commanded his Disciples to do as he had done Or with the words of S. Paul to the Corinthians who supposes them to meet together to eat the Lord's Body and commands them to stay one for another (b) 1 Cor. 11. 31. And from this meeting the Sacrament was call'd by the Ancients Synaxis the Collection or gathering together of the Faithful as it is by us still call'd the Communion Furthermore 't is inconsistent with the nature and intendment of the Sacrament which is a Feast of Love and design'd to unite us more closely together in brotherly Love one to another by representing to us by our eating together at the same Table and partaking of one and the same Loaf that we all belong to one Family and are Children of one Father 'T is contrary to the Practice of the Apostles and first Christians who were wont to assemble on the first day of the week to break Bread (c) Act. 20. 7. And that it was unknown to the Christian Church for many Ages is freely confess'd by the Romanists themselves Even Bellarmine grants that we no where expresly read that the Sacrifice was offered by the Ancients without some one or more communicating besides the Priest (d) Bell. de Missa l. 2. c. 9. tho 't is true he says we may by many conjectures collect that it was but how weak his Conjectures are will be evident to any man who will be at the pains to read them Harding confesses that in the Primitive Church the People receiv'd every day with the Priest and that private Mass came in afterward by the negligence and indevotion of the People (e) Article 1. Divis 7. Cassander questions whether solitary Mass came not first into use after the days of Gregory the Great that is more than