of their Church This latter I undertake to make out from the undeniable Maximes to which all of that Communion are bound to adhere There are Two Principles which I may well call the Fundamental Principles of the Roman Church since all Opinions that are not inconsistent with them can be tollerated among them But whatever strikes at these must needs be Abominated as Destructive of that they call The Catholick Faith The one is The Authority of the Church The other is The Certainty of Tradition If then the Doctrine of Deposing Kings and by consequence Killing them for if they are justly deposed it 's as just to kill them as to kill any Usurper is such that without denying the Authority of the Church and the Certainty of Tradition it cannot be denied then all men must resolve either to acknowledg it or to renounce their Subjection to a Church that must needs believe it About the Authority of the Church Two things are to be observed that serve for clearing what I design to make out The First is That the Church in any one Age has as much Authority as ever it had or can have in any other Age For if Christs Promises together with the other Arguments they bring for the Authority of the Church be good they are alike strong at all Times and in all Ages And therefore though in writing Books of Controversies they muster up Authorities out of the former Ages because we profess we pay little esteem to the latter Ages Yet among themselves all Ages are alike and the Decrees of them are of equal authority Secondly The Authority of the Church is as little to be disputed in moral matters that fall under practice as in Articles of Faith that only fall under Speculation and in a word The Church must be the Infallible Expounder of the Ten Commandments as well as of the Creed All the Arguments from Christs Promises from the hazard of trusting to our private Reasonings and the Necessity of Submitting to a publick Judg are by so much the more concluding in Practical matters as it is of more Importance That Men think aright in Practical than in Speculative Opinions If then there arises a Question about a Moral matter or the Exposition of any of the Commandments The only certain Decision must be expected from the Church For instance a Question arises about Images Whether it is lawful to use them in the Worship of God upon the seeming Opposition which the worship of them has to the 2d Commandment Since the Church has once Determin'd that it may be lawfully used it is Heresie to deny it on this pretence that we fancy it is contrary to one of the Commandments So if a Controversie arise upon the Fifth Commandment How far a King is to be acknowledged if the Church has determined the Limits of that it is Heresie to carry it further If also another Question arise how much the Sixth Commandment obliges It must be carried so far and no further than the Determination of the Church allows I confess by the Doctrine of that Church even a General Council may err in a point in which any matter of Fact is included Because they may be deceived by a false Information But in a General Rule about Morality and the Extent of any of the Ten Commandments The Decision of the Church must either be certain and for ever Obligatory or the whole Doctrine of the Infallibility of the Church falls to the ground Concerning the Certainty of Tradition the general Opinion of that party is That Tradition is an Infallible Conveyance of Divine Truth and that whatever any Age of the Church delivers to another as derived from Christ and his Apostles must be received with the same Veneration and Obedience that we pay to the Holy Scriptures And for the ways of distinguishing a Tradition of the Church from any Imposture or Novelty There be four of them The first That is the most doubtful is That the greatest and most esteemed Doctors in any Age deliver as a Divine Truth Nor is it necessary that they formally say This is a Tradition but if many of them mention an Opinion and declare their own assent to it this passes as a sufficient proof of the Tradition of any Age of the Church So in all points of Controversie between them and us the greatest part of their Writers some few later and suspected ones only excepted think they have sufficiently justified their Church when they bring Testimonies out of any of the Writings of the Fathers that seem to favour their Opinion and will call it unreasonable for us to reject these because they only deliver their own opinion and do not call it the Tradition of the Church but conclude That many Writers in any age asserting an Opinion it may well be looked on as the Tradition of that Age. But because this is more liable to exception there is another way that is more infallible to judg of Tradition and that is by the conveyance of the See of Rome which they judg the chief Depository of the Faith and for which they fansie they have so many proofs from the high things some of the Fathers have said about the dignity of that See Now if these conclude any thing it must follow That whatever has been delivered in any Age by a Pope as conveyed down from Christ or his Apostles must either be so indeed or the See of Rome is not a faithful Transmitter of Tradition But there is yet a more certain way of judging of Tradition by what the chief Pastors of the Church have delivered when assembled in a general Council This being the Supreme Tribunal in the Church there can lie no appeal from it Nor can the Doctrines delivered or approved by it be questioned For instance If it were under debate How the Tradition about Transubstantiation can be made out in the Thirteenth Century it is needless to seek any other evidence than That one Almerick is condemned for denying it and in Opposition to that it was formally established in a general Council This is as much as can be had and he were very unreasonable that were not satisfied with it So if it be asked How can the Tradition of the Doctrine of Deposing Kings and giving away their Dominions in the same Century be proved The Answer is plain That same very Council decreed it Upon which a great Prince was deposed and his Dominions were given to another These are the Common Standards by which Traditions are Examined But to these a new one has been lately added which is indeed a much shorter and nearer way And that is whatever the Church holds in any one age as a Material point of Religion she must have received it from the former age and that age from the former and so it climbs upwards till the days of the Apostles If this be a certain Track of Tradition by which we may infallibly trace it Then for instance If
in any one age it hath been believed That St. Peter had power from Christ which he left to the See of Rome by which his Successor in it can depose Kings then this must be an Apostolical Tradition and by consequence of equal authority with any thing written in the Scriptures To these General Considerations about the Authority of the Church and the Certainty of Tradition I shall add Two other about the Nature of Supreme and Soveraign Power By which we may judg of what Extent the Popes Power must be if he have an authority to depose Kings and transfer their Dominions to other persons First When the Soveraign Powers proceed in a Legal way against its Subjects If either they abscond so that they cannot be found Or have such a Power about them that the Sovereign cannot bring them to punishment He may declare them Rebels and set Prices on their Heads And in that case it is as lawful for any Subject to kill them as it is for an Executioner to put a condemned Person to Death These being the several ways the Law provides in those several cases So when a Pope deposes a Prince He may as lawfully set on private Assassinates to kill him as oblige his Subjects to rise with open force against him For if the Pope has a Power over him to depose him this clearly follows from the Nature of Sovereign Power and it is the Course that sometimes must be followed when the Rebel can be no other way brought to deserved punishment and if the Pope has the power of deposing then a Prince who after such a Sentence carries himself as a King is a Rebel against his Supreme Lord And is also an Usurper For his Title being destroyed by the Sentence He has no authority over his Subjects and therefore may be as lawfully killed as any Rebel or Usurper Secondly The Supreme power may in cases of great necessity when the thing is in it self materially just pass over such Forms as ought in ordinary Cases to be observed I need not tell you That in a great Fire Subordinate Magistrates may blow up Houses But doubtless the Supreme Power of all as a King in an absolute Monarchy and such is the Papal Power if these Opinions be true may dispence with some Forms when the Matter is in it self just and if the chief design of a Law be pursued the circumstantial parts of it may upon extraordinary occasions be superseded Therefore if the Pope is Supreme over all Kings and has this deposing Power Then though by the Canon a King ought to be first a Year Excommunicated for his Heresy or favouring Hereticks and at the Years end he may be Deposed by the Pope There are also other Rules for Excommunications tho the Summary way in some cases may be used yet all these are but circumstantial and lesser Matters The design of that Law is That no Heretical Prince or favourer of Heresie be continued in his Power The other are but Forms of Law that cannot be indispensibly necessary in all cases Besides the very Canon Law teaches that when there is both a Notorietas juris Facti Summary proceedings are Legal when then it is Notorious that the Doctrines of the Church of England for Instance are Heretical and that the King is an Obstinate Favourer of these Heresies and will not extirpate them Summary and Secret proceedings are justifiable There is no hope that Bulls Breves or Citations would do any good in this case These would on the contrary alarm the State and bring all the Party under great hazards Therefore from the Nature of Supreme Power it is most justly Inferred That though there have been no publick Sentence of Deposition according to the Forms of the Canon Law yet all these may be dispensed with and a Secret and Summary one may do as well These Positions are such that I cannot fansie any just Exceptions to which they are liable and from all these laid together the Inference will undeniably follow That according to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome the power of Deposing Kings is lodged with the Pope by a Divine Authority and that by consequence private persons may conspire to take away the Life of a King so deposed Even though there be no publick Sentence given about it But before I bring the Evidence for all this I shall desire the Reader will a little reflect on the Positions I have laid down in which he will find an Answer to all the Exceptions that can be made against the following Evidence By the first The Authority of the Church being the same in all Ages he will see it is to no purpose to pretend these were dark Ages So that what was done in an ignorant time cannot oblige the World when things are seen in a better light But if the Church has an Authority from Christ that shall last till the end of the World it must be the same in all ages The Ignorance of the age is a very good answer when made by a Protestant but can signifie nothing in a Papists Mouth By the second Of the Churches authority in setling Moral Rules for practice it appears how fond that distinction is which they make between a Canon and a Decree It is true a Decree about a particular Case in which there is some matter of Fact may be wrong according to their Principles and yet the authority of the Church remain entire For instance in the deposing a Prince or condemning a Man for Heresie the Church may either by false Witnesses or mistaking a Man's words be drawn to pass an unjust Sentence by reason of a mis-representation of the Fact But that is nothing to the purpose here where a Decree is made as a perpetual Rule of Practice this must be of the same authority of a Canon about any article of Faith Otherwise it will follow that the Church may mislead the People in matters indispensably necessary to Salvation For such is the Obedience to the Ten Commandments By the first way of judging of the Tradition of the Church from what the most received Writers in any age deliver as the Doctrine of the Church it will appear That the Schoolmen and Canonists are as competent Conveyers of Tradition from the twelfth age downward as the Fathers were from the sixth Age upward and laying this for a Principle That the Church is the same in all Ages they are really more competent Witnesses than the Fathers were First Because they write more closely to the subject they have in hand they consider what is said for or against an Opinion in a more exact manner than the Fathers did who being carried with the heat they are sometimes in go off from the purpose and generally affect Eloquence which is the most improper Stile for nice Matters Whereas the Schoolmen write in a blunt way only considering the purpose they are about coyning the most barbarous words they can light on when they
laid before them they are obliged to submit or they fall from the Catholick Faith the chief Branch of which is To believe all the Traditions of the Church And since the Church is the same in all Ages according to their Doctrine the Traditions of any one Age must be as good as the Traditions of any other can be all being grounded on the same Authority And now let all the Reasons that Arnold brings to prove from the Churches believing Transubstantiation in any Age that she must have always believed it be considered and applied with a small variation of the Terms to this Purpose and we shall see if they conclude not as strongly in favour of this Doctrine as for that which he has pursued so much How can it be imagined says he that a Doctrine so contrary to common Sence and Reason could have been so universally received if every Man had not been taught it by those who instructed him in the Faith Will Men easily change their Faith Or tho particular Persons would prevaricate would the whole Clergy conspire to do it Or would the People take it easily off their hands These and many more Topicks of that sort may be so mustered up and set off by a Man of Wit and Eloquence that an ordinary Person would stare and not know what to say The Premises will shew that there is need but of very little Art to change the same Plea and fit it to this purpose with two great advantages beyond what can be fanci'd to be in the other The one is that the generality of Mankind is naturally more concerned in the preservation of Temporal things than about nice points of Speculation the one they see and handle every day and are much concerned about the other they hear little of and are not much touched with them So that it is less probable there could be a change made in opinions on which the Titles of Princes and the Peace of Kingdoms depended than about subtil Discourses concerning Mysteries So that the Plea is stronger for the Tradition of deposing Kings than for Transubstantiation A second Difference is That there was a continual Opposition made to the belief of Transubstantiation in all Ages which they themselves do not deny only they shift it off the best they can by calling the Opposers Hereticks but for the deposing Doctrine there was not one Person in the whole World that presumed to bring it in question from the first time it was pretended to till those whom they call Hereticks disputed against it and tho some few others who hold Communion with them have ventured on a canvasing of that Doctrine it is well enough known what thanks they got from Rome nor can they shew any one Book licensed according to the Rules of their Church that denies it And thus the Plea for this Doctrine has a double Advantage beyond that for Transubstantiation Upon the whole matter then if Tradition be a sure Conveyance and if we may pronounce what is truly a Tradition either from the Opinions of Doctors the Constitutions of Popes the Decrees of General Councils and the universal Consent of the whole Church for some Ages then the Doctrine of deposing Kings to which all these agree must be reckoned among church-Church-Traditions There is but one other Mark that can be devised of a Tradition which is What the Church has taught and believed in all Ages but for a certain Reason which they know very well they will not stand to that They know we do not refuse such Traditions and if only such may be received then the Worship of Images the Prayers to Saints the Worship in an unknown Tongue the Belief of Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass the denying the Chalice to the Laity the redeeming Souls out of Purgatory with many other things of the like nature will be soon taken off of the File And indeed in this sence the deposing Doctrine is so far from being a Tradition that we have as undeniable Evidences that the Church for the first six Ages knew nothing of it but on the contrary abhorred the thoughts of it as we have that their Church these last six Ages has set it up From which among many other Reasons we conclude that these latter Ages have not been acted with the same Spirit nor followed the same Doctrine that was the Rule of the former Ages There is more than enough said to shew that these Doctrines are a part of their Faith from which they can never extricate themselves but by confessing either that their Church has erred or that Tradition is no true Conveyance when they do either of these they turn their Backs on Rome and are in a fair away to come over to our Church with which purpose I pray God inspire them The mean while it is no wonder if those of that Communion have been guilty of such horrid Plots and Rebellions every where especially in England since Henry the 8th's time There was in his Reign First a Rebellion in Lincolnshire another greater one in the North and some lesser ones after that In Edward the 6th's time there were Risings both in the North and in the West But these succeeded so ill and turned only to the ruine of their own Party that they resolved to try secreter ways in Queen Elizabeth's time in whose long and blessed Reign there scarce passed one year in which there was not some Plot against her Life There was not Matter enough to work upon for raising any considerable Rebellion in England But in Ireland there were more frequent attempts that way It is true the Care and Providence of God was too hard for all their Plots how closely soever laid and they were turned back on themselves not so much to the ruine of the chief Plotters who were wise enough to conveigh themselves out of the way as of many Noble Families that were poysoned with their ill Principles All the Blood which the State was forced to shed lies at their door who were continually giving fresh Provocations And for King Iames not to mention the Conspiracies against him in Scotland nor that Plot of Cobham and Watson upon his first coming to this Crown the Gun-powder Treason was a thing that went beyond all the wicked Designs that had been ever in any Age contrived And when his late Majesty was Embroiled in his Affairs in this Island how did they take advantage from that Conjuncture to break out into a most horrid Rebellion in Ireland joyned with a Massacre of Persons of whatsoever Age or Sex or Condition Which was so far set on by Rome that a Nuncio came publickly to direct their Councils I will not dwell on Particulars that are suffciently known but only name these things to shew That no Reign of any of our Princes since the Reformation has been free from the dismal effects of these Doctrines And for his Sacred Majesty who now Reigns whom God long preserve from their Malice they
said upon that Head than for any of the rest They pretend the Popes set up first the Empire of the West Then gave the Princes of Germany the Right of choosing the Emperor and does still give the Imperial Crown upon the Emperors Swearing an Oath of Homage to them according to the verse under that Insolent Picture set up by Pope Innocent the 2d In the Lateram of the Emperor lying prostrate at his feet and receiving the Crown from him Post homo fit Papae sumit quo dante Coronam But all these Surrenders were made use of only to strengthen the great pretention they had of being Christs Vicars and St. Peters Successours which from the end of the 11th Century till the beginning of the 16th for above 4 Ages together was as Authoritatively asserted by Popes as positively taught by Divines and as tamely received by the whole Church Emperors and Kings not presuming to contradict it as any other Article of Faith And for proofs of this we need appeal to no other witnesses than those 3. great Cardinals Baronius Bellarmin and Perron who may be presumed to have understood the Doctrine of their own Church better than any body else The First of those through his whole work strains his Industry to discover as many Instances as he can of it and never parts with any without expressing the particular satisfaction he had in so pleasant a Discovery I shall only set down what he says on the two 1st occasions that he met with When he takes notice of Gregory the Great 's priviledges formerly mentioned he adds You see Reader That the Popes can make Laws to which if Kings themselves do not yield Obedience they shall lose their Kingdoms Upon the first Deposition made by Gregory the 3d. He adds The Faithful in the West being awakened by this Thunder do immediately fall from the Obedience to Leo adhering to this Apostolical Pope So this Gregory left a worthy Precedent to Posterity that Heretical Princes be not suffered to reign in the Church of Christ if having been often admonished they continue to persist obstinately in their Errors Such strains as these do so often occur afterwards that they can scarce be reckoned It is well known what advice he gave P. Paul the 5th in the quarrel with the Venetians applying the voice to St. Peter Arise and Kill to the case in hand and that with his Insolent Paraenesis to that Republick are clear Evidences of his sence in this matter What Bellarmin taught more shortly and obscurâ—…ly in his Controversies was afterwards made more plain both by his Writings about the Translation of the Roman Empire upon the Interdict of Venice and against King Iimes and William Barklay And Cardinal Perrons Eloquent speech against the Bill put in by the Third Estate of France for Condemning those pretensions of a Deposing Power shews us not only his own sense but the sense of the whole Clergy of France in whose name he delivered it He calls the Contrary Opinion a Doctrine that breeds Schisms a Gate that leads unto all Heresie and so detestable that he and his Fellow Bâ—…shops will choose to burn at a Stake rather than consent to it He affirming That all the parts of the Catholick Church and of the Church of France in particular and all the Schools of Divinity till the coming of Calvin held the affiâ—…mative and says That no where in France since the Divinity Schools wâ—…re set up can they find any one Doctor Divine or Lawyer any Decree Council or Sentence of Parliament or any one Magistrate Ecclesiastick or Politick who had held that in case of Heresie or Idolatry Subjects might not be absolved from their Oaths of Fidelity to their Princes It is true at first he spake more modestly and pretended the thing was problematical and so was not fit matter for an Oath but when that modester Strain tho it tended all to depress the Regal and exalt the Papal Power had so far prevailed with the King that he ordered the matter to be laid aside and not to be further insisted on They were not satisfied with this but made a new Address in the Name of the Clergy and the Cardinal spake now in a higher tone asserting formally the Popes indirect Power in Temporalâ—… and that all who maintained the contrary were Schismaticks and Hereticks even those of the Parliament it self and did plainly threaten the King That if he did not raze all the Proceedings out of the Register the Clergy would leave the Assembly and Excommunicate all who denied the Popes Power of Deposing And if the King would not suffer them to execuâ—…e these Censures they would proceed upon their hazard tho they were to suffer Martyrdom for it For which zeal they received a Brave from the Pope giving them his solemn Thanks for what they had done desiring them to persevere in the same mind So we have in this â—…stance not only Cardinal Perrons own mind but the sâ—…nse of the whole Clergy of France I do not think it necessary to enquire further into the opinion of later Writers tho it were easie to shew that to 〈◊〉 day both the Court of Rome the whole Order of the Jesuites the Writers both of Controversies and Cases of Conscience and the Expositors of Scripture do as oft as occasion offers assert the power of Deposing Kings to be still in the See of Rome And tho some few Writers of that Religion since Barkelay and Widdrington's time both of the English and Irish Nation have adventured to deny this power théy have been censured for it and branded with Heresy This has been so notorious in the matter of the Irish Remonstrance that I need say no more of it But whether the Writers of this Age allow it or not they are bound according to their Doctrine about Tradition to acknowledg it since two of the Characters of Tradition are found to agree to it For it has been delivered in several Ages of the Church as true Catholick Doctrine by all the publick Doctors in these times so that either This is a Tradition of the Church or That is not a true mark of Tradition nor is it a certain conveyance of Truth if we may be thus deceived in a clear Tradition for four Ages successively It does also appear that if the See of Rome be a faithful Depositary and Transmitter of Church Traditions this must be one since it is delivered to the world by so many Popes in the names of St. Peter and St. Paul and founded on the Power of the Keys and of Binding and Loosing granted to St. Peter But I shall next shew how the third mark of Tradition the Authority of General Councils agrees to this Doctrine When this Doctrine had been so well spread over Europe then the Popes found it was safe to trust it to the judgment of such an Assembly as they esteemed a General Council And they proceeded in this matter after
do hinder him in his Iourney he is ipso facto deprived of all Honour Dignity Office or Benefice whether Ecclesiastical or Secular So here the indirect power over Princes by which they may be both deposed and punished is plainly assumed It is true that same Council did indeed Decree That no Subject should murther his King or Prince upon which some of our English and Irish Writers who condemn these practices think they have great advantages That Decree was procured by Gersons means who observing that by the many Rebellions that had been generally set on by Popes the Persons of Princes were brought under such contempt that private Assassinations came to be practised and in particular that of the Duke of Orleance by the Duke of Burgundy Therefore to prevent the fatal consequer ces which were like to follow on that and to hinder such practices for the future he with great earnestness followed that matter And tho it had almost cost him his life it is like from some of the Duke of Orleance his Faction who were resolved on a Revenge yet at last he procured it But this was only a Condemnation of private Cut-throats And the Article condemned had a pretty Reservation in it for it strikes only against Subjects killing their Prince without waiting for the Sentence of any Iudg whatsoever So if a Sentence be past by the Spiritual Judg then this Condemnation notwithstanding a Prince may be Murthered And the other Decree of that Council passed in the same Session shew they had no mind to part with the Deposing Power Besides the Answer to this Decree is clear It is acknowledged by the Defenders of the contrary opinion That it is not lawful in any case to kill a King but when one that was a King is no more such but becomes a Rebel and an Usurper then it is lawful to kill him Pursuant to the Decree made at Constance a Council met at Siena ten years after in which all the former Decrees made against Hereticks are confirmed and the Favourers or Fautors of Heresie are delared liable to all the pains and censures of Hereticks and by consequence to the chief of them all Deposition After that came the Council of Basil which ratified the forementioned Decree made at Constance about General Councils By which Popes Emperors Kings c. that presumed to hinder any from coming to the Council are subjected to Excommunication Interdicts and other Punishments Spiritual and Temporal Last of all came the Council of Trent and tho met ters were at that pass that the Council durst not tread on Princes as others had formerly done lest they should have been thereby provoked to join with the Protestants yet they would not quite lay aside the pretence of a Deposing power but resolved to couch it so into some Decree that it might continue their claim to a Right which they would not part with tho they knew not at that time what to make of it So in the Decree against Duels they declare That if any Emperors Kings c. did assign a field for a Combat that they did thereby lose their Right to that place and the City Castle or other places about it Now it is certain if by their Decrees a Prince may forfeit any part of his Dominion he may be also dispossessed of all the rest since his Title to his whole Territory being one individual thing what shakes it in any part subjects it entirely to him who has such authority over it Here we have found 7 General Councils as they are esteemed by that Church all either expresly asserting the Deposing Power or ratifying former Decrees that had asserted it And from such a succession of Councils it is reasonable to conclude That this Third Character of a Tradition of the Church agrees to it and if General Councils are fit Conveyors of Traditions we have as full Evidence as can be desired for proving this to be a Church-Tradition This last Character of a Tradition is what the whole Body of the Church has held in any one Age. Upon which they say we may calculate that such opinions must have come down from the Apostles since it seems neither credible nor possible that the Belief of the Church could be changed With this Arnold has of late made great noise And as the new Fashions that come from France do please our young Gallants best so some of the Writers of Controversies among us have taken up the same plea here That the whole Church received the Deposing Doctrine in cases of Heresy may be inferred from what had been said The Church is made up of Popes Bishops Priests Of Soveraign Princes and Subjects of all ranks That the Popes believed it none can doubt So many Definitions of Councils shews us as plainly what the Bishops and other Prelates believed the Writing of the Schoolmen and Canonists shew what the rest of the Clergy believed Those Princes who suffered under the Sentences give at least a tacit consent to it since they never question it but study only to clear themselves of the imputation of Heresie The other Princes who made use of the Donations of the Popes shew as plainly that they believ'd it The great Armies that were brought about their Standards must have also believed it and the people who generally deserted the Deposed Prince notwithstanding the great vertues of some of them and the love that Subjects naturally carry to their Princes shew that they believed it So that if St. Iames his Question Shew me thy Faith by thy Works be applied to this particular the Answer will be easie What shall I mention the frequent depositions of Charles the 1st of Henry the 4th of his Son Henry the 5th of Frederick the 1st Philip Otho the 4th Frederick the 2d and Lewis the 4th in the Empire The frequent Depositions in Sicily and Naples the many attempts upon France that terrible Bull in particular of Iulius the 2d against that good King Lewis the twelfth By which besides the Sentence against the King it appears he designed the total destruction of the Nation promising the Pardon of Sin to every one that killed one French Man the frequent Attempts upon England both in Hen. the 2d and K. Iohn's time not to mention their later Bulls of Deposition against K. Henry the 8th and Q. Elizabeth the many Attempts in Spain particularly the deposing the King of Navarre by P. Iulius and the Sentences against Henry the 4th then King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde All these and a great many more with the strange Effects that followed upon them are so clear Proofs of the Worlds believing this Doctrine for many Ages together that if Men had any Remainders of shame left with them they could not deny it And to this day all their Writers maintain it tho perhaps now the greatest part of the Laity know little of it but whenever the Tradition of the Church is
is certain that the Design of Revealed Religion was to give men clearer Notions of these Moral perfections to press them by stronger Arguments and encourage our Endeavours by suitable Rewards and punishments So that if any Religion contradict these Moral Duties we are sure it is false for the Revelation of God's will must be designed to make us better than we would otherwise be following barely the Light of Nature and not worse If then the Church of Rome over-throws Morality and contradicts any of the Ten Commandments we are sure it is not of God And how far it has done this they may judge by these Particulars First Whatever Church offers cheap and easie pardons for sin does take off so much from our sense of the evil of sin We cannot have a very ill opinion of any thing that is easily forgiven Now what are the Popes Pardons Indulgences Jubilees Priviledged Altars the going of Pilgrimages the saying of some Collects the wearing of Agnus Dei's Peebles or other such like trash but so many Engines to root out of mens minds any deep horrour or great sense of sin Is not this the very thing which the People of the Iews of old offered at to bring Thousands of Rams Ten Thousand Rivers of Oyl their First born or the fruit of their Body to offer for their sins All which were rejected in the name of God in these words I will shew thee O man what is good and what our Lord requireth of thee Verily to do Iudgment and to love mercy and to walk solicitous with thy God This is a Moral matter and unchangable therefore whoever go to beat down the sense of sin by the offer of Pardon on any other terms but the sincere change of a mans life destroy Morallity which is the Image of God in man If from this general Consideration we descend to Examine the Commandments in particular we shall find matter enough for a severe Charge against their Church Is not the First Commandment broken when Devotions are offered to Saints which Import their being Omniscient Omnipresent and Almighty that are the Incommunicable Attributes of the God-head and when pardon of sin preservation Grace against Temptations and Eternal life are immediately begged from Saints It is true they say the sence of these prayers is only that we desire their assistance at Gods hands for these blessings But the words of their Offices import no such matter And though for above One Hundred and Sixty Years these things have been complained of and in the Correction of their Offices some of them were cast out yet many of them do still continue In which the plain sence of the words of their Offices is Idolatrous Only they make a shift with another and forced sence put on them to defend themselves from that charge And for such Devotions they can shew no Warrant for the first Thousand years after Christ. The Second Commandment is so openly and confessedly broken by them that many of them maintain it does not all oblige Christians but belonged only to the Jewish Dispensation And in all their Catechisms it is left out which was done very wisely with what honesty let them answer for it was not fit the people should look on that as a Commandment which they saw so notoriously broken throughout their whole Church A great trade being also driven by the breach of it That this was not in the Primitive Church themselves confess all the Books the Fathers wrote against the Idolatry of the Heathens demonstrate this Nor were Images so much as set up in Churches before the Sixth Century And then care was taken that they should not be worshipped and not before the Eighth Century were they worshipped in any place of the Christian Church The Doctrine of the Popes power of Relaxing of Oaths and discharging men from the Obligation of them joyned with the practice of their Popes for above 800 years is as formal an Opposition to the Third Commandment as can be Imagined This was also begun in the Eighth Century The vast multiplication of Holy-days made the Observation of the Lords day of necessity slacken They have destroyed the Order of Societies established in the Fifth Commandment by the Power they allow the Pope to Depose Princes and absolve Subjects from their Alleageance They teach the murdering and burning all Hereticks that is to say all that will not submit to their Tyranny by which Infinite numbers of Innocent persons have been murdered against the Sixth Commandment And these two Doctrines of deposing Princes and putting Hereticks to death were abhorred by the Church for the first Eight ages and were brought in by the Popes since that time The frequent practice of the Court of Rome in granting Divorces on the pretence either of Spiritual kindred or of Degrees not forbidden either by the Law of Nature or the word of God and allowing second Marriages to both Parties upon such Divorces is an avowed breach of the Seventh Commandment The setting on some Princes to Invade other Princes in their just Rights is the Doctrine as well as it has been the practice of their Church for some Ages And as their Popes have wrested many Territories from Temporal Princes so for many Ages they set on Publick Robbery against the Eighth Commandment The Doctrine of Equivocating both taught and practised the breaking of safe Conducts and publick Faith decreed by their General Councils is also against the Ninth Commandment For the Tenth I shall say nothing of it because the meaning of it is not so generally agreed on But thus we see all the Rules of Morality are contradicted by that Church It might be justly added to swell up this Charge that of late there have been Doctrines published to the world by the approved Casuists of that Church with Licence which subvert all Justice destroy all security and take away the most sacred ties of mankind By the Doctrines of Probability and of Ordering the Intention aright there is no crime how black soever but a man may adventure on it with a good conscience These things were long and openly taught amongst them without any Censure And when many of the French Clergy complained of these at the Court of Rome perhaps more out of spite to the Jesuits than zeal for the Truth it was long before these so just Remonstrances were heard And in conclusion a trifling Censure was past on them by which they were declared Scandalous neither Impious nor Wicked and all were forbidden to teach them any more but they stand yet in the Books formerly published with Licence After all these particulars is it to be wondered at if the morals of the men of that Church be vitiated when their Doctrine is so corrupted for peoples practices are generally worse than their Opinions And thus the Second point is made good that in our Church we teach the same Rules of Living that are in the Scriptures which are grosly corrupted by their Doctrines
The Third Branch of the Christian Religion is the Worship of God and that chiefly the use of the Sacraments For the Worship of God let it be considered that we pray to God and praise him only for all these things about which the Scriptures command us to address to him Our worship is in a Language that all the people understand and so are edified by it according to St. Paul who has enlarged so much on this matter in a whole Chapter that it is strange how any who acknowledg the Authority of that Epistle can deny it Our Liturgies are such that the Romanists cannot except to any part of them Our ceremonies are few and these be both decent and useful So that in all the parts of our Worship we do so exactly agree to the Rule of the Scriptures and the Primitive Church that they cannot blame us for any one Rubrick or Collect in it But for their worship It is in a Language not understood by the people who to be sure can receive no Edification from that they understand not nor can they say Amen to such Devotions This is as it were in spite to St. Paul who took special care that as long as his Authority was in any esteem in the Church such an abuse should never creep into it Nor is there a shadow of Authority for such a practice from the Primitive Church in which for many Ages the Worship was still in the vulgar Tongues Next their Worship is so overcharged with many Rites and Ceremonies that the seriousness of Devotion must needs be much alloyed by them A great part of the Worship is so whispered as if they were muttering Spells Their Books of Exorcisms are the most indecent things that can be full of Charms and other ridiculous Rites And for the Pontifical and Ceremonial of their Church they may match with Heathenism for Superstition Their Offices are so various and numerous and the Rubricks seem so full of disorder that a man may as soon learn a Trade as know all the several parts of them How this can be reconciled to the Simplicity of the Gospel or the Worshipping God in spirit and truth may be easily judged by those who can compare things For the Sacraments we have the Two that Christ Instituted Baptism and the Lords Supper And for Pennance Confirmation Ordination and Marriage we have them also among us as they were appointed by Christ and his Apostles though we do not call these Sacraments For Extream Unction we find no warrant at all for it as a sacred Ordinance and we are sure the Church for many Ages did not think of it For Baptism it is done among us in the very Form our Saviour appointed and this they do not deny But among them they cannot be assured that they are at all Baptized since according to the Doctrine of the necessity of the Intention of the Priest to the Being of a Sacrament they cannot be assured of it for an Atheistical Priest can spoil their Baptism so that unless they can be certain of that which is impossible for them to know I mean the Intention of the Priest they are not sure that they were ever truly Baptized But for the Lords Supper if any person will so far trust his own Reason and senses as to compare all the Warrants we have in Scripture for that Ordinance with the Practice of our Church and theirs they will soon see who agree most to them Christ took Bread which he blessed and gave saying This is my Body which is given for you He also took the Chalice and said Drink ye all of it c. All this we doe and no more so that it is indeed a Communion among us and those who have read the account that Iustin Martyr gives us of the Rites in the Communion in his days would think he were reading the very Abstract of our Office But in the Church of Rome besides the less material things of the Form of the Bread the Consecration of Altars and Vessels with the numberless little devices in the Canon of the Mass that they seem not of such importance let these considerable changes they have made be looked into 1. They have brought in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation against the clearest Evidence both of sense and reason against the nature of a Sacrament and its being a Memorial of Christs Death and that by the very words of Consecration the Bread and Wine are Christs Body and Blood as the one was given for us and the other shed for us on the Cross and not as he is now at the Right hand of God The belief of this crept in by degrees from the eighth Century in which it was first set on foot but much contradicted both in the Eastern and Western Church and was not fully setled till the 13th Century We are sure it was not the Doctrine of the Churches of Rome Constantinople Asia Antioch nor Africk in the 5th and 6th Centuries by express Testimonies from the most esteemed Authors of that time Gelasius Chrysostom Ephrem Theodoret and St. Austin 2. They deny the Chalice to the Laity against the express words of the Institution and contrary both to the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church for 1300 years 3. They have declared the Priests saying Mass to be an Expiatory Sacrifice for the Dead and the Living though the Scripture plainly says That Christ was once offered for us It is true the Primitive Church used the words Sacrifice and Oblation as our Church yet does but their meaning by that was only in the general sense of these terms as Prayers Praises and Alms are called Sacrifices 4. They have brought in a new piece of Worship which is the hearing of Mass without receiving the Sacrament and it is now the great Devotion of their Church Though by the Institution it is as express as can be that the Consecration is only in order to its being a Communion And by the Apostolical Canons which some in their Church believe to be the work of the Apostles and are by them all acknowledged to be a Collection of the Rites of the first Ages all persons that were present at the Worship and did not communicate were to be severely censured 5. The adoring the Sacrament the exposing it on the Altar and carrying it about in solemn Processions to be worshipped as they are late Inventions so if Transubstantiation be not true they are by their own confession the grossest Idolatries that ever were And are not these considerable variations from the first Institution of this Sacrament As for their own Sacraments though there is no reason to equal them to either of these that were instituted by Christ yet some of them we use as they were at first appointed Persons Baptized are Confirmed with Imposition of hands the only Ceremony used by the Apostles We allow the use of Confession and do press it in many cases and give the benefit of
the Tradition of the Church was confidently alledged and some Quotations were brought and very oft out of some later Writers The Paper was no sooner read than a loud and often repeated Shout of applause followed without any further search or canvasing about these Authorities And upon that the Decree was made This was the practice both of the second Nicene and of some more ancient Councils whose Journals are hitherto preserved and where the Journals are lost we have reason to believe they followed the same method so that it is very probable there might have been some such Writing read in the Council of Lateran And if they did not found their Decree upon Tradition they were much to blame for they had as venerable a Tradition as either the second Council of Nice or some other Councils had a practice about 150 years standing from the days of Pope Gregory the VII so that it is not to be denied but they had as good authority from Tradition to make this Decree as to make most of the other Decrees on which they insist much in the Books of Controversies that are written by them By the fourth Rule of judging about Tradition the matter is yet much plainer for if the generally received Belief of any Age of the Church is a good Thread to lead us up to the Apostles times then there needs no more be said For it is certain that for near four Ages together this was the universally received Doctrine of the Church of Rome And the opposition that some Princes made to it was condemned as Heresy Rebellion and every thing that was evil And it is remarkable that both Oâ—…kam that wrote much for the Emperors cause against the Pope and Gerson and Almain no great favourers of Papal power are cited by Cardinal Perrow as acknowledging the Ecclesiastical power of deposing if a Prince were guilty of spiritual crimes So that the Controversies in this matter that were managed between the Writers for the Popes and Emperors were not whether the Pope in cases of Heresy might depose a Prince but were concerning two things very remote from this The one was whether the Pope had a direct Temporal power over all Kings by which as being Lord of the Feâ—… he could proceed upon any Cause whatsoever against a King and take his Dominions from him To this indeed Gregory the 7th pretended tho more covertly and Boniface the 8th more avowedly There was great Opposition made to this by many Writers but at the same time they all agreed on it as an undeniable Maxim That the Pope had an indirect Power over Princes by which in the Cases of Heresy he might excommunicate and depose them nor was there so much as any Debate about it A second thing about which there was some Controversy was whether the Particulars that fell under debate came within the Head of Heresy or not So in the Case of Princes giving the Investitures into Bishopricks the Pope brought it in within the Head of Heresy and condemned those Persons as Simoniacks The Writers on the other side denied this pretending it was a Civil Matter and a right of the Crown The like Debates fell in when Princes were sentenced on any other account The Authority of the Sentence in the Case of Heresy was not controverted all the Question was Whether the Point under debate was Heresy or not And concerning these things any who have read the Writings in the great Collection made of them by Goldastus will receive an easy and full Satisfaction By which it appears that the Popes Power of deposing Kings in the Case of Heresy was the received Doctrine of the Church for several Ages and by consequence it must be looked on as derived down from the Apostles If the Doctrine of any one Age of the Church can lead us backward in a certain Track to discover what it was in the Apostles days By the first Position about the Nature of Supreme Power it is apparent that in the Case of Heresy a Prince deposed by the Pope if he stands out against the Sentence may be as lawfully killed as any Tory or Moss-Trooper or Bantito may be for he is a Rebel against his Lord and an Usurper over the People from that day forward And therefore tho Mariana told a Secret too publickly yet it cannot be denied to be a certain Consequent of their Principles It had been indeed more discreetly done to have ordered this only to be infused unto Peoples Consciences by their Confessors in secret And for Mariana tho the Book in gross is condemned as they give out yet the Opinions set down in it are not censured But Suarez writing against K. Iames tells him in plain Terms That a King who is canonically deposed may be killed by any man whatsoever This was not only published with an ordinary License but the whole University of Alcala declared every thing in it to be according to the Doctrine of the Church Valentia tho he disguises it a little yet says That an Heretical Prince may by the Popes Sentence be deprived of his Life Foulis cites ten more Doctors for the same Opinion of killing Kings by private persons I do not build upon the Assertions of these Jesuits as binding Authorities in that Church but make use of them to shew that some of their own eminentest Writers acknowledg the force of this Consequence which is indeed so evident that nothing but good Manners and some small Care not to provoke Princes too much by such bare-faced Positions keeps others from asserting it Few Princes are so tame as Childeric was to go into a Monastery after they are deposed Therefore this Doctrine is but a lame provision for the Churches Security from Heresie if the Lawfulness of killing does not follow that of deposing Kings And it was so generally received that it is told of Gerson that he was at great pains to get it declared that no private Cut-throat might kill a King and that by consequence it was only the Popes Prerogative to order them to be destroyed By the second Position about the Nature of Supreme Power that in extraordinary Cases Forms of Law may be superseded It is also clear that tho we know nothing of any Sentence of Deposition given out against the King yet he is not a whit the safer for he lies under an yearly Curse every Maundy Thursday The Notoriousness of his Heresy will sufficiently justify a particular Sentence without any further Process or Citation according to the Maxims of the Canon Law And there may be for ought we can know as valid a Deposition as Parchment and Lead can make it already expeded And if it be not yet done we are sure it may be done very suddenly and will be done whensoever they see any probability of Success Bellarmine hath very sincerely told us the Reason why Heretical Princes are not deposed because the Church has not strength enough to make such
wherever they find it And therefore in the first place their minds must be disingaged from these unjust prejudices that they conceive of our Religion and such just prejudices must be offered them against the Romish Religion as may at least beget in them some jealousies concerning it by which they may be brought so far as to think the matter suspicious If then there be such reasons offered them for susspecting foul dealing from their Priests and Church as would make them suspect an Attorney Physician or any other person with whom they were to deal they will be prepared to hear reason which is all that we desire and upon this Head these following Considerations may be laid before them 1. All people that pretend to great Power and Dominion over our consciences are justly to be suspected If any man designed to make himself Master of any of our other Liberties we would examine his Title and suspect all his other motions when we see they tend to subject us to him Therefore a Church that designs to keep all her Votaries under an absolute obedience is justly to be suspected and our Church that pretends to no such power is more likely to deal fairly 2. A Church that designs to keep her Members in ignorance is more to be suspected than a Church that brings every thing to a fair Trial. A Church that denies the use of the Scriptures in a known tongue except to a few and wraps up their Worship in a Language that is not understood is reasonably to be suspected more than a Church that gives the free use of the Scriptures to all persons and worships God in a Language which the people understand 3. A Church whose Opinions tend to engross the Riches of the world to its Officers is more to be suspected than a Church that pretends to nothing but a competent maintenance of the several Officers in it The Redeeming Souls out of Purgatory and the Enriching the Shrines or Reliques of Saints Pardons Jubilees and many more Tenets of the Church of Rome are so calculated for enriching their Societies that every cautious man must needs suspect some design in it which he cannot charge on a Church that has none of these Arts to get money 4. A Church that has carried on its Designs by the most dishonest methods possible the forging of Writings and Deeds of Miracles Visions Prophesies and other things of that Nature is more justly to be suspected than a Church that cannot be charged with any such practices The Forging so many Epistles for the Popes of the first Ages which are now by themselves confest to be Spurious with many other Forgeries were the Engines by which the Papal Power was chiefly advanced The Legends and Extravagant Fables of which they are now ashamed were the chief Motives of Devotion for many Ages And by these Saints and Images were so much magnified and Monasteries so enriched A Noted Liar after a Discovery is no more to be trusted 5. Any that considers the present State of Rome the manner of Electing Popes the Practices of that Court and the Maximes they move by must see that every thing there is secular corrupt and at best directed by rules of Policy But to fansie the Holy Ghost can come upon any Election so managed as their own Books shew that is is the most unreasonable thing that can be devised Therefore a Church that neither pretends so high nor can be charged with such proceedings is more likely to be the true Church 6. A Church that teaches Cruelty against poor Innocent people that differ in opinion and sets on Plots Conspiracies and Rebellion against Princes that are judged Hereticks is more likely to be corrupted than a Church that is so merciful as to condemn all capital proceedings for difference of Opinion and teaches an absolute Submission to the Soveraign Power even when it persecutes and oppresses them 7. A Church that is false to her own Principles is not so likely to Instruct her members aright as a Church that is in all things consistent to her self The great Foundation of their Doctrine is That there must be a speaking Judg to decide all Controversies Now they have no such Judg for it is not of Faith that the Pope is this Judg or is Infallible And for a general Council they have had none these 112. years nor are they like to see another in hast So they have no Speaking Infallible Judg among them And thus they deceive people by a false Pretence whereas we appeal to nothing but what we really have among us which are the Scriptures 8. A Church that appeals to Marks which are not possible to be searcht out is more likely to mislead people than a Church that pretends to nothing but what can be certainly proved The great thing they appeal to is the Constant Succession of the Bishops of Rome and their other Pastors This cannot be known no not by a probable conjecture But there are on the contrary as great grounds for History to deny it in the See of Rome as in any other Ancient See whatsoever but though they have it both the Greek Church and our Church has it likewise These are such plain things and the Truth of them is so notoriously known that I should ask any of that Communion whether upon the like reasons he would not be Jealous of any person or sort of persons whatsoever And if these grounds of jealousie would work in other matters it is much more reasonable that they should take place in matters of Religion In which as an Error is of far greater Importance So Impostors in all Ages have studied to make gain by Religion Therefore it is most just upon these violent presumptions to look about us and take care we be not cheated But before I would descend to particulars there is one General prejudice that works most universally on weaker minds to be removed which is that the true Church cannot Erre If then it be made appear unanswerably that the true Church may Erre and that in a most weighty Point all these Arguments fall to the ground That the Church of the Iews in our Saviours days was the true Church cannot be denied for our Saviour owned it to be such He joyned with them in their worship He sent the Lepers to the Priest He commanded them to hear the Doctors that sate in Moses Chair and himself acknowledged the High Priest This is sufficient to prove that it was the true Church and yet this Church erred in a most Important point whether Jesus Christ was the true Messias in whom the Prophecies were fulfilled or not they Judged falsly The High Priests with all the Sanhedrim declared him a Blasphemer and condemned him guilty of Death Here the true Church expounds the Scriptures falsly and erred in the Foundation of Religion And it is well known that the chief arguments which they of the Romish party bring to prove that a Church cannot
Err do agree as well to the Iewish as the Christian Church the one being the true Church under that dispensation as well as the other is now If then this Decision made by the true Church in Christs time did not oblige all in that Church to go on in that error but private persons might have examined their Sentence and depart from them upon it then upon the same reasons though we acknowledge the Church of Rome a true Church yet we may examine her Doctrines and separate from her errors This grand prejudice being thus removed there are two things in the next place to be laid before them One is that the Scriptures being acknowledged to come from Divine Inspiration on all hands can only decide the Controversies among us and the places I shall make use of shall be cited according to the Doway Translation to which being made by themselves they cannot except Another is that a man must judg of things as they appear plainly to his reasonable Faculties It is against all reason to say that because it is possible for a man to be mistaken therefore he ought to doubt his Judgment in things that are clear to him This must turn a man Sceptical both to all Religions and all the concerns of human life Therefore every man must follow his Judgment when after a diligent Inquiry any thing appears plain to him And now to come up close to those of that perswasion they are to consider that the chief parts of Religion are First Articles of Faith Secondly Rules of Life Thirdly The worship of God chiefly in the Sacraments And Fourthly The Government of the Church If then in every one of these Heads the Church of England agrees clearly with the Scriptures and the Church of Rome does either manifestly contradict them or differs matterially from them in all these points in which we and they differ then the Resolution of the Question Whether a man ought to joyn himself to our Church or theirs will be easily made For Articles of Faith if either the Apostles Creed or the Creeds of the First 4. General Councils contain a just abstract of the Faith then we who receive every Article in these Creeds do agree more exactly to the Apostolical Doctrine than they who have added many new Articles to their Creed The chief Article of Faith is The Covenant made between God and Man through Iesus Christ by which upon the Account of his Merits and Intercession all who follow the Rules of the Gospel may expect the Blessings of it both here and hereafter Pennance toward God and Faith towards our Lord Iesus Christ being the conditions upon which we hope for Eternal life This we plainly teach without Addition or Change But in how many things have they departed from this Simplicity of the Gospel First In teaching People to address to God for the Merits and by the Intercession of the Saints From whom these things are asked for which the Scriptures direct us only to God and Christ. And in the very words pronounced after absolution The Merits of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints are joined with the passion of Christ as the grounds on which we obtain pardon of Sin Grace and Eternal life Secondly In perswading People That a Simple attrition with the use of the Sacraments without any real conversion of the Soul or change of life is sufficient to Salvation Thirdly In perswading People That there is a Communication of the Merits of Saints to other Persons though the Scriptures mention only the Communication of Christs Merits Fourthly by Teaching that tho our sins are pardoned thorough Christ yet there are terrible and long lasting torments to be endured in another State Fâ—â—tly that saying Masses and going of Pilgrimages can Redeem from these Now in all these the two chief Designs of the Gospel are plainly contradicted Which be First To Change our hearts and lives Secondly To perswade us to a humble Dependance upon Christ and an high acknowledgment of him But these Doctrines of theirs as they shew us a way to be sure of Heaven without a real Conversion so they take off so much from Faith in Christ as they carry us to trust to somewhat else These are Errors of great Importance Since they corrupt the Fountain and overthrow the chief design of the Christian Religion They are also late devices brought in in the dark and ignorant Ages No mention is made of praying to Saints in any Ancient Liturgie There is a great deal against it in the most Ancient Authors And though in the Fourth Century upon the Conversion of many Heathens to the Christian Faith to humour them in their conceit of some Intermedial Agents between the Divinity and us Mortals there was a Reverence for the Saints set up to deive out the worship of those Secondary Deities yet this was no direct Adoration though they then began to use Rhetorical addresses to Saints like prayers Yet even in Gregory the Great his time in the beginning of the Seventh Century we find no Prayers made to them in all his Liturgies And for the Belief of a simple Attrition being sufficient with the Sacrament no body ever dreamed of it before the Schoolmen found out the Distinction between Attrition and Contrition in the later Ages For the Communication of the Merits of Saints the whole Fathers in one voice speak only of the Merits of Christ being Communicate to us The Fryers first invented it to invite People at least to die in their habits by perswading them that all the merits of the Saints of their Order were shared among the whole Order And for Redeeming out of Purgatory the first Four Ages knew nothing of it In the beginning of the Fifth Century St. Austin plainly speaks of it as an Opinion which some had taken up without any ground and that it was no way certain nor could we ever be sure of it And though in Gregory the Great 's time the Belief of it was pretty far advanced yet the Trade of Redeeming out of it by saying Masses for Departed Souls was not even then found out So that all these are both gross Errors and late Inventions The next Branch of Religion is the Rule of human life which one would think could be taken from no other Standard so certainly as the 10. Commandments and the Expositions given of these in Scripture chiefly our Saviours Sermon on the Mount Let Malice it self appear to Declare wherein our Church strikes at any of these or Teaches men to disobey even the least of them If then our Rule of life be exactly the same with that which the Scriptures prescribe we are safe as to this which may be well called The most important piece of Religion For it is to be considered that God making man after his own Image the end of his Creation was that he might be made like God The Attributes of God to be Imitated are Goodness Mercy Justice Wisdom and Truth And it
Absolution but we do not make this an Engin to screw peoples secrets from them For which there is no warrant in Scripture nor was it thought necessary for many Ages after the Apostles Confession of publick Scandals was enjoyned and for private sins it was recommended but this latter was not judged simply necessary for obtaining the pardon of sin And what noise soever they make of the good that Confession and the enjoyning of Pennance may do if well managed we need only appeal to some of their own best Writers now in France whether as they have been practised they have not rather driven all true Piety out of the world If these abuses had been only the faults of some Priests the blame could not have been justly cast on their Church but when the publick Rules given to Confessors printed with Licence are their warrants for so doing then their Church is in fault So that nothing is more common among them than for persons after a confession made of their sins with a slight sorrow and some trifling pennance undergone together with the Priestly Absolution to fancy themselves as clean from all sin as if they had never offended God And this being the Doctrin of their Church it both lessens the sense of sin and takes men off from making such earnest applications to God through Christ as the Gospel commands For Orders they are among us with the same Rites that Christ and the Apostles gave them first And a learned Man of their own Church has lately published the most ancient Forms of Ordinations he could find From which it appears that all the Ceremonies in their Ordinations for the want of which they accuse us were brought in since the eighth Century so that even by their own Principles these things cannot be necessary to Ordination otherwise there were no true Orders in the Church for the first eight Ages For Marriage we honour it as Gods Ordinance and since the Scriptures declare it honourable in all without exception we dare deny it to none who desire it St. Paul delivers the Duty of Clergy-men towards their Wives with Rules for their Wives behaviour which had been very impertinent if Clergy-men might have no Wives We find a married Clergy in the first ten Centuries And we know by what base Arts the Caelibate of the Clergy was brought in and what horrid ill effects it has produced Neither do we allow of any devices to hinder Marriage by degrees of kindred not prohibited in the Law of God or the trade that was long driven in granting Dispensations in those degrees and afterwards annulling these and avoiding the Marriages that followed upon them upon some pretences of Law Thus it appears how they have corrupted the Doctrine of the Sacraments together with the Worship of God The last head of Religion is Government and as to this we can challenge any to see what they can except to us First in reference to the Civil Power we declare all are bound for conscience sake to obey every lawful Command of the Supream Authority and to submit when they cannot obey We pretend to no Exemption of Clarks from the Civil Jurisdiction but give to Caesar the things that are Caesars We do not obey the King only because he is of our Religion much less do we allow of Conspiracies or Rebellions upon our judging him an Heretick so that we deliver no Doctrin that can be of any ill consequence to the Society we live in And for the Ecclesiastical Government we have Bishops Priests and Deacons rightly Ordained and in their due subordination to one another every one administring these Offices due to his Function which has been the Government of the Christian Church since the times of the Apostles So that we have a clear vocation of Pastors among us from whose hands every person may without scruple receive all the Sacraments of the Church But for the Church of Rome how unsafe is the Civil Government among them not to mention the Doctrin of deposing Princes for which I refer you to my former Letter What a security does the Exemption of Clerks from the Civil Courts in cases criminal give to loose and debauched Church-men and what disturbance must this breed to a Common-wealth The denying the Civil Magistrate power to make Laws that concern Religion or oblige Churchmen takes away a great deal of his Rights for scarce any Law can be made but wrangling and ill-natur'd Churchmen may draw it within some head of Religion And that this was frequently done in former Ages all that have read History know The quarrels that were in the beginning of this Century between the Pope and the Republick of Venice were a fresh Evidence of it But for the Ecclesiastical Government they have spoiled it in all the parts of it The Pope has assumed a power of so vast an extent and so arbitrary a nature that all the ancient Canons are thrown out of doors by it We know that originally the Bishops of Rome were looked on by the rest of the Church as their Colleagues and fellow Bishops The Dignity of the City made the See more remarkable and the belief of St. Peters having founded it with his suffering Martrydom there with St. Paul made it much honoured so that when the Empire became Christian then the Dignity of the Imperial City made the Bishop of Rome be acknowledged the first Patriarch From this beginning they arose by many degrees to the height of pretending to a Supremacy both Civil and Spiritual and then they not only received appeals which was all they at first pretended to but set up Legantine Courts every where made the Bishops swear Obedience and Homage to them and the Arch-Bishops receive the Pall from their hands in sign of their dependance on them Exempted Monasteries and other Clarks from Episcopal Jurisdiction broke all the Laws of the Church by their Dispensations So that no shaddow of the primitive Government does now remain And though Gregory the Great wrote with as much indignation against the Title of Universal Bishop as ever any Protestant did yet his Successors have since assumed both the Name and thing And to that height of Insolence has this risen that in the Council of Trent all the Papal Party opposed the Decree that was put in for declaring Bishops to have their Jurisdictions by Divine Right The Court Party not being ashamed to affirm that all Jurisdiction was by Divine Right only in the Pope and in the other Bishops as the Delegates of the Apostolick See and they were in this too hard for the other Party So that now a Bishop who by the Divine appointment ought to feed the Flock can do no more in that then as the Pope gives him leave The greatest part of the Priests have no dependence on their Bishops The Monks Fryars and Iesuits being immediately subordinate to the Pope so that they do what they please knowing they can justifie any thing
at Rome and they fear no Censure any where else From this so many abuses have crept in and the Canonists have found out so many devices to make them Legal that there is no hope of Reforming these at Rome The whole State of Cardinals is one great Corruption who from being Originally the Parish Priests of Rome and so under all Bishops have raised themselves so high that they do now trample on the whole Order and pretend to an Equality with Princes The giving Benefices to Children the unlimitted Plurality of Benefices in one Person the Comendam's the reserved Pensions with many other such like are gross as well as late Corruptions And no wonder if all men despair of Reforming the Court of Rome when these abuses are become necessary to it by which the greatness of the Cardinals and the other Officers or Ministers there is kept up I need not mention the gross Simony of that Court where all the world knows every thing may be had for money The Popes themselves are often Chosen by these Arts and if their own Rules be true such Elections with every thing that follows on them are void The Infinite Swarmes of the Inferiour Clergy do plainly drive a Simoniacal Trade by the Masses they say for Departed Souls for Money And for Publick Pennance they have Universally let it fall in stead whereof private Pennance is now in use And if their own Writers say true this is made an Engine to serve other ends when by enjoyning slight and easie Pennances they draw the People after them upon which the Jesuites have been loudly accused these Forty Years last past In Sum all the Corruptions or rather defects that are in the Government of our Church are only such as they brought in and have not met yet with such effectual remedies as must cure the Church of these inveterate Distempers their ill Conduct did cast her into If any of that Party will review these Particulars and so far trust their own Reasons as to judge according to the plainest Evidence they cannot resist the conviction that they must needs meet with when they see the simplicity of our Faith the Morality of our Doctrine the Purity of our Worship and our Primitive Government and compare it with their vast Superfetation of Articles of Faith the Immorality of their Rules of living the Superstition if not Idolatry of their Worship and the most extravagant Innovations in Government that are in the Church of Rome And indeed these things are so clear that few could resist the force of so much plain truth if it were not for some prejudices with which they are so fettered that they cannot examine matters with that freedom of mind that is necessary Therefore much care must be taken to clear these in the most familiar and demonstrative manner that is possible They may be reduced to these Five chief Ones First That the true Church cannot Err. Secondly That out of the true Church there is no salvation Thirdly That the case of the Church of Rome is much safer than ours is since the Church of England acknowledges a possibility of salvation in the Church of Rome which they on the other hand deny to the Church of England Fourthly That unless there be a Supreme Judg set up we can be sure of nothing in Religion but must fall into many Factions and Parties And Fiftly That the Reformation was but a Novelty begun in the former Age and carried on in this Nation out of an ill design and managed with much Sacriledge The First of these seemed necessary to be cleared in the beginning of this Discourse and I am deceived if it was not done convincingly And for the Second we agree to it That out of the true Church there is no Sâ—…lvation But then the Question comes What makes one a Member of the true Church The Scriptures call the Church the Body of Christ of which he is the Head So then whoever are joined to Christ according to the Gospel must be within the true Church But the deceit that lies hid under this is That from hence they fancy that the Unity of the Church does consist in an outward Communion with the See of Rome And upon that they calculate that there must be an Unity in the Body of the Church And that cannot be except all be joined to the See of Rome Now we grant there is but one Church but this Unity consists not in an Outward Communion though that is much to be desired but consists in an Unity of Belief about the essentials of Christianity There is nothing more evident than that even according to their own Principles other Churches are not bound upon the hazard of Damnation to hold Communion with the See of Rome for it is not an Article of Faith nor certain according to their own Doctrine That the Pope is Infallible And except that were certain we cannot be obliged to hold Communion under such a Sanction with that See For if it be possible that a Pope may become an Heretick or Schismatick which many of them confess and all agree that the contrary is not of Faith then other Churches are not in that case obliged to hold Communion with that See If therefore the possibility of Error in that See be acknowledged then holding Communion with it cannot be the measure of the Unity of the Church So we bring it to this Issue It is not Heresie to say The Pope may Err Therefore this is no just prejudice against our Church because we have departed from Communion with him when he imposed his Errors on us So all the high things they boast of that See come to nothing except they say This Proposition is of Faith That the Pope is Infallible And for these Meetings that they call General Councils they were at best but the Councils of the Western Patriarchate artificially packt and managed with much Art as appears even from Cardinal Pallavicini's History of the Council of Trent For the Third Prejudice It is the most disingenuous thing that can be Because our Church is charitable and modest in her Censures and theirs is uncharitable and cruel in her Judgments therefore to conclude That Communion with them is safer than with us If confidence and Presumption Noise and Arrogance are the marks to judge a Church by we must yield to them in these but if Truth and Peace Charity and holy Doctrines be the better Standards then we are as sure that our Communion is much safer Let this Rule be applied to the other concerns of human life and it will appear how ridiculous an abuse it is to take measures from so false a Standard If a man were sick the Question comes Whether he shall use an approved Physitian or a Montebanks On the one hand the Montebank says He will certainly cure him and the Doctors will undoubtedly kill him On the other hand the Doctor modestly says he will undertake nothing but will do the best
opinion of any thing that came from so wicked a man and upon such ill motives If this be a good Argument against the Reformation it was as good against Christianity upon Constantine's turning Christian for the Heathen Writers represent him with as black a character as they can do King Henry But we must not think ill of every thing that is done by a bad man and upon an ill Principle Otherwise if we had lived in Iehu's days the same Plea would have been as strong for keeping up the Idolatry of Baal since Iehu had in a very unsincere manner destroyed it and yet God rewarded him for what he had done But whatever might have been King Henry's secret motives his proceedings were regular and justifiable He found himself married to her that had been his own Brothers Wife contrary to the express words of the Law of God The Popes Legat and his own Confessor and all the Bishops of England except one thought his scruples were well grounded Upon which according to the superstition of that time he made his applications to the Court of Rome for a Divorce which were at first well received and a Bull was granted Afterwards some defects being found in that a more ample one was desired which was also granted and Legats were appointed to try the matter But the Pope soon after turned over to the Emperors Party whose Aunt the Queen was and was thereupon prevailed with to recal the Legats Commission destroy the Bull and cite the King to appear at Rome where all things and persons were at the Emperors devotion Upon all this the King did expostulate with the Pope that either his business was just or unjust if it was just why did he recall what he had granted and put him off with such delays If it was not just why did he at first grant the Bull for the Divorce This was unanswerable but the Pope did still feed him with false hopes yet would do nothing Upon which he consulted the chief Universities and the most learned men in Christendom about his Marriage Twelve famous Universities and above an hundred learned Doctors did declare under their hands and Seals some writing larger Treatises about it that his Marriage was against the Law of God And that in that case the Popes Dispensation which had allowed the Marriage was void of it self So after the King had been kept in suspence from December 1527 till February 1533 4. above six years he set his Divines to examin what authority the Pope had in England either by the Law of God or the practice of the Primitive Church or the Law of the Land and after a long and accurate search they found He had no authority at all in England neither by the Laws of God of the Church nor of the Land so this Decision was not made rashly nor of a sudden The Popes Authority being thus cast off it was Natural in the next place to Consider what Doctrines were then held in England upon no other grounds than Papal Decrees For it was absurd to reject the Popes power and yet to retain these Opinions which had no better Foundation than his Authority Upon this many of the things which had been for some Ages received in the Church of Rome fell under debate And a great many particulars were reformed Yet that King was so leavened with the Old Superstition that the progress of the Reformation was but slow during his Reign But it was carried on to a further perfection under King Edward and Queen Elizabeth In all their Methods of proceeding there is nothing that can be reasonably censured if it be confessed that the Pope is not Infallible and the whole Church of Rome acknowledges that it is no Heresie to deny his Infallibility And for the Sale of the Abby-lands they only spoiled the spoilers For the Monks and Fryers had put these publick cheats on the Nation of Redeeming Souls out of Purgatory going on Pilgrimages with the worship of Saints and Images which were infused in the vulgar by many lying Stories pretended Apparitions the false shew of Miracles with other such like Arts. And the credulous and superstitious Multitudes were thereby wrought on to endow these Houses with their best Lands and adorn their Churches with their Plate and richest Furniture It was not to be expected that when their Impostures were discovered they should enjoy the spoil they had made by them nor was it for the publick interest of the Nation to give such encouragement to idleness as the converting all these Houses to Foundations for an unactive life would have been Many of them were applied to good Uses Bishopricks Cathedral and Collegiat Churches Hospitals and free Schools And more of them ought indeed to have been converted to these ends But the excesses of King Henry and his Courtiers must not be charged on the Reformers who did all they could to hinder them And thus all these prejudices with which the Vulgar are misled appear to be very unjust and ill grounded In conclusion If by these or such like considerations any that are now of that Communion can be brought to mind Religion in earnest considering it as a Design to save their Souls by making them truly pure and holy and so reconciling them to God through Christ And if they will examine Matters without Partiality seeking the truth and resolving to follow it wherever they find it and joyn with their Enquiries earnest Prayers to God the Father of lights to open their eyes and grant them his Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth there is little doubt to be made but the great Evidence that is in Truth will in due time appear so clear to them as to dissipate all these mists which Education implicite Faith and Superstition have raised by which they have hitherto darkened FINIS A RELATION Of the Barbarous and Bloody MASSACRE Of about an hundred thousand PROTESTANTS BEGUN At PARIS and carried on over all FRANCE by the PAPISTS in the Year 1572. Collected out of Mezeray Thuanus and other approved Authors LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1678. A Relation of the Massacre of the Protestants begun in Paris and carried on over all France in the Year 1572. THere are no Principles of Morality more universally received and that make deeper impressions on the minds of all Men that are more necessary for the good of humane Society and do more resemble the Divine Perfections than Truth and Goodness So that if our Saviour denounced a Woe against those who teach Men to break the least of his Commandments what may they look for who design to subvert these that may be justly called the greatest of them That the Church of Rome teaches Barbarity and Cruelty against all who receive not their Opinions and that Hereticks are to be delivered to secular Princes who must burn them without mercy or if they have either Bowels or Conscience so
that they will not be the Instruments of their Cruelty that they shall lose their Kingdoms or Dominions is known to all that have read the Decrees of the 4th Council in the Lateran The violation of Publick Faith was also decreed by another of their General Councils at Constance in which notwithstanding the safe conduct that Sigismund had granted to Iohn Husse and Ierome of Prague care was not only taken that they should be burnt but they made it a standing Rule for the time to come That tho Hereticks came to the place of Judgment trusting to their safe conduct and would not have come without it yet the Prince who granted it was under no Obligation by it but the Church might proceed to Censures and Punishment By these Decrees Cruelty and Treachery are become a part of their Doctrine and they may join them to their Creed upon as good Reasons as they can shew for many of their other Additions The Nature of Man is not yet sunk so low as easily to hear these things without horror therefore it is fit they should be kept among the Secrets of their Religion till a fit opportunity appear in which they may serve a turn and then we need not doubt but they will be made use of If any will be so charitable to their Church as not easily to believe this the History of the Parisian Massacre may satisfie them to the full which Thuanus says was a Pitch of Barbarity beyond any thing that former Ages had ever seen And if the Irish Massacre flowing from the same Spirit and the same Principles had not gone beyond it we might have reasonably concluded that it could never be matched again But we may be taught from such Precedents what we ought to expect when ever we are at the mercy of Persons of that Religion who if they be true Sons of the Church of Rome must renounce both Faith and Mercy to all Hereticks I shall give the Relation of this Massacre from that celebrated late Writer of the French History Mr. de Mezeray only adding some Passages out of Thuanus Davila and others where he is defective But I shall premise a short representation of the Civil Wars of France which are made use of as the Arguments for justifying that Cruelty and by which they do still blemish the Protestant Religion as teaching Rebellion against Princes During the Reign of Francis the 1st and Henry the 2d the Protestant Religion got great footing in France the usual severities of the Church of Rome were then employed to extirpate it yet tho their Numbers were very great and the Persecution most severe they made no resistance But upon the death of Henry the 2d Catherine de Medici the Queen Mother with the Cardinal of Lorrain and the Duke of Guise took the Government in their Hands pretending that the King Francis the 2d was of Age being then sixteen The Princes of the Blood on the other hand alleadged That the Kingdom ought to be under a Regency till the King was at least 22 Years of Age Since Charles the 6th had been admitted at that Age to the Government as a particular mark of their esteem of him So that tho the Age of Majority was at 25 Years and that was a singular exception from a general Rule yet at furthest it shewed that the King could not assume the Government before he was two and twenty It was also an undoubted Right of the Princes of the Blood to hold the Regency during the Minority of their Kings and to administer it by the Direction of the Parliaments and the Assembly of the States Upon these Points many things were written on both sides The Princes of the Blood pretended they were excluded from the Government against Law and upon that were projecting how to possess themselves of the Power which with the Person of the King were violently kept from them But the Prince of Conde being advised to it by Coligny then Admiral of France did also declare for mitigating the Severities against the Protestants This being the Case that the Point was truly disputable no Man can blame the Protestants for joining with their Friends against their Enemies And yet this Plot was driven no further than an endeavour to take the King out of the Hands of his Mother and the Brothers of Lorrain who were all Foreigners The chief Promoter of it was a Papist Renaudy and it was discovered by Avennelles who tho he was most firm to his Religion being a Protestant yet having an aversion to all Plots revealed it out of scruple of Conscience Soon after this Discovery Francis the 2d died and his Brother that succeded him Charles the 9th was without dispute under Age he not being then full eleven years old And according to the resolution of many great Lawyers in the case of his Brother the Kingdom ought to have been under a Regency during all the Wars that preceded the Massacre for he was then but two and twenty At first it was agreed to that the King of Navarre as the first Prince of the Blood ought to be Regent but he being wrought on by the Queen Mother and her Party and drawn over to them the Lawyers were again set to examine How far the Power of the Regent did extend Many published their Opinions That the other Princes of the Blood ought to have their share in the Regency and that the Regents might be checkt by the Courts of Parliaments and were subject to an Assembly of the States The chief Point of State then under Consideration was What way to proceed with the Protestants whose Numbers grew daily and were now more considerable having such powerful Heads A severe Edict came out against them in Iuly 1561 condemning all Meetings for Religious Worship except those that were celebrated with the Rites of the Church of Rome banishing all the Protestant Ministers and appointing the Bishops to proceed against Hereticks with this only mitigation of former Cruelties That Banishment should be the highest Punishment But the Nation could not bear the Execution of this So next Ianuary there was a great Assembly called of the Princes of the Blood the Privy Counsellors and eight Courts of Parliament in which the Edict that carried the name of the Month was passed By it the free exercise of that Religion was tolerated and the Magistrates were required to punish all who should hinder or interrupt it Not long after that the Duke of Guise did disturb a Meeting of Protestants at Vassy as he was on his Journey to Paris his Servants began with reproachful words and from these they went to blows It ended in a throwing of Stones one of which hurt the Duke but that was severely revenged about 60 were killed and 200 wounded no Age or Sex being spared Upon this he encouraged the violation of the Edict every where so that it was universally broken The King of Navarre joined with him