Reason upon the consent of Mankind and the concession of our Adversaries and upon such known and evident matters of Fact as the most Impudent Wrangler wou'd be asham'd to deny As to the first That the Church of England is Heretical I prove thus Whatsoever Society of Christians obstinately denies any Doctrine believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith is Heretical but the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England is Heretical The Major or first Proposition is a known Principle which no Christian in his wits ever denied The Minor or second Proposition I demonstrate thus The Church of England obstinately denies Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass and many other Points but these are believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith That the Church of England obstinately denies the said Doctrines or Points is matter of Fact and what She very much glories in That the same Points or Doctrines were all in the begining of the Reformation believed by the Catholic Church to be of Faith we have besides the unanimous consent of the Roman Greek and all the Eastern Churches the Testimony of several Learned Protestants who surely wou'd never have told a thing so favourable to their Adversaries if it had not been manifestly True And to shew that this is not said gratis I will Instance in some Hospinian faith Luther's Separation was from all the World Epist 141. White Popery was a Leprosie breeding so universally in the Church that there was no Visible Company of Men appearing in the World free from it Defence c. 37. p. 136. The aforesaid Doctrineâ— is what this good man is pleas'd to call Popery as all the World knows Bishop Jewel The Whole World Princes Priests and People were overwhelm'd with Ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope Sermon on Luke 11. Whitaker In times past no Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Controv. 4.9 5. c. 3. Bucer All the World err'd in that Article of the real presence p. 660. Calvin They made all the Kings and People of the Earth Drunk from the First to the Last Justit 4. c. 18. Perkins During the space of 900 years the Popish Heresie had spread it self over the Whole World Exposit symb p. 266. The Sum of this cloud of Witnesses which yet is not the twentieth Part of what may be brought from the Reformation-treasure amounts to this that before the Reformation there was no other Religion in the Whole Christian World but the Roman Catholic or as they are pleas'd to term it the Papistical and that the aforesaid Points and many more which they call Popery Leprosie and Ignorance were universally believed as Articles of Faith by all the visible Companies of Christians in the World And if this be true the Church of England which obstinately denies these Points and many more must necessarily deny some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church as of Faith and by consequence the Church of England is Heretical Touching the second viz. that the Church of England is Schismatical This is no less evident than the former For if Schism be a willful Separation from the Church as it is defined by all Mankind as well Protestants as Catholics the Church of England is doubly guilty of this Crime First for separating from the Pope and their own Immediate Heads the Bishops of England Secondly for separating from the Communion of all other Bishops in the World besides The Bishop of Rome in the begining of the Reformation was acknowledg'd by all the World to be at least Patriarch of the West and by the Protestants themselves to have exercis'd Jurisdiction over the Church of England for 900 years and more even from the time of its Conversion to Christianity and surely so long a prescription is a sufficient Title tho' no other cou'd be shewn We find in the Acts of the third General Council held at Ephesus Binius Tom. 2. Apend 1. Cap. 4. a complaint exhibited by the Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus against the Patriarch of Antioch who wou'd force that Iland to submit to his jurisdiction and oblige its Metropolitian to receive the Grace of Ordination from him as the Council phrases it To this Complaint the Council answers That if the Bishops of Cyprus cou'd make out that the Patriarch of Antioch had never conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan it was unjust to pretend to it now And the Bus'ness being fairly prov'd in favour of the said Bishops the Council decreed That the Patriarch of Antioch had no Jurisdiction over them nor ought to pretend to any Whence it is manifest that if the Patriarch of Antioch cou'd prove that he had conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan at any time or exercis'd Lawful Jurisdiction over them the Council wou'd have Decreed the said Iland to be subject to him and that as it was a manifest Usurpation in the Patriarch of Antioch to pretend to any such Jurisdiction since he was not in Possession of it nor cou'd prove to have ever had it so likewise it wou'd be perfect Rebellion and Schism in them to withdraw from his Jurisdiction if he were Legally possess'd of it Now I would fain know if the same Council were to judge the Church of England and the Pope's cause what they wou'd think of it Pope Eleutherius sent some of his own Clergy to Convert the Brittans in King Lucius his Time St. Gregory sent Augustin the Monk and others to convert the Saxons and exercis'd Jurisdiction over them ordaining their Metropolitan or causing him to be ordained by his Orders and the Popes his Successors continued in peaceable Possession of this Prerogative and they the Clergy and People of England receiving and obeying his lawful Commands not only as Patriarch of the West but even as Head of the Church for the Space of 900 Years and more what wou'd this Council I say think of the Church of England's rising up against the Pope's Authority after so long a Prescription Certainly it wou'd look upon them to be Rebels against the Authority the best establish'd in the World Nor will it any way help them to say as they usually do that the King of England has Power to Transfer the Papal or Patriarchal Power from Rome and confer it upon the Archbishop of Canterbury For besides that it is most absurd to suppose such a Power in a King since it cannot be imagin'd whence such an Ecclesiastical Authority can be deriv'd to a Secular Prince we have an express Decree to the contrary in the fourth General Council held at Calcedon What gave Occasion to it was this The Bishop of Tyre was anciently Metropolitan of Phaenicia Concil Calced Act. 6. and as such exercis'd Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in that Province Marcianus the Emperor contrary to
that of those One or Two who first oppos'd it III. That these Authors of Sects did not all oppose this universal Consent at the same time but some in different Ages and all at different Times IV. That they did not all oppose the same Points of Faith 1. That the Contradiction of each of the said Sects began first in one or two at most This is so manifest in History and in all Records both innocient and Modern that it were superfluous to go about to prove it 2. That the Contradiction of all such as adher'd to the Heads of each Sect be they never so many amounts to no more than that of those one or two who first oppos'd it This is evident for if Arius for instance err'd in denying the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father no number of Adherents to his Opinion can make it True Now that Arius err'd in this Point 't is easy to see because the universal Consent of all the Christian World was against him And as this is manifest in respect of Arius and his Sectators so it is no less convincing in regard of Nestorius Eutyches and all other Sects whatsoever 3. These Authors of Sects did not oppose the universal Consent at the same time but some in different Ages and all at different Times This is so plain that it needs no Proof for no body who is never so little read in Antiquity can be Ignorant that Arius for instance opposed it in the Beginning of the fourth Age Nestorius in the Beginning of the fifth Age Eutiches in some Years after and so of all the rest 4. They did not all oppose the same Points of Faith This is no less evident than the former our Adversaries themselves being the Judges Indeed if they had all denied the same Articles of Faith at the same time and in different parts of the World I must confess it would in some Measure lessen the Authority of those that asserted them for it is natural to think that several Men of different Tongues and Interests would without any mutual Participation of their Thoughts never agree to assert or deny the same things unless there had been some Reason for it But when one Man denies one Point or more if you please in one Age and an other denies an other in another Age or at least at a different Time what is this but one Man against all the World To answer this Objection then I say 1. That tho' it were true that all these Heads of Sects had always opposed the universal Consent of the Church as aforesaid viz. One in one Age and another in an other or at a different time this Opposition can no more prejudice the Faith which we hold upon the universal Consent of all the Christian World than if one Man in the last Age and an other in this had denied the being at any time of King Henry the VIII or of the City of Constantinople such Impudence could lessen our Belief concerning that King or this City 2. 'T is not true that these Heads or Ringleaders of Sects did always oppose the universal Consent of the Church For since they were the first as I shall prove by and by that opposed the Doctrine of the Church and taught new Opinions contrary to what was believed before they must have been for some time before they broached their new Doctrine of the same Opinion with the rest of the Church who taught them their Faith consequently they did not always oppose the universal Consent but concurred with the rest in it till they took up their new Opinions and even still continue to own that the Doctrine which they opposed was universally believed at the Time of their Separation So that we have the Universal Consent of the Christian World for the Truth of our Faith even the Consent of those who afterwards opposed it not excepted Now that these Heads or Ring-leaders of Sects to wit Arius Nestorius Eutyches Luther c. were the first that opposed the universal consent of the Church in respect of the several Opinions wherein they are said to contradict it may easily be proved first by the confession of their own Parties who ingenuously own that they follow the Opinions of those Men in the Things wherein they differ'd from the rest of the World and have therefore got the Apellation of Arians Nestorians Eutychians Lutherans c. whereas if any Churches or Societies of Christians had held these Opinions before they wou'd have continued in Communion with them and not have separated from all the World as 't is manifest they have even by the acknowledgment of their own Writers Secondly By an Induction of all these Sects in particular and of the Councils held in several Ages wherein they were proscribed But in this I am happily prevented by the ingenuous confession Dr. Tillotson was pleased to make of this Truth as far at least as relates to my purpose Thus says he in the heigth of Popery Ser. 1. Vol. 5. Wickliff appear'd here in England and Hierom of Prague and John Huss in Germany and Bohemia And in the Beginning of the Reformation when Popery had quite over-run the Western Parts of the World and subdued her Enemies on every side and Antichrist sate securely in the quiet possession of his Kingdom Luther arose a bold and rough Man but a fit wedge to cleave in sunder so hard and knotty a block and appeared stoutly against the gross errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome and for a long time stood alone and with a most invincible spirit and courage maintained his ground and resisted the united malice and force of Antichrist and his Adherents and gave him so terrible a blow that he is not yet perfectly healed and recovered of it So that for a man to stand alone or with a very few adhering to him and standing by him is not a mear immaginary supposition but a case that hath really and in fact happen'd in several Ages and places of the World Thus he and indeed enough to prove what I said For you seâ— he ingenuously owns these Authors of Sects stood alone each in his Time and he might as well have said the same thing of the Authors of all other Sects that ever rose in the Church Wickliff says he appeared here in England and Hierom of Prague and John Huss two of Wickliff's Disciples in Germany and Bohemia There was none then of their Opinion before them Luther stood alone for a long time all the World was then against him And must this single Man be believed upon hiâ— bare Word delivering a new Doctrine in opposition to all the World without the least Mark or Character of a Man sent by God These are surely harder terms than God ever required of the very Pagans for their Conversion from Idolatry But to give this more weight Let us compare the Jews which received the Law and the Prophets with the Christians who received
says We pray to the Saints in Heaven in the same order of Brotherly Society with which we intreat our Brethren upon Earth to pray for us But that this says he is not a true Representation of their Doctrine will appear by these Considerations 1. That they pray continues He to the Saints and Angels in Heaven with the same solemn Circumstances of Religious Worship that they pray to God himself 2. That in their Prayers and Thanksgiving they joyn the Angels and the B. Virgin and the Saints together with God and Christ 3. That in the Creed of Pope Pius 4. it is expresly said the Saints which reign with Christ are to be Worship'd and Invocated 4. That in the Public Offices of their Church they do not only pray to the Saints to pray for them but they direct their Prayers and Thanksgivings immediately to them for all those Blessings and Benefits which they ask of God and thank Him for of which innumerable Examples adds He might be given out of their Public Offices particularly in the Office of the B. Virgin they pray to the Angels thus deliver us we beseech you by your command from all our Sins To which I answer 1. That there never was a Book more universally commended and approv'd in the Latin Church than the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church The Pope highly commended and approv'd it as appears by his Brief to this Bishop annex'd to the said Book All the Cardinals and Consistory in Rome approv'd it as the Letters of the Master of the Sacred Palace and the Consultor of the Holy Office do witness And all the Learned Bishops and Prelates of the R. Catholic Church have very much approv'd and commended t as appears by the Letters of many of them to the said Bishop and his Friends all which are likewise annex'd to the said Book it has been translated into almost all the Vulgar Tongues in Europe and is read and perus'd by all R. Catholics with all the satisfaction and content imaginable so that to say this Exposition is not a true Representation of the Doctrine and Practice of the R. Catholic Church in this matter is as Unreasonable in it self as it is injurious to that Great and Learned Prelate and to the whole Catholic Church which hath so universally approv'd it 2. As to his first Consideration I have already prov'd that we address no Prayers to Saints or Angels in the Public Service of the Church but that all our Prayers are directed to God only and as to our Posture in the Church or at our private Devotions whether kneeling or standing or bowing we declare our intention is to adore God alone and none else Touching his second Consideration viz. that in their Prayers and Thanksgiving ibid pag. 80 81. they join the Angels and the B. Virgin and the Saints together with God and Christ Of this He gives us in an other place these instances Nothing so frequent with them says He as to joyn the blessed Virgin with God and our Saviour in the same breath nothing so common in their Mouth as Jesus Maria glory to God and the B. Virgin and in the Roman Missal adds He they make Confession of their Sins to God-Almighty and the blessed Virgin and to St. Michael the Arch-Angel and to all the Saints To which I answer 3. That it is very True we join God and his Saints together in the same breath as the Dr. saith but then our Plea is that we are taught both by the Old and New Testament so to do For Instance All the Congregation blessed the Lord God of their Fathers and bowing their Heads Worship'd the Lord and the King 1 Chron. 29.20 Here at the same time and in the same act and in the same breath too 't is said that the Israelites Worship'd God and the King Had we but any such thing in our Public Offices what work wou'd the Dr. make on 't Again The people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel 1 Kings 12.18 Here again God and Samuel are join'd together in the same Breath Again It seem'd good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs to lay upon you no other Burthen Acts 15.28 Again I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the Elect Angels 1 Tim. 5.21 St. John writes to the Seven Churches in Asia Grace be unto you and Peace from Him which is and which was and which is to come and from the Seven Spirits which are before His Throne and from Jesus Christ Rev. chap. 1. Had we offer'd Peace from the Angels to our Flocks and placed them before Jesus Christ how loud wou'd He Cry Yet no less than an Apostle of Jesus Christ hath done it What will the Doctor say to all this Is not God here join'd with Angels and Saints and Men in the same Breath And must it be a Crime in us to do that whereof we have such manifest Precedents in the very words of the Scripture Truely to weigh well the matter one wou'd almost swear the Doctor was not in earnest but were I of councel for him I shou'd have advis'd Him if He had a mind to exhibit such Ridiculous Scenes not to make the Religion of Jesus Christ a Theatre of Laughter and Sport for God is not mock'd As to his third Consideration I answer 4. That Pope Pius 4. his worshiping and invocating the Saints is to be understood in the same order of brotherly Society in which we worship and reverence our holy Brethren on Earth upon Account of their Piety and Virtue and in which we intreat them to pray for us as the Bishop of Meaux saith and as St. Austin said long since Colimus Martyres eo cultu dilectionis societatis quo in hac vita coluntur sancti Deì homines We worship the Martyrs with that Worship of Love and Fellowship wherewith the holy Men of God are worshipped in this Life Lib. 20. cap. 22. contra Faust All the difficulty then of these and the like Phrases which we read in Scripture in the Fathers and in the Decrees of Councils and Popes consists in the Ambiguity of these Words Worship and Invocate which I have on purpose explain'd in the beginning of this Dispute to avoid Confusion and which the Catechism publish'd by Order of the Council of Trent and many other learn'd Divines have so clearly and fully explain'd So that nothing but an Itch of Contention and a Spirit of Wrangling cou'd make any Man doubt of our Sense of these Words But the Passage of St. Austin is so clear and full to the purpose that I hope the Reader will not be sorry to have it at large tho' it be something long and the rather because it is in answer to a Certain Manichee who about twelve Hundred Years since reproach'd St. Austin with what the Doctor and his Party charge the Roman Catholics at present The Christian People says this Father do celebrate the Memory of
very hard if not impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as may make a Separation excusable impossible according to St. Austin that there should be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic Thus far the Dr. and indeed very right only where the Fathers condemn him and his party he is so much a Friend to his Cause as to alter the Phrase a little For instance whereas St. Ireneus says absolutely It is impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as to make a Separation excusable he saw very well that if no kind of Injury or Provocation cou'd justifie a Separation himself and his Party stood condemned in that Holy Fathers Opinion and therefore he changed the word Impossible into very hard if not impossible tho' in the Greek which some will have to be the original or Latin Translation there is not the least colour for it So where St. Austin saith That it is impossible there should be any just Cause for any to separate from the Catholic Church He softens the Expression changing Catholic Church into the Church truly Catholic pretending if I may presume to spell his meaning that they did not separate from the Church truly Catholic tho' they had separated from all other Societies and Congregations in the World upon a ridiculous Pretence as if the Catholic Church and the Church truly Catholic were two different things or where the Expression seems too harsh he thinks himself sufficiently entituled to moderate it as where the Holy Father St. Austin says There is no Crime so great as Schism he makes bold with his Words rendring them thus there is scarce any Crime so great as Schism Mr. Serjeant to whose great Wit and indefatigable Labour we are obliged for several other Learned and Ingenious Works in these two excellent Treatises presses his Antagonist to purge himself and his party of the guilt of Schism since he owns they had made a separation from that Church in whose communion they and their Ancestors were since they imbraced the Christian Faith But among other pressing Arguments he urges this which in my opinion is enough to open any man's eyes that has not sworn never to see the Sun Dr. Hammond gathers from Fathers and Scripture that Schism is so horrid a sin that there is scarce any crime I give you his own words so great not Sacriledg Idolatry parricide not expiable by Martyrdom very hard if not impossible to receive such an injury or provocation from the Church as may make a separation excuseable Impossible according to St. Augustin that there shou'd be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic whence Mr. Serjeant reasons thus No Man in his Wits much less any body of Learned Men ought to separate from the Church or withdraw themselves from its Authority unless they had a clear and evident Conviction both that this Separation waâ— absolutely necessary and that the Authority pretended by the Church was a manifest usurpation because they would else incur that horrid guilt of Schism But Dr. Hammond and his Party are so far from having any such Evidence or Conviction for either the one or the other that nothing is pretended but bare probabilities and conjectures Consequently it is the last of madness and folly in Dr. Hammond and his Party to persist in their Separation Now Dr. Tillotson who was a very acute Man foreseeing what effect so plain a Demostration was like to have upon such as tendered the Salvation of their Souls being however resolved to maintain the Cause at any rate cou'd bethink himself of nothing sufficient to justifie so dangerous a Separation less than a clear and evident Demonstration of the necessity of it And this in my opinion was the Reason why he undertook to demonstrate that in regard of the aforesaid controverted Points the common sense of Man-kind natural Reason and the Scripture were as clear and evident on the Protestant's side as that twice two make four But what if I shew that he is so far from having any such Evidence on his side that there is not one of all these Points in which he instances but what is destitute of even the least probable Argument to support it Nay I go farther what if I demonstrate that the R. Catholics have all the Evidence and Reason that the nature of such things will bear for what they hold concerning these Points Then surely I may reasonably hope that Rational Men who ought to tender the welfare of their Immortal Souls will be so just to themselves as seriously to consider into what horrible and dangerous crimes they are drawn by the wilfulness of Men who are resolved to maintain a Separation which all the world knows was begun for no other end than to countenance Things that I am unwilling to name but are too well known to be concealed This I shall endeavour by the assistance of God's Grace to perform in the following Chapters when I have first laid down that chief and fundamental Point of all Controversies namely the Infallibility of the Church CHAP. I. Of the Infallibility of the Church THE R. Catholics hold that the Church is infallible that is cannot err in delivering the Doctrine she received from Jesus Christ nor mistake in her Explanation thereof when by Heretics wrested and perverted to a wrong sense The ground of which Tenet I conceive to be this that Christ has provided such efficacious means for the conveyance of Truth to all succeding Ages as will infallibly secure the Church from error in her Decrees concerning Articles of Faith This Point is to be managed with so much the more perspicuity and clearness by how much it is of greater importance than any other It will be therefore requisite to take some pains to satisfie Mens Reasons and if it be possible to make this Truth so clear and evident that those whose Interest and Prejudices make them unwilling to own it may at least be ashamed to deny it And methinks I have this peculiar advantage in this undertaking that every Pious Christian who tenders the welfare of his Soul cannot chuse but wish me success because I undertake the Proof of that which it is every Man's Interest it shou'd be true for if I can shew that there is an Infallible Church and that such a Congregation of Faithful is that Church then all Christians who are Solicitous about the true Church and the means of Salvation and agitated with various Scruples and Difficulties and which is more dreadful threatned with Hell and Damnation by the furious Zeal of different Parties may sit still and hear what the Infallible Church says to them In the handling then of this important Truth I shall do these three Things First I will endeavour to shew that there is a Church or Congregation of Faithful which is Infallible in her Decisions and Declarations
of all Articles of Faith Secondly That this Congregation and no other is that which is in Communion with the Bishop of Rome Thirdly I shall answer the Objections which Dr. Tillotson brings in his Sermons against this Point First I will endeavour to shew that there is a Church or Congregation of Faithful which is Infallible in her Decisions and Declarations of all Articles of Faith To prove this I shall lay down these Grounds 1. That Jesus Christ planted his Doctrine in the Hearts of a certain number of Men by working True and Real Miracles in their presence which no other but an Omnipotent Power cou'd effect and that in order to the propagating of this Doctrine he chose twelve Men whom he called Apostles and made them his chief Ministers vesting in them his own Power and Authority for that End 2. That these twelve Apostles and other Disciples went into several Countries and preached the same Doctrine to Jews and Gentiles confirming it with true and real Miracles 3. That the Apostles ordained and constituted other Ministers of this Doctrine to succeed in their own Room to whom they delegated the same Power they received from Jesus Christ and These Others and so on from Generation to Generation to continue to the end of the World 4. That this Power of working Miracles continued in the Preachers of this Doctrine at least till a considerable number of people had embraced the same Doctrine in most of the then known Countries of Asia Europe and Africa This supposed I say 1. That the people who heard the Apostles preach and saw them confirm their Doctrine with true and real Miracles were infallibly sure that this Doctrine was True because they were sure the doing of such Miracles required an Omnipotent Power and that according to the Notion all Men naturally have of God he would not exert his Omnipotence in Favour of a Lye 2. That whatever Articles the Universal Consent of so many Nations was agreed upon to have been received from the Apostles it is impossible it should be false that they had received them because it is impossible that so many Nations of different Interests Tongues and Manners should all conspire and agree to relate the same thing as received from the Apostles if it had not been so And as this is most assuredly true in regard of those who saw the Miracles of the Apostles and delivered their Doctrine to the next Generation so it is for the same Reason equally impossible it should be false in respect of any succeeding Generation That there was such a Man in England as King Henry the VIII or that there is or was such a Man as the Grand Signior or such a City as Constantinople I am as certainly sure as of any thing I see with my Eyes for it is as evident to my Understanding that it is impossible in practice that so many Nations as relate these things different in their Humours Manners and Interests should all conspire to tell an Untruth which can be of no Advantage to them as it is evident to my Senses that I see the Paper and feel the Pen wherewith I write For since no Cause imaginable can be assigned to cause so many different Nations to conspire together in the Belief of an Untruth no interest as we suppose moving them thereunto and no Cause put it is impossible an Effect should follow it is as evident to my Reason that they cannot thus conspire as it is to my Senses that I perceive their proper Objects unless we have recourse to God Almighty and say that he might put it in their Hearts to act thus But if we should suppose this not inconsistent with his Divine Attributes may we not likewise suppose that he might impose upon my Senses and make me think I see and feel when I do not Yes undoubtedly Yet I suppose no Body will say but that I may be certainly sure that I both see and feel And whatever reason his unsearchable Wisdom might have to impose upon my Senses I am sure it does not stand with his Goodness to put into any Man's Heart to tell a Lye If it be then impossible that the universal Consent of all the Nations in Europe should be liable to err in delivering to posterity things of an indifferent Nature how much more must the Universal Consent of all the Christian World be certain in conveying the Truth of the Gospel upon which our eternal Welfare depends One single Man may and has often declared the Truths that were committed to him but because he is obnoxious to Error no Man is bound to believe him any further than he shews good Credentials for what he says It was therefore necessary the Apostles and other Disciples who first preached the Gospel each apart should be endued with a power of working Miracles to gain themselves credit A small Body of Men such as a City or Corporation is less obnoxious to Error than one Man however no Man is obliged to believe them no further than they shew good Reason for what they say because it is easy for such a Body of Men for some private End to conspire in the Belief of an Untruth Thus in some time after the Flood the Son of Cham erected Idols and perswaded the rest of their Kindred Men simple indeed but very much abandoned by God that these were the Gods they must adore And for all this false Worship prevailed in succeding Ages as Men increased so as to spread almost over the whole Earth Yet because it was not only destitute of all Rational Motives to perswade its Belief in the beginning but even contrary to the Light of Nature the very Philosophers and learned Men that seem'd to promote its Profession gave no Credit to it Thus a small number of Sarazens perswaded the rest of their Rude and Barbarous Countrymen to believe the Impostures of Mahomet And however this Barbarous Nation forced their Passage with Fire and Sword thro' many spacious Countries and planted their Religion in most parts of Asia and Affrica Tho' their Principles be not altogether so absurd as those of the Pagans yet as they have not the least Rational Motive to induce any Man to believe them so neither were they obtruded on the Believers the Progeny of those who first embraced them excepted by any other means than Cruelty and Slaughter I have on purpose mentioned these two false Religions that swayed in the World for a long time to obviate an Objection which might be made against the Unanimous Consent of Christians in their Belief of the Doctrine of Jesus Christ For if it be said that several Countries and Nations of Pagans and Mahometans have conspired in the Belief of the Faith they received from their Ancestors yet that this Faith or Religion was false This Objection is so far from impairing the Truth of the Christian Religion that it rather confirms it For it is most certain the Pagans and Mahometans received
their Religion from their Ancestors and these from others and that the mistake did not consist in this but because they were so foolish as to receive it from those who took it up in the beginning without any Rational Motive nay contrary to Sense and Reason and the very Light of Nature The Case was very different with the first Christians They embraced their Religion upon a clear and evident Conviction of their Senses and Vnderstanding viz. upon the evidence of true and real Miracles and other Corroborating Proofs But of this enough A whole Nation is much less subject to err in conveying Truths received to Posterity than a City or small Body of People And tho' it be not impossible they should all agree together to deliver to Posterity what they had not received from their Ancestors yet it is hardly credible they would That there hapned a great Conflagration in London in the Year 66. we have no other Evidence but the Testimony of the People of England yet whoever should deny that Fact would be looked upon as a Fool or a Madman If it be then so incredible that one Nation who speak all the same Language and have daily entercourse one with an other should be so disingenuous as to deliver to their Posterity as a Truth received from their Ancestors what they had not received how should it ever sink into the Heart of any Man in his wits to believe that Hundreds of Nations of different Humours Tongues Customs and Interests should unanimously agree together to do that which is so incredible of one single Nation This indeed is plainly impossible unless we can suppose that so many Nations should meet together or communicate their Thoughts to one another by Writing and so all agree to tell what they knew not to the Prejudice of Truth and their own and Posterities eternal Damnation than which nothing on Earth is more absurd Or that God should put it into their Hearts to deceive their Posterity which even to imagine is horrid Impiety The Sum of all that I have said is this That it is impossible the universal Consent of the Pastors and People of so many different Nations should concur and agree in declaring any Article or Articles of Faith unless they had received the same Articles from their Ancestors and it is equally impossible that these Ancestors should have so delivered them unless they had received them from their Ancestors and these from others their Ancestors and so up till you come to the first People who took up these Articles And if it be found that these people had evident Conviction of the Truth of these Articles such as true and real Miracles it is equal to a Demonstration that the same Articles are true because as 't is said before the working of real Miracles requires an Omnipotent Power and the Light of Nature shews us that God would not put his Seal to an Untruth And if it be asked how come we to be certainly sure that the Apostles confirmed their Doctrine with Miracles I answer because it is impossible that all the Nations to whom the Apostles and their Disciples preached the said Articles of Faith should all agree to deliver to Posterity that they had received such Articles upon a clear Conviction of their Senses and Reason by true Miracles unless it were true that they had so received them And this is an Advantage whereof all Heretics are destitute no Sect that ever yet sprung up in the Church being able to derive its Heretical Opinions from the Apostles or first Planters of the Christian Faith but have all a certain Period beyond which they cannot ascend to derive their Doctrine To instance in some The Arians for near 200 Years might claim the General Consent of some Nations asserting they had received their Doctrine from their Ancestors but when they went back as far as the Beginning of the fourth Century all their Ancestors are reduced to miserable Arius who at that time contrary to the unanimous Consent of the whole Christian World denied the Divinity of the Son of God In like manner the Nestorians and Eutychians may pretend to a General Consent of some Nations for a great many Ages but when they ascend as far as the latter End of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth Century they are forced to stop there and reduce their Ancestors the first to Nestorius the second to Eutyches a Monk and Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria The Waldenses likewise may say for themselves something like the rest but if we look back as far as the twelfth Century we shall find them all terminate in one single Merchant of Lyons in France Peter de Waldo And to come nearer home those many and almost innumerable Sects in our own and Neighbour Countries who go by the General Name of Protestants tho' they pretend to have received their Doctrine from their Ancestors for some Time I hope they will not say and indeed to do them Justice I never heard they pretended to it that those Opinions they hold in opposition to the R. Catholics were delivered to them by their Ancestors any higher up than the Beginning of the sixteenth Century when 't is no less manifest that all their Ancestors were R. Catholics than that Luther Zuinglius and Calvin were the Inventors of their new Opinions Here perhaps it will be Objected That this Consent of Nations for all the Articles of the Catholic Faith is not so universal as I pretend since 't is well known a great many in almost all Ages have contradicted it The Arians for instance to omit many other Sects before them contradicted it in one Point The Nestorians and Eutychiâ—â—â— in Two the Waldenses in more and the Protestants in most of all This is the only Objection which can with any colour of Reason be made against the universal Consent of the C. Church and which doubtless occasioned the Pâ—ain of many Souls most of those People that followed these Ring-leaders being either unable to examine the Grounds of their Separation or prejudiced by some temporal Consideration in favour of their Opinions And with all thinking themselves secure in the Society and Communion of so many Men whom they look'd upon to be both Learned and Godly Now if I can make out that this Objection is not only weak but even void of all colour of Reason I hope our deluded Friends will be so just to their own Souls as to consider how dangerous it is to persist in a Separation which is necessarily attended with the unevitable crime of Schism so dreadfully described by one of their own * Dr. Hammond Learned Men. Which that I may the more distinctly do I desire these four things may be considered I. That the Contradiction of each of the said Sects began first in one or two at must II. That the Contradiction of all such as adher'd to the Heads of each Sect be they never so many amounts to no more than
is the Word of God and the Scripture again bears witness that the Church is Infallible and yet this way of Reasoning is not in the least defective because the Church has sufficient Credentials for the truth of its Evidence before it rereceives a Testimony from the Scripture viz. The Universal Consent of the whole Catholic Church which as is already proved is undoubtedly certain The Testimony then of Scripture bearing witness of the Church is properly speaking Argumentum ad hominâ—â— that is an Argument from a Concession or a Principle agreed upon by both Parties And now since the Protestants do agree that the Scripture is Infallibly true I hope they will hear it if it bears witness of the Infallibility of the Church Let us see then what it says upon this Subject Christ saith Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Matth. 16. verse 18. Again Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and so I am with you alway even unto the End of the World cap. 28. ver 19 20. And again I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now â— howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth John 16. ver 12 13. St. Paul writes to Timothy But if I tarry long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God the Pillar and Ground of the Truth 1 Tim. â— ver 15. You see Christian Reader that Christ promi'sd to build his Church upon a Rock and that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it that he himself continues with it â—â—â—o the end of the World That the spirit of Truth shall guide it into all Truth And St. Paul says that the Church of God is the Pillar and Ground of the Truth Now if any Man that believes the Goodness and Power of Jesus Christ to perform what he promises can shew me any Text in Scripture more Plain and Evident to prove any thing else than these do the Infallibility of the Church I shall hold my self highly oblig'd to him for that Favour If the Gates on Power of Hell for they are both the same shall not prevail against the Church surely then it shall not fell into Error For there are but two Ways of prevailing against it viz. by destroying all the Members that compose it as to their temporal Being or by corrupting their Souls with Error That the Gates of Hell hath not prevail'd as to the former our own Being is a sufficient Evidence and that they shall not as to the latter methinks a sober modest man ought to be content with the Insurance of Christ's Promise If Christ continues with the Church unto the end of the World can it be imagined that he shou'd suffer it to fall into Error since we cannot suppose him to have any other bus'ness to continue with it than to preserve it from that If the holy Ghost or as the Teâ—t calls him the Spirit of Truth will guide the Church into all Truth we must surely renounce all pretence to Reason and Christianity if we believe that any Power whether Earthly or Infernal can be able to make it err Lastly if the Church be the Ground and Pillar of Truth as St. Paul calls it certainly neither Rain nor Floods noâ— Wind can shake or throw down an Edifice so firmly founded I shall now add three or four Testimonies of the Primitive Fathers in savour of this Truth and so conclude this chapter Saint Ireneus a Father of the second Age writes thus of the Church where the Church is there is the Spirit and where the Spirit of God is there is all Grace lib. 3. c. 40. Praes in lib. per. Ar. In the third Age Origen That only is to be believed for Truth which in nothing disagrees from the Tradition of the Church And a little after We must not believe otherwise than as the Church of God has by Succession deliver'd to us In the same Age St. Cyprian Whoever divides from the Church and cleaves to the Adultress is separated from the Promises of the Church he cannot have God his Father that has not the Church his Mother Again To Peter's Chair and the Principal Church Infidelity or false Faith cannot have access Epist 55. In the fourth Age St. Jerom The Roman Faith commended by the Apostles cannot be changed in Apolog. cont Ruffin In the beginning of the fifth Age St. Augustin I know by Divine Revelations that the Spirit of Truth teacheth it the Church all truth Lib. 4. de Bap. c. 4. Again To dispute against the whole Church is insolent Madness and I my self would not believe the Gospel were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me to it cont Epist fundam c. 5. I shall not trouble the Reader with any Reflections upon these Sentences but will let them stand or fall by their own Weight perswaded as I am that no Comment or Gloss whatsoever can make them speak plainer or more to my purpose I will only mind him that these Great and Eminent Men who shin'd in the Church like so many Lights as well by the Lustre of their extraordinary Piety as by the profoundness of their Learning cou'd not be ignorant of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church of their Time Consequently wou'd never have taught so peremptorily the Infallibility of the Church unless it had been the Opinion of all the Christian World There is then an Infallible Church that is to say a Congregation of Faithful that believes holds and teaches the Doctrine of Jesus Christ 1. Upon the Universal Consent of the Christian World 2. Upon clear and plain Texts of Scripture declaring the Assistance of the Holy Ghost to guide it into all Truth 3. Upon the unanimous Consent of the Fathers of the Primitive Times a Triple Cord which neither the Power of Hell nor the Subtility of Heretics nor the Malice of the World shall ever be able to break Let us now examine what Society of Christians can justly lay claim to or be truly call'd the Catholic Church CHAP. II. The Congregation of Faithful in Communion with the Bishop of Rome and no other is the Catholic Church TO prove this Assertion I shall lay down some Principles known either by their own Light or sufficiently proved by plain Texts of Scripture and the Consent of our Adversaries I. That in the Catholic Church there is and shall be a Continued Succession of Bishops Priests and Teachers from Christ to the End of the World II. That there is but one Catholic Church III. That one Communion as well as one Faith is Essential to the Being of one Church IV. That whosoever separates from or
it is Impossible the Church shou'd give them such Provocation as might justifie a Separation in like manner All those who are excommunicated by the Church for their obstinate Refusal to assent to any Truth declar'd to be an Article of Faith are properly call'd Heretics Now Protestants as well as Catholics agree that neither Schismatics nor Heretics are Members of the Catholic Church nor any way within its Pale There only remains then to examine who those are on whom these Marks of Schism and Heresie are justly chargeable and who on the other Hand are free from that charge which if plainly made out it will be easy to see what Congregation of Faithful can be justly call'd the Catholic Church Now all the Societies of Christians who with any colour of Reason can pretend to the Name of Catholic are these 1. The Nestorians and Eutychians 2. The Greek Church 3. The Church of England And lastly the R. Catholics I have on purpose omitted the Waldenses Socinians Hussites Lutherans Calvinists and all those almost Innumerable Sects continually shooting out of the Trunck of the Reformation and spreading far and near over our own unfortunate Ilands as Anabaptists Independents Quakers Mugoltonians Seekers Familists Philadelphians c. because all these are destitute of even the least Pretence to the Name of Catholic Church having neither lawful Pastors lawful Mission nor Right Ordination which as all the Christian World before the Reformation and as the Church of England still grants cannot be given without Imposition of Hands performed by Bishops This they Ingenuously own they have not consequently nor the least Pretence to the Catholic Church no nor if we believe some Learned Divines of the Church of England to the Name of Christian For as these Gentlemen Reason no Man can be call'd Christian unless he is Baptiz'd Baptism cannot be conferr'd but by such who have Authority to administer the Sacraments no Man can have this Authority but by lawful Ordination and this is not conferr'd nor cannot without Imposition of Hands by Lawfully ordain'd Bishops Bishops all these Sects own they have not consequently nor true Baptism nor Christianity This I confess cannot be said of the four Societies aforesaid For every one of them hath always retain'd the Hierarchy of the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons at least have pretended to it and think it Essential to the being of the Catholic Church But since this is not enough unless they have likewise the Catholic Faith and Communion which together with the said Hierarchy make up the essential parts of Catholic Religion our present Bus'ness shall be to try each of them by this Touchstone and see which will abide the Test 1. Touching the Nestorians and Eutychians Under this Appellation I comprehend the Jacobites Cophtes Armenians and all other Sects who follow the Opinions of Nestorius and Eutyches touching the Person and Natures in Christ all the Rest of the Eastern Christians either adhereing to the Roman or Greek Church What I have to say concerning these Sects shall be dispatch'd in a few Words Dr. Tillotson and all the Learned Men of the Church of England do receive the Definitions of the four first General Councils whereof the two last excommunicated and condemn'd as Heretics the Authors of these Sects and their Adherents Nâ—storius for asserting two persons Eutyches for denying two Natures in Christ consequently all those Sects who took up their Opinions are justly excluded from the number of True Catholics As to the Points in Controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants viz. Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Mass Prayers for the Dead Invocation of Saints c. they are as firmly believ'd by the said Sects as by the R. Catholics 2. As for the Greek Church It is notoriously known that the Chiefest Reason of their Separation from the Church of Rome was because this Church asserted the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son which yet the Protestants hold to be Orthodox Doctrine And no less evident that the Greek Church did Recant their Error concerning this Point and all other things wherein they differ'd from the Church of Rome many times but more especially in three General Councils First in the Council of Lâ—theran where the Patriarch of Constantinople assisted in Person 2dly In the Council of Lyons where the Greek Emperor and other Representatives of the Greek Church were present And lastly in the Council of Florence where the Emperor the Patriarch of Constantinople and a great many Greek Bishops were present and disputed the Point for a long time which at last came to this Issue There were Letters of Vnion drawn up wherein the Grecians do acknowledge the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son the Popes Supremacy and some other Points of no great Weight before debated These Letters were signed by the Emperor and by all the Greek Bishops the Bishop of Ephesus only excepted and stand upon Record to this day Whence it is manifest that by their own Act and Deed they are convicted of Schism for their wilful and causeless Separation afterwards from the Church of Rome whom they own'd by this Authentick Instrument to be the Catholic Church and themselves likewise to be Members of it Touching the main Points in Controversie betwixt the Protestants and the Church of Rome what the Greek Church holds and professes let us hear from the Pen of an Ingenious Protestant Gentleman Sir Edwin Sandys in his Europae Speculum pag. 233. With Rome saith he they concur in the opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole body of the Mass in praying to Saints in Auricular Confession in offering of Sacrifice and Prayer for the Dead and in these without any or no material Difference They hold Purgatory also and the Worshiping of Pictures Thus far Sandys So that tho' the Greeks were a true Church it wou'd but very little help the Protestant Cause nay rather it wou'd very much prejudice it since the Grecians hold those points to be Orthodox on the pretended falsity whereof the Protestants ground their Separation But of this more in its proper Place 3. Touching the Church of England This is of so Great Importance to our present Controversie or rather the only necessary Point to be Rightly understood that it is requisite it shou'd be handl'd with all the clearness and perspicuity imaginable And if it be possible to make it Evident that this Church is branded with Heresie and Schism two things sufficient to unchurch any Society of Christians whatsoever I hope I may without vanity say that I have gained my Point To prove then that the Church of England is both Heretical and Schismatical I am heartily sorry I must use such hard Expressions to so many Ingenious and Great Men whose Learning and other good Qualities I very much honor and respect I shall make use of no Arguments but such as are grounded upon the clear Light of natural
And most of these are condemned by the Protestants as are most if not all the Points wherein the Protestants differ from Her condemned by all other Sects An Evident Argument that she alone hath the Truth since if these things which they ground their Separation upon had been Evident as they pretend they wou'd all agree in them 3. All other Sects separated from the Communion of the Church of Rome begining each Sect in One or Two in opposition to the whole World And we are able to point at the Age and Year of their Separation and at the Name and Character of each Sect's Author and Promotor An Argument that She is the Mother Church or Root of the Tree and those Sects some Branches fallen or cut off 4. The Roman Catholic Church was never Condemn'd by any General Council nor yet by any Council of Bishops whether National or Provincial for the Points of Faith which the Protestants contest if we except the Bishops made in England by Secular Power when the true Bishops were all discarded But the Opinions held by the Protestants and all other Sects in Opposition to the Church of Rome were Condemn'd by several General Councils as every Learned Man can tell 5. It cou'd never be made out in what Age or Year or in whose Reign or by Whom any of the Points in Dispute were introduc'd into the Catholic Belief An Evident Argument that they were believ'd from the Begining it being impossible to conceive how all the Christian World cou'd be induc'd to believe those things contrary to what they held before and yet that no Man should perceive it Nay it is Absurd and Ridiculous to imagine that the greatest part of Mankind shou'd not be allarm'd at the Novelty of a Doctrine which if we believe the Protestants shocks so much both Sence and Reason whereas the New Doctrine of Arius Nestorius Luther Calvin and the Rest of his Tribe so violently shook the whole Earth that to this very day our own woful Experience is but too sensible a Testimony of its direful Effects Lastly the R. Catholic Church hath the universal Consent of all the Christian World for her Tenets in matters of Faith if we except that of the different Sects which sprung up at different Times which as it is before prov'd amounts to no more than the Dissent or Contradiction of one single Man concerning One Point in one Age and of another concerning an other Point or more in a different Age at least at different Times and that in Opposition to all the Rest of Mankind A Prerogative which no other Society of Christians can pretend to it being evident and even confest by themselves that the Opinions which they hold in Opposition to the R. Catholics were taken up by certain Men in different Ages and Times by Luther in the 16th Century by Wiclief in the 13th by De Waldo in the 12th c. I will then conclude That since the R. Catholic Church is as universal in its Communion as almost the Bounds of the Earth as Ancient in its Doctrine as the Apostles of Christ since it was it alone that adher'd to the Ancient Faith and rejected the Novelty of all Heresies and can only glory in having the Universal Consent of the Christian World as before explain'd for the Truth of its Doctrine This Society and no other is the True Catholic Apostolic Church I shall now proceed to answer Dr. Tillotsou's Objections to this Point The first is taken out of Vol. 2. Serm. pag. 50 61 62. which in Substance is this Tho' the R. Catholics be very Stiff and Peremptory in asserting their Infallibility yet they are not agreed among themselves where it is seated whether in the Pope alone or in a Council alone or in both together or in the Diffusive Body of Christians They are sure they have it says he tho' they do not know where it is Then he adds There is not the least Intimation in Scripture of this Priviledge confer'd upon the Church of Rome and it is strange the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics shou'd never Appeal to this Judge it being so short and expedite a way of ending Controversies and this very Consideration concludes the Dr. is to a Wise Man instead of a Thousand Arguments to satisfie him that in those days no such thing was believ'd in the World Answer I may say of these Three Propositions the first is neither True in it self nor in most of its Circumstances The second is perfectly of the same Nature if you except the Word Rome The third is grounded upon a Negative and proves nothing I begin with the first They are not agreed saith he among themselves where it is seated c. For my own part I never yet read or heard of any Catholic Divine that ever said That the Catholic Church taken for the Diffusive Body of Christians was not Infallible in declaring Matters of Faith Therefore I think All agree that the Infallibility is seated in the Diffusive Body of Christians And I challenge any Protestant in the World to name me One who says the contrary The Pope is One and the Chief Member of that Diffusive Body The Pope and Council together make a Great many Members and if you add to these All the Rest of the Faithful they make up the intire Diffusive Body of Christian If the Pope be Infallible surely the Concurrence of a Council will rather confirm than diminish his Infallibility If the Pope and Council together be Infallible the Consent of the Diffusive Body of Christians must surely strengthen and confirm it But if neither the Pope nor the Council alone be Infallible the Diffusive Body of Christians must necessarily be if any such Thing as Infallibility may be ascrib'd to any of the Three seeing both Pope and Council are included in it We are sure then the Infallibility consists at least in the Diffusive Body of Christians But to illustrate this a little more let us propose this familiar Example If I shou'd ask where my Lord Major of Londâ—n is at this Time And that some shou'd tell me He is in his own House Others not in his own House but some where in London and others neither in his own House nor in London but in England I wou'd willingly know whether these three sorts of People do not all agree that my Lord Mayor is in England Certainly they do because the assent of the two former is necessarily implied in the Latter In like manner tho' some say the Pope is Infallible Others not the Pope alone but together with a General Council and others neither Pope nor Council alone without the Concurrence of the Diffusive Body of Christians yet all do 〈◊〉 in this that the Diffusive Body of Christians is Infallible The Dr. then is very much out when he says they do not know where it is tho' they are sure they have it Touching the second Proposition There is not the least
Intimation in Scripture of this Priviledge confer'd upon the Church of Rome and it is strange the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics shou'd never Appeal to this Judge c. That there is not only Intimation but even plain Texts of Scripture which denote the Churche's Infallibility is what I think is already sufficiently Prov'd And since it is likewise Prov'd that the Roman Church or which is the same thing the Congregation of Faithful in Communion with it is the Catholic Church I think it is a necessary ' Consequence that there are plain Texts of Scripture that prove the Infallibility of the Church of Rome Nor is it less certain that the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics did Appeal to this Judge For in those days there was no other Means to convince Heretics of their Errors but by the Authority of the Church In the primitive Times New Heresies sprung up as many if not more than in any of our latter Ages yet there was no other Rule or Standard to judge these Errors by the Canonical Books of Scripture not being collected or put together at least in 150 Years after the Foundation of the Church and then not one Book of it all whose Authority or Credit was not question'd by some Heretic or other How was it then possible for the Ancient Fathers to confute these Hereties unless they had Appeal'd to the Authority of the Church and told them that this is the Doctrine of the Catholic Church this is what we receiv'd from our Fore-fathers And this is what all the Christian World believes Neither is it true that the ancient Fathers did not Appeal to this Judge even when the Scripture was collected and receiv'd as the Word of God Read but St. Ireneus Contra Haeres Tertul de Praescript Epipha de Haeres St. Austin cont Epist Fund and many more and you shall find how much the Doctor was mistaken in this bus'ness I do not cite the passages of these Fathers because they are so well known and so often quoted by Others who wrote upon this Subject But let this of St. Austin to use the Doctors own Phrase be instead of a thousand I wou'd not believe the Gospel Cont. Epist Funda were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me to it The second Objection is in Answer to a Certain Passage in the Canon Law Vol. 3. pag. 94. where it is said That if every Man may judge for himself there will be nothing but Confusion in Religion there will be no End of Controversies And that our Lord had not seem'd to be Discreet * The Drs Translation of the Latin has it so if he had not provided for the Assurance of Men's Faith by giving them an Infallible Judge To this he says that if this Reasoning be good we may as well conclude that there is an Universal Infallible Judge in Temporal Matters but it is evident in Fact and Experience says he that there is no such Judge in Temporal Matters consequently nor in Matters of Faith Answ Had there been an Universal Infallible Judge appointed in Temporal Matters it wou'd doubtless contribute very much to the Peace and Tranquility of the World if He were Obey'd but very little to the Means wherewith God Almighty designs to bring his chosen People to the Kingdom of Heaven which is to exercise them with Fiery Tryals and make them pass thro' much Tribulation And therefore He permits the Cruelty of Tyrants to try the patience of Martyrs and suffers the Oppression of the Poor on Earth to enhance their Reward in Heaven So that the Cruelty or Errors of a Temporal Judge do rather increase than diminish the Happiness of the Just But the Case is far otherwise in spiritual Matters If the Judge shou'd spoil us of our Faith or err in Judging for us it wou'd cause our Eternal ruine our Damnation being necessarily consequent upon a False Belief And for that Reason the goodness of God seems to be so much the more engag'd to secure the Spiritual than the temporal Judge from error by how much the danger is the greater on that side and the Ruin more inevitable if we shou'd chance to Err. Christ threatens Damnation to all those that will not believe his Doctrine which how it can stand with his Infinit Goodness unless he had provided Infallible Means of conveying the Truth of this Doctrine to them it is hard to conceive In short Temporal Ease and Tranquility is of very little Moment even in this Life but of none at all in the next and therefore generally speaking God leaves Men in the Counsel of their own Hands and permits Them very often to disturb the public Peace and quiet of this World But the true Knowledge of his Divine Law and of the Mysteries of our Redemption are of so great importance to our Eternal Happiness that his Goodness will Infallibly secure it for us if it be not our own Fault Object 3. An Infallible Judge pag. 95 96. if there were one is no certain way to end Controversies and to preserve the Vnity of the Church unless it were likewise Infallibly Certain that there is such a Judge and who he is For till Men were sure of both these there wou'd be still a Controversie whether there be an Infallible Judge and who he is And if it be true which they tell us that without an Infallible judge Controversies cannot be ended then a Controversie concerning an Infallible judge can never be ended And there are two Controversies actually on foot about an Infallible Judge One whether there be an Infallible Judge or not Which is a Controversie between Vs and the Church of Rome And the other who this Infallible Judge is Which is a Controversie among themselves which cou'd never yet be decided And yet till it be decided Infallibility if they had it wou'd be of no use to them for the ending of Controversies Thus far the Drs. own Words Answ That there is an Infallible Judge is already prov'd Who that Judge is I have likewise manifestly shewn namely the Living Voice of all the Catholic Pastors and People agreeing in the same Points of Faith And if it be farther ask'd who those Pastors and People are I answer The same in Communion with the Pope as it is prov'd before And surely none will doubt but we may be Infallibly certain that these agree in the same Points of Faith Consequently we may be Infallibly certain both that there is an Infallible Judge and who that Judge is And if it be True which they tell us says the Doctor that without an Infallible Judge Controversies cannot be ended then a Controversie concerning an Infallible Judge can never be ended And why so Why may not an Infallible Judge end it Is not an Infallible Judge sufficient to end any Controversie whatsoever If the Church be Infallible and assisted by the Spirit of God for no other End than to
Divine's Books on this subject are still extant and let even our Adversaries be the Judges whether this be not one of the most groundless Mistakes that ever any serious Man cou'd fall into 3dly That he is as far out when he says that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church Had we said that the particular Church and Diocess of Rome were the Catholic Church his Comparison wou'd then indeed have been Reasonable but surely he cou'd not be ignorant that we understand by the Roman Church all the Christian Churches over the World in Communion with the particular Church and See of Rome which we therefore call the Roman Catholic Church because Rome being the Seat of St. Peter's Successor is the Center and Principlâ— of Catholic Unity If the Doctor had a mind to make good his Thesis he shou'd have prov'd that all other Societies of Christians who are not in Communion with the Church of Rome are notwithstanding their Heresies and Schisms a Part of the Catholic Church he shou'd have prov'd that the Nestorians and Eutychians which take up the greatest part of the Eastern Christians are a Part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding they were excommunicated and cut off from the Body of the Catholic Church by the lawful Authority of two General Councils whose Decrees he and all other learned Protestants do profess to embrace that the Grecians are still Members of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their willful Schism from its Communion their ancient Error concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost their having been so often reconcil'd and united to it yet still returning to their Vomit but more especially their self-condemn'd Perverseness in their late Separation from the Communion and Fellowship of the Church of Rome which they solemnly and in the most Authentic manner gave under their Hands in the Council of Florence they wou'd hold and maintain he shou'd have prov'd that Luthor Calvin and all those who adher'd to their new broach'd Opinions are a part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their being excommunicated by the Church and their own Confession of holding these Opinions in Opposition to all the World besides All this I say the Doctor shou'd have prov'd to shew that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church But neither he nor any Body else did ever so much as attempt it on the contrary most of the learned Men of the Church of England have readily given up the Cause in regard of all the aforesaid Sects and most of all other Sects do as censoriously condemn those of the Church of England With what colour of Reason then can the Doctor suggest that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church Nay can any thing be more plain than that the Roman Church as it is understood by Catholics is the whole Catholic Church since none of the aforesaid Sects can with the least colour of Reason pretend to be a part of it since they themselves do unchurch one another since they own that the Church of Rome is a Part at least of the Catholic Church and that one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the being or Constitution of the one Catholic Church in both which Essential they own themselves to be different from the Church of Rome So that if we had no other Proof besides this last Reason is a plain Demonstration that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no part or member of it 'T is a known Truth and even vouch'd by all Protestants whatsoever that the Church of Rome is at least a Part of the Catholic Church That one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the Constitution of the Catholic Church of Christ is a Doctrine generally receiv'd by the Church of England and I suppose by all the Divines in the World besides now there is none of all the aforesaid Sects as they all unanimously agree that holds either the same Faith or Communion with the Church of Rome which yet they hold to be a Part of the Catholic Church and which together with the said Sects make up the whole Body of Christians It is then most evident that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no Part or Member of it But the latter no Protestant ever yet durst affirm for if they shou'd affirm that the Church of Rome is no part of the Catholic Church this would vacate all their Pretences to be a Church since it is from the Church of Rome they pretend to derive their Mission Ordination and spiritual Power if any they have We are then sure even to a Demonstration that if what the Protestants say be true the Roman Church is the whole Catholic Church and no less sure that neither the Protestants nor any other Sect whatsoever can be any part or member of the Catholic Church whilst they continue out of the Communion and Faith of the Roman Church 2. To prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church the Doctor requires the following Particulars shou'd be clearly shewn and made out 1. A plain Constitution of our Saviour whereby St. Peter and his Successors at Rome are made the Supreme Head and Pastors of the whole Christian Church Of this says he we have not the least Intimation in the Gospel nor in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles nay there is clear Evidence adds he to the contrary that in the Council of Jerusalem St. James was if not superior at least equal to him And St. Paul upon several Occasions declares himself equal to St. Peter But suppose it were true continues the Doctor That St. Peter were Head of the Church where doth it appear that this Authority was deriv'd to his Successors And if it were why to his Successors at Rome rather than at Antioch where â—e was first and unquestionably Bishop Answ Touching a plain Constitution c. methinks a modest good Christian might well be content with one plain Text of Scripture produc'd to that purpose much more with a great many and this surely is already done a hundred times over both from the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles where we plainly find this Charge committed to St. Peter and his frequent Exercise of it as occasion offer'd 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of his Successor at Rome Nor do we say it is necessary he shou'd be there rather than any where else For St. Peter might if he pleas'd for ought we know have as well plac'd his Chair in Canterbury but it is matter of Fact that he did not place it there but in Rome His making St. James equal if not superior to St. â—eter in the Councâ—l of Jerusalem needs no other Confutation than a bare recital of the matter of Fact which pass'd there I am sure it is as plain as words can make it
Inconvenience I confess it is but if we shou'd conclude the Existence or non-Existence the Truth or Falshood of things from their conveniency or inconveniency the World wou'd be brought to a sine pass 'T is very inconvenient that God shou'd condemn all Mankind to death to all the other miseries and infirmities to which human Nature is now obnoxious for the eating of one single Fruit yet it is never the less True 'T is very inconvenient that a Man shou'd be condemn'd to eternal Flames for one only Sin wherein he dies unrepented yet no Man ever question'd this Truth We must not then conclude from the inconvenience that attends a Thing that is therefore false but we ought to weigh the Reasons and Motives whereby we are induc'd to believe it is so Now the Roman Catholics believe that those among the Greeks and Eastern Churches which are not in communion with the Church of Rome together with the Protestants are no true Members of the Catholic Church because they have the most Authentic Records and the most invincible Proof that any matter of Fact is capable of that the said Greeks Eastern Churches and Protestants fell into Heresie and Schism in which they do as yet actually persist What allowance God-almighty may make for the invincible Ignorance and want of Capacity in a great many of these People and how far he will be merciful and pardon the other defects of those who endeavour to live up to what they know and want necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth He alone knows None I am sure is more willing to judge favourably of their Salvation than Roman Catholics But to flatter them with hopes of Salvation whilst they persist in their Errors and have necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth and to tell them they may be saved with such Errors when we are convinc'd in our Consciences they cannot is surely no Christian Charity but the greatest of Heathenish Cruelty 5. In consequence of the Truth of this Proposition and of the importance of it to the Salvation of Souls they ought to produce express mention of the Roman Catholic Church in the ancient Creeds of the Christian Churches But this says the Dr. they are not able to do on the contrary Aeneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the second says that before the Council of Nice little Respect was had to the Roman Church Answ Just so the Arians used to object to the Catholics that if the word Consubstantial were of that importance as it was pretended they ought to produce express mention of it in the ancient Creed of the then present Church but as the Catholics then answer'd that it was enough the thing meant by that Word was in the Creed tho' not the Word it self so say we to the Protestants that in these Words of the Creed I believe the holy Catholic Church is implied what we mean by the Words Roman Catholic Church tho' the Word Roman be not there What Aeneas Sylvius might in passion or upon some private quarrel with the Pope have Written against the Roman Church consider'd with respect only to the Diocess of Rome I am not much concern'd For I am sure he never said nor writ that the Roman Church as it includes all the Christian Churches in communion with the See of Rome in which sense the Dr. cou'd not be ignorant we always take it was not the true Catholic Church Besides if it be true that Aeneas Sylvius said what the Dr. makes him here speak let the Holy and Learn'd Martyr St. Irenaeus who liv'd very neer two hundred years before the Council of Nice teach him the contrary Every Church says he that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church the Roman by Reason of her more powerful Principallity Loco sup cit CHAP. IV. Of Transubstantiation WHat we hold to be of Faith concerning this Point is this That the whole Substance of the Bread and Wine is after Consecration chang'd into the Body and Blood of Christ without any Alteration in the Accidents or outward Forms This is to all our modern Sectaries a Stone of Stumbling and Rock of Offence Against this they have whetted their Pens and Tongues and pointed all the Shafts of their Art and Eloquence in order to pull down an Edifice whose Builder and Maker is God himself But however they agree to destroy this mysterious Fabrick yet what to substitute in its Room or how to expound those Texts of Scripture on which it is founded none can with greater Heat and Passion even to the most injurious and provoking Language be divided nor fall into more manifest Absurdities and Contradictions than these Pretenders to Reformation And indeed if the Disagreement of Witnesses be an Argument of their Falshood as the Evangelists assure us it is we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that these are false Witnesses For I am sure none ever disagreed more not only in the Circumstances but even in the very Nature and Substance of their Evidence Martin Luther and his Adherents expound these Words This is my Body litterally and therefore believe the Real Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament but being however resolv'd to Incommode the Pope Epist ad Calvin as Luther says they add that the Substance of the Bread and Wine is likewise there And to extricate themselves from a difficulty which attends the Real Presence they affirm moreover that the Body of Christ is every where And thus they have brought forth two New Points of Faith never before heard of namely Consubstantiation and Vbiquitie And this the Church of England Writers call an absurd and monstrous Doctrine Calvin and his Sectators in Contradiction to this expound the same Words Figuratively and therefore believe a Real Absence or which is all one that the Eucharist is but a Type or Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ Zuinglius tells us himself was the first that found out this Exposition by the help of a certain Angel which appear'd to him but whether he was black or white he says he cannot tell So that for ought he knew it may be the Doctrine of a Devil I am sure Luther at least did think it so for he calls Calvin a Devil Epist ad Calvin and worse than a Devil for offering to obtrude this Doctrine upon the World and for wresting the plain Words of our Saviour to such a Sense The Church of England neither expounds those Words litterally nor yet figuratively for She neither believes Transubstantiation nor Consubstantiation neither Real Presence nor yet Real Absence And to deal ingenuously I do not well know what she believes in this particular And what is worse to the best of my Understanding nor she herself For in the Catechism which is put into the Children and common people's Hands where surely the Articles of Faith must if any where be clearly and plainly expounded she teaches
of the Protestants that it needs no farther Confutation 3. All the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ both in a literal Sense and in a Sense of Transubstantiation I shou'd fill up a Volum were I to bring all the Passages of Councils and Fathers which make for this Truth no Mistery of our Religion being ever with more Care inculcated and expounded by the Fathers in their Homilies Catechisms and familiar Discourses to the common People and that no doubt for the difficulty Men naturally have to believe it But it not being my design to write all that may be said for it but what may suffice to evince the truth of it I shall content my self with the Testimony of a few Councils and Fathers whose Authority and Weight however I hope shall make sufficient amends for the smalness of their number And 1. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense or which is the same thing believ'd the Real presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament let St. Cyril Bishop of Alexandria bear witness This great Patriarch in his Epistle to Nestorius speaks thus of the Eucharist Neque enim illam ut â—arnem communem suscipimus absit hoc neque rursum tanquam viri cujuspiam Sanctificati dignitatis unitate verbo consociati sed tanquam verè vivificam ipsiusque verbi propriam God forbid we shou'd receive it as common flesh nor yet as the flesh of a Man sanctified and united to the Word by a conjunction of dignity but we receive it as it truely is the quickening and proper flesh of the Word Himself This Letter was read and approv'd in the third General Council * Concil Ephes puncto 7. which no doubt wou'd never have been had it contain'd any thing contrary to Orthodox Faith so that having receiv'd Authority and Approbation from those Fathers we shall no more consider it as the Doctrine of a private Man but as the Faith of the whole General Council Now can it be imagin'd that this Council which represented the whole Catholic Church shou'd approve and put upon Record a Letter which declares the Real Presence as clear and plain as is possible for words to express it unless it had been at that Time the Faith of the whole Catholic Church And can it be imagin'd that the Catholic Church in those fair Days of her Youth as the Calvinists speak shou'd believe that Christ's proper Flesh as the said Letter words it was in the Sacrament unless they had understood Christ's Words in a literal Sense and receiv'd the same Doctrine from their immediate Ancestors Or can it be imagin'd that these Ancestors shou'd be of this Belief unless they had likewise receiv'd it from their Ancestors and so up to the very Apostles This is surely to any Man of Sense but more especially ought to be to the Church of England who professes to receive the Acts and Decrees of this Council instead of a Demonstration that from the begining of Christianity to the Time of this Council all the Orthodox Christians did both believe the Real Presence and understand Christ's Words in a literal Sense 2. That the Orthodox Christians from the begining understood those Words of Christ this is my Body in a sense of Transubstantiation we have the unanimous consent of the ancient Fathers of the Church many whereof in their familiar Discourses to the common People Illustrate this Conversion by the change of the Water into Wine of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of the River Nilus into Blood and the like And 't is very observable that in all their Discourses upon this Subject and whenever they speak of this Change they have Recourse to the Omnipotent Power of God to which alone they ascribe it which surely wou'd be very needless had there been no real Change in the Case St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem speaks thus Concerning this Change Therefore since Christ hath said of the Bread this is my Body who durst any more doubt it And since He himself so positively affirm'd saying this is my Blood who ever doubted so as to say that it was not his Blood In Time past at the Wedding of Cana in Galilee he chang'd Water into Wine which has a certain likeness to blood and shall not we think him worthy to be believ'd that he cou'd change Wine into his Blood Again for under the appearance of Bread he gives us his Body and under the appearance of Wine he gives us his Blood And a little after tho' your Senses seem in this to oppose you yet Faith must confirm you do not judge the thing by the Taste but let Faith assure you beyond all doubt that you partake of the Body and Blood of Christ Cate. Mystag 3. Here is a great Bishop an Eminent Witness of Antiquity one who flourish'd 1300 Years since and who no doubt knew very well the Faith of the Catholic Church of his Time touching this Point Here is a careful Pastor expounding Christ's Words and Catechizing his Flock in the very Language of the present Roman Catholics He tells them that since Christ said that the Bread and Wine were his Body and Blood they must believe that the Bread and Wine were chang'd into his Body and Blood He illustrates this change by a familiar Comparison of the Water which Christ chang'd into Wine and enforces the belief of the possibility of the other by the actual Existence of this change which they both read and believ'd He tells them that under the Appearance of Bread they receive the Body and under the Appearance of Wine they receive the Blood of Christ and that tho' their senses may tell them that it is still Bread yet their Faith must correct that Mistake that they must not judge what it is by the Taste but must believe that it is the Body and Blood of Christ whatever their senses may suggest to them to the contrary Did ever any Roman Catholic speak plainer concerning Transubstantiation Can any Roman Bishop or Pastor at present enforce the belief of this Mystery with more cogent Arguments than to tell his Auditors that since Christ said this is my Body we must believe it is so since he chang'd Water into Wine we have no Reason to doubt but his Omnipotence is sufficient to change Wine into his â—lood that tho' it appears to our Eyes to our Taste to our Smell that the thing is otherwise yet we must not in this bus'ness rely upon the Relation of these senses but upon the sense of Hearing because Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God which Word we are here only requir'd to believe All which are the very Reasonings of St. Cyril Now what the Protestants may think of this great Maâ— I shall not determin but this I am sure of that had he written this since the Reformation they wou'd have all reckon'd him to be as rank a Papist as ever put Pen
to Paper St. Gregory Nissen speaks thus to the same purpose Rectè Dei Verbo sanctificatum Panem in Dei Verbi corpus credo transmutari I do believe that the Bread sanctified by the Word of God is chang'd into the Body of God the Word Orat. Cate. Cap. 37. St. Ambrose takes a great deal of pains to inculcate this Truth to the Ignorant people instancing in several real Changes as that of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of the Creation of the World out of nothing c. I will instance in one only of his Passages to this purpose 'T is indeed somewhat tedious to be brought here at length however since it cannot be well understood unless it be intirely read I hope the Reader will pardon me so necessary a Fault Panis iste says he ante Verba Sacramentorum Panis est c. That Bread before the Sacramental Words is Bread but when the Consecration comes to it of the Bread is made the Flesh of Christ Let us prove this How can that which is Bread be the Body of Christ By Consecration By what and by whose Words is the Consecration perform'd By the Words of the Lord Jesus For all other things which are said do give Praise to God there is a Prayer premis'd for the People for Kings and for others but when the Priest comes to make the venerable Sacrament he does no more use his own but Christ's Words Therefore the Word of Christ maketh this Sacrament What Word of Christ Even that Word by which all things were made The Lord commanded and the Earth was made The Lord commanded and every Creature was ingender'd You see then how efficacious the Word of Christ is Seeing then there is so much Efficacy in the Word of the Lord Jesus as to cause things that were not to have a Being How much more efficacious is it to make the things that are extant to be chang'd into an other thing Heaven was not the Sea was not the Earth was not but hear him that says He said and they were made He commanded and they were created That I may answer you then It was not the Body of Christ before Consecration but after Consecration Note That some Critics have Doubted whether the Books whence this Passage is taken belong to St. Ambrose by Reason that the Stile of them is somewhat different from the Rest of the Works of this Father but the best and ablest Critics agree that they are either St. Ambrose's Works or some other Bishop's neer his Time who dilates upon what St. Ambrose wrote concerning the Eucharist I say unto you that it is then the Body of Christ He said and it was made He commanded and it was created Lib. 4. de Sacra Cap. 4. I shall not trouble the Reader with any Reflections upon this Passage being in my Opinion so plain and so much to the purpose that it cannot possibly need any thing to strengthen it Nor will I tire his Patience with any more from Fathers it being evident to any Man of Sense that these great Pillars of the Church Men so Eminent both for Learning and Piety wou'd never have believ'd Transubstantiation nor have taken so much pains to inculcate it to the People had it not been the universal belief of the Catholic Church I shall only add some Words of the Decree of the Council of Lateran on this Subject and so conclude The Words which relate to our purpose are these Concil Later 4. sub Inno. 3. Transubstantiates Pane Vino in Corpus Sanguinem Christi The Bread and Wine being transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ This all the Protestants confess is very plain in favour of Transubstantiation and therefore they do most outragiously declaim against it and even force their Lungs and Pipes both to decry the Decree and to expose the Authors of it For my part I am in no passion nor heat I shall therefore soberly and calmly examin what this Council was what Authority it may justly claim and how far it ought to influence our Faith If it be found to be only a Conventicle of Heretics or a confus'd assembly of some Bishops met together without any authority from the Chief Pastor and other Patriarchs of the Church in order to broach new Doctrines in opposition to the Faith which was once deliver'd unto the Saints then it will be but reasonable we reject their Authority But if on the contrary it appears to have been an Oecumenical or General Council representing the whole Catholic Church and that all the individual Members of the Catholic Church at that Time receiv'd and acquiesc'd to its Decrees especially to that part of it which relates to our present purpose it is but just and reasonable we pay the same respect and deference to it Now after having examin'd the Authentic Acts of this Council and consulted all the at least famous Historians and Ecclesiastical Writers of those Times and even the Writings of some of our Learned Adversaries I find that it has all the Marks and Characters which even the most Oecumenical Council ever yet had I find that this Council was call'd by common consent of both Emperors and of all the Kings and free States in Europe that it was held in Rome in the Year of our Lord 1215. Pope Innocent the 3d. Presiding in it The best Historians of those Times tell us that there were near 1200 Prelats in this Council that the Patriachs of Constantinople and Jerusalem were there in Person that the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch being under the Yoke of the Sarazen and Turkish Tyrany because they cou'd not come in Person sent their Deputies instructed with Power to represent their Persons and Churches As to Europe the great number of Prelates there assembled shew even to a Demonstration that there were more than sufficient Representatives of the Western Churches And what more can be desir'd to compleat a General Council Now can any Man imagin that so August an Assembly as this so man Grave and Learn'd Men of different Humors Interests and Manners shou'd all conspire together to impose upon themselves and all Mankind besides a New Doctrine in one of the most essential points of Christian Faith contrary to what they had receiv'd from their Ancestors and that not one Honest Man shou'd be found among them all to discover the Imposture Or that all Mankind shou'd acquiesce to such a Doctrine and none say this is contrary to what we have been hitherto taught Can it be imagin'd that the Bishops who met here on purpose to hear every Individual Prelate tell his own Story and to declare what Faith he had receiv'd from his Ancestors on this Subject who aim'd at nothing else but to find out the Truth but to see wherein they did all agree and to reckon That only as an Article of their Faith which shou'd be found to be the same in every Man's Mouth and yet that contrary to
the main End and Design of their meeting and what is more to the eternal damnation of their own Souls they shou'd unanimously agree to declare as an Article of their Faith what they neither receiv'd nor knew nor believ'd before In a word is it possible that any Man of sense cou'd imagin that in any Age of the Church the Pope Patriarchs Bishops Kings Princes and People shou'd all agree to receive as an Article of Faith that which the Apostles never deliver'd to their Ancestors nor their Ancestors to them And if this be absurd and not to be suppos'd as most certainly it is with what colour of Reason can any Man refuse the Evidence of this Council What shall we believe if we do not believe so great and so grave an Assembly Here are from all parts of the Christian World so many hundreds of Learned Prelats attesting on no less penalty than their eternal Damnation if false that this is the Faith which the Apostles deliver'd to the Church that this is the Doctrine which they receiv'd from their Fore-fathers Here are all the Rest of the Prelats and People of the whole Catholic Church likewise declaring by their ready Acceptance and Submission to this Doctrine that it is the same they receiv'd from their Predecessors And now if after all this Men will be so much in love with their fancies as to believe that the whole Catholic Church both in its Representatives and in the diffusive Body of Christians cou'd be induc'd to conspire together to deceive their Posterity against their own plain and True Interest against the Trust and Confidence repos'd in them the Duty and Piety of Parents to their Children the tender Care they ought to have for their Welfare and contrary to the main End and Design of the Divine goodness who put his Word into their Mouths to the end they might faithfully deliver it to succeeding Generations and all this notwithstanding the terrors of the Lord and the wrath of God reveal'd from Heaven against all impious Lyars notwithstanding the dreadful Woes and Curses pronounc'd in Scripture against false Seducers and the horrible aggravation of their own Guilt for having led so many millions into Error and Perdition Add to this the promise of the Holy-Ghost's guiding the Church into all Truth the assistance of the Divine Spirit with it to the End and consumation of the World the dear and tender Love of the great Shepherd of our Souls for his Flock and the great care and concern he has for the preservation of his Church for which he shed his most precious Blood If after all this I say Men will be so far deluded as to believe such dreams I shall only say to them as Joshua did to the Children of Israel If it seem evil to you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve but for me and my House Josh 24. we will serve the Lord and believe his holy Word Thus much concerning the Proof of this Mystery Let us now see what the Doctor Objects Never Roman Conqueror sung more Pâ—ans after Victory nor insulted over his Enemy with more Ostentation than Dr. Tillotson has on this Subject over the Roman Catholics and the Church of Rome and to compleat the Parallel if his Railing Eloquence and Unchristian Contumelies I am sorry he extorts such Words from me were of equal force to bind with that of Roman Chains no Barbarous Captives were ever worse us'd by their Insulting Conquerors than the Sons of that Mother whose Piety and Zeal brought forth in Christ his Ancestors have the fortune to be treated by the Unchristian Slanders and Calumnies of his bitter Tongue and Pen. Besides that invincible Argument if we believe him that Achilles the Evidence of Sense which he pretends to be against this Mystery and which he repeats over and over in more places of his Sermons than I can at present reckon he has oblidg'd us with a Treatise written on purpose upon this Subject which he calls a Discourse against Transubstantiation It begins vol. 3. pag. 297. In this Piece I meet with as copious a Collection of scrurrilous injurious Language of Notorious and Manifest Impositions with so much disingenuity in citing of Authors and managing their Authorities as I believe was ever possible for any Man who had never so little esteem for his Credit to bring within so narrow a Compass Now to Answer all this Discourse and to lay open all its Disingenuity to set these Passages of the Fathers which he mangles and dismembers in their due Light and to shew the Scope and End at which those Fathers aim'd woud alone require a volum of no small bulk which in no wise agrees with my design'd Brevity nor yet will my present Affairs I shall therefore be content at present to answer his main Objection taken from the Evidence of Sense which is the only Objection I find in all his Sermons but with as many faces as Protheus was said to have and some three or four more taken out of this Discourse which are the only Real Difficulties in it being resolv'd however to lay hold on the next Opportunity to answer the whole Paragraph by Paragraph Vol. 3. pag. 80 81. Vol. 5. p. 20. c. Vol. 6. pag. 165. 1. His main Objection is this Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense The Evidence of our Senses is against it 'T is contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind c. Answ This He repeats over and over and to enforce the Belief of it he tells us in several places that it destroys the External Means of Confirming the Truth of Christianity But he only repeats it for I cou'd never yet find in all his Books that he has made the least offer to prove it He wou'd have us it seems be so civil as to take it for granted For without this I believe nay I am sure he did not well know how go about to prove it And 't is a thing I often admir'd with how much Confidence his Good Man and Others wou'd press this Argument upon us without ever offering the least Proof for it when at the same time they knew very well we firmly deny it And this seems so much the more strange because the more Evident any thing is as they pretend this to be the easier it is to find Mediums to prove it But neither He nor all the Philosophers that ever were or are to come shall ever be able to make one good Argument to prove that Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense For what is Transubstantiation The Change of one Substance into another Of what Sense then is Substance the Object that such a Change may be discover'd by it 'T is of no Sense sure but of the Vnderstanding as all the World knows How can that then contradict Sense which is not the Object of any Sense since no Faculty can be employ'd but about its proper Object They might as well
prove to him that the Symbols taken in that Sense were not chang'd But this he is so far from doing that the Reason he offers to evince that he was so caught proves no more than that the Accidents or Objects of Sense still remain namely that which may be seen and handled which the Hetetic Eranistes never denied 'T is then evident that he understood the Word Symbol in a different Sense from that of Eranistes Consequently his meaning must have been that the Accidents which he calls Symbols did not pass out of their Nature c. And all his Advantage consisted in the Equivocation of the Word Symbol which his Adversary took in a vulgar Sense and by that gave him an Opportunity to perplex him and tell him he was caught in his own Net And God knows he must be hard put to it who would fain squeez Proof for his Faith from such intricate Disputes I have nothing to add in answer to Gelasius his Passage to what is here said For 't is plain from the Scope and Design of this Father who likewise disputed with an Entychian Heretic that he meant by substance or nature of Bread the Qualities of it which we confess remain still in the Sacrament nothing being more usual in common Discourse than to give the name of Nature to the Quality as we commonly say a Man of ill nature that is of ill Qualities One Word more with the Doctor and I take leave of this Subject He tells us Discourse against Transubstantiation pag. 328 329. That Transubstantiation was first introduc'd into the Catholic Religion about the latter End of the Eight Century in the Second Council of Nice And pag. 333. that it was almost 300 Years before this Mishapen Monster as he Religiously terms it cou'd be Lick'd into that Form in which it is now settl'd and establish'd in the Church of Rome What I shall say to the matter of Fact here mention'd leaving the Doctor to his own Master to account for his civil Language is that I cou'd wish he were alive that he might now at least consult his own Protestant Authors to correct his Error since he was then in two much haste to do it Doctor Humfrey a Famous Divine of his own Country and perswasion wou'd better inform him that Austin the great Monk as he calls him Jesuitiâ—mi part â— sent by Gregory the Great Pope taught the English a Burthen of Ceremonies Purgatory Mass Prayer for the Dead Transubstantiation Reliques c. Now all the World knows that Austin the Monk taught the English about the latter end of the sixth Century and the Begining of the seventh almost two hundred Years before the Second Council of Nice Cent. 6. de Oper. Sti. Greg. The Centuriators of Magdeburg the Doctor 's own good Friends wou'd tell Him that the same Gregory the Great wrought a Miracle in the presence of an uncredulous Woman to confirm her in the Belief of the substantial Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ as the Centurists Phrase it And surely it was no less these Gentlemens Interest than his cou'd they but dâ—vest themselves of all honesty and sincerity to make it of a Fresher Date than even the Council of Nice But the Doctor was so intent upon baffling Monsieur Arnauld's Demonstration of the Impossibility of obtruding this Doctrine upon the Faithful without Great and Violent Commotions both in Church and State which he saw he cou'd not well effect unless he had fix'd a certain Epocha whence this Doctrine shou'd take its rise that rather than fail he wou'd hit at a venture upon the Second Council of Nice and there fix his Foot Being perswaded as he says that this was the fittest Time for such a Change And is not this a miserable Shift to which this Ingenious Man is reduc'd when he is forc'd to make good his undertaking to have recourse to such known and manifest I am asham'd to say it falshoods Which surely do better become Impostors than Grave Divines whose very Names and Character shou'd prompt them to candor and sincerity it being evident that disingenuity and false dealing whatever they may do for a time serve to no other end at last than to discredit the Cause and confound its Patrons CHAP. V. Of the Communion in one kind TO give the Communion in one or in both kinds is no matter of Faith but respects the Discipline of the Church which according to the different Circumstances and Exigencies of Affairs for the increase of Piety and Devotion and in Condescension to the Infirmity of her Children is often necessitated to alter some things in her Discipline it being Evident that what in one Age was good and profitable an other Age will in no wise bear And since it is agreed upon that the care of feeding the Flock was committed to the Church that she alone is Commission'd to dispence the Divine Mysteries and hath a peculiar promise of the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to guide her into all Truth none can reasonably doubt but She is the most Competent Judge what in her Discipline to change what to retain Now the main stress lyes upon this whether or no it be in the Power of the Church to alter her Discipline in a matter of this Importance so as to restrain the Faithful to the receiving of the Sacrament in one kind only It being acknowledg'd by our selves that in the Primitive Times this Sacrament was indifferently administred sometimes in Both sometimes in one kind Tho 't is hard to conceive why Men shou'd rather conclude that it is not in the Power of the Church to restrain the Faithful to one kind because the Communion was somtimes given in Both than the contrary that it is in the Power of the Church so to do because it was likewise sometimes given in one kind To justifie then the conduct of the Church in this particular I shall only examin whether the Receiving of the Eucharist in both kinds be Essential to a True and Real Participation of the Sacrament For if both kinds be Essential then 't is certain the Church cannot take away any Essential part of the Sacrament without destroying the whole and consequently in giving but part wou'd give nothing at all Therefore cou'd not restrain the Faithful to one kind it being evident that the Church is only impower'd to dispense and not to destroy the Mysterys of God But if I can make out that the Participation of the Euchurist in Both Kinds is not Essential to the worthy receiving of the Sacrament then it will evidently follow that the Church may lawfully command the forbearance of one kind For if you shou'd ask any of our Learned Protestants why they do not give the Communion at night or after Supper or sitting down or lying on Couches as 't is confess'd Christ gave it They will tell you because 't is not Essential to the Sacrament to give it so Or why they do not
present Mass-book Alcuinus De Div. Off. a Famous Author of the eigth Century relates the same thing So doth Rupertus Lib. 2. c. 9. de Div. Off. Hugo de Sancto Victore and other Writers of the Eleventh Century They tell us that on Good-Friday there was no Consecration made but that the Body of our Lord which was consecrated the day before was reserv'd for that day's Communion that the Priest took the Lord's Body and some unconsecrated Wine and Water and then gave the Communion to the People under the Form of Bread alone So that there has been a perpetual Practice in the Latin Church of giving the Communion in one kind solemnly once every Year both to Clergy and Laity even to this very Time I might further bring the Authority of Sozomenus Evagrius Authors of the sixth Century and of several Great and Learned Men of the Gallican Church to confirm this Practice but I think it is sufficiently evident from what is said that the Communion was publicly givâ—ng in one kind ever since Christians had Churches for public and solemn Service I shall therefore proceed to shew in the last place That to take the Communion in both kinds is not Essential to the Sacrament from the Consent of our Adversaries if consistent with Themselves I suppose Martin Luther's Opinion in this Matter is of no small Authority for 't is but reasonable to suppose that those who have follow'd the Scheme which he drew shou'd pay their just tribute of Respect to his Opinion in this Point Let us then hear him speak If any Council says he shou'd chance to Decree the Communion in both kinds we shou'd by no means make use of Both De Miffa Ang. nay we wou'd sooner in contempt of the Council take one or neither than both and curse those who shou'd by the Authority of such a Council make use of both kinds Here I think it is very plain Luther was of opinion that both kinds was not essential to the Sacrament else surely he wou'd not have said that he wou'd sooner make use of neither than of both nor curse those who shou'd take both kinds But the Discipline of the French Protestants will afford us a more ample Testimony in this Matter In a Synod held in Potiers Anno. 1560. and in an other in Rochel 1571. It is provided that those who cannot drink Wine may receive the Communion under the Form of Bread It may not be amiss to subjoin their very Words as they are read in the 12th Chapter of their Discipline Tit. Of the Lord's Sup. Art 7. The Bread of the Lord's Supper ought to be administer'd to those who cannot drink Wine upon their making Protestation that it is not out of Contempt and upon their endeavouring what they can to obviate all Scandal even by approaching the Cup as neer their Mouths as they are able Now 't is not to be imagin'd that these Gentlemen shou'd think both kinds essential to the Communion and yet make such a Decision For there is no Body who is never so little Read in Philosophy but knows that the Essence of Things is indivisible that by separating one essential Part from the other you destroy the nature of the whole that in giving only an essential part of a thing you give nothing in regard of that whose essential part it was consequently he that gives but part of the Sacrament gives no Sacrament at all Therefore these Gentlemen who knew better Things in ordering the Bread alone to be given to those who cou'd not drink Wine cannot in Reason be suppos'd to believe that the Cup was Essential to the Communion else they wou'd have absolutely refus'd the Sacrament to those who cou'd not receive it in both kinds since to give it in one kind were to give nothing at all but rather to prophane and abuse that which is most Sacred and August in the Christian Religion whereas the natural disability of those who cannot drink Wine might reasonably excuse them from taking either kind And thus I have endeavour'd as briefly as I cou'd to prove from the practice and discipline of the Church in all Ages from public as well as private Communion from Liturgies Fathers and Historians and even from the consent of our Adversaries manifestly imply'd in their Discipline and Practice that neither the Primitive Christians nor the Catholic Church in any Age nor yet any Orthodox Believer did ever think that to take the Sacrament in both kinds was essential to the Communion And if so then it is plain and evident that the Church hath Power to and may lawfully restrain the Faithful from the Cup and confine them to One kind only Let us now see what Dr. Tillotson objects to all this And here I shall not abuse the Reader 's Patience by repeating the same thing over again for since all that can with any colour of Reason be objected is contain'd in one short Paragraph tho' the things there insisted on are often repeated in several of his Sermons but with no material Addition I will only transcribe it and offer my Exceptions to it And then says he the Communion in One kind is plainly contrary to our Saviours Institution in both kinds as they themselves acknowledge And therefore the Council of Constance being sensible of this was forc'd to decree it with an express non Obstante to the Institution of Christ and the Practice of the Apostles and the Primitive Church And their Doctrine of Concomitancy as if the Blood were in the Flesh and together with it will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and pierc'd and exhausted and drain'd of his Blood and his Blood is represented as shed and poured out so that one kind can by no means contain and exhibit both Three things the Doctor here insists upon 1. That We our selves acknowledg the the Communion in one kind to be contrary to our Saviour's Institution 2. That the Council of Constance was forc'd to decree it with a non obstante to the Institution of Christ 3. That the Doctrine of Concomitancy will not help the matter because in the Sacrament Christ's Body is represented as broken and exhausted and drain'd of His Blood I may say of these three Propositions the first is neither True nor to the purpose The second is something to the Purpose but not True The third is like the first neither True nor to the Purpose I begin with the first We our selves acknowledge that the Communion in one Kind is contrary to our Saviour's Institution For my own part I have read at least some of the best R. Catholic Casuists and Divines upon this Subject and have convers'd with many more Yet I declare I neither read nor heard any of them say that to give the Communion in one kind was contrary to our Saviour's Institution nay I think all R. Catholics do believe that the Administration of the Communion
the Psalms in their public Prayers from that Time to This in any other Language than the Hebrew tho' if we except their Rabbins very few if any of that Nation understand any thing of it The Grecians have long since corrupted their Language as all the World knows and the common People among them know no more of the Genuine Greek than ours do of the Latin yet the Greek Church never chang'd a Syllable in their Liturgy but do still say their Mass in the same Pure Greek which was us'd when they first embrac'd the Christian Faith All other Sects of Christians See Father Symon's Critical History of the Old and New Testament in the Earstern Churches have likewise Corrupted their Languages yet they continue to Celebrate Divine Service in the Languages they first us'd tho' the Communion People do not understand them And if I may be allow'd to borrow an instance from Infidels the Turks still retain the Arabic Language in their Alcaron nor did they ever permit it to be read in any other Tongue in their public Prayers tho' 't is confess'd their common People understand it not But of this enough Let us now see what the Doctor objects to this Point And here I do not intend to pursue him in all the Repetitions He makes of the same thing without any material Addition for then I shou'd transcribe several almost intire Sermons but shall for the Reader 's ease and my own bring all his Real or Apparent Difficulties within the compass of these few Heads First he saith That the celebrating of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue is contrary to the Practice of the Primitive Church and the Great Design and End of Religious Worship which being a Reasonable Service ought to be Directed by our Understanding and accompanied with our Hearts and Affections Secondly That to pray in an unknown Tongue is contrary to St. Paul's Doctrine who has no less than a whole Chapter wherein he confutes and condemns this Practice Thirdly Vol. 1. edit post obit pag. 126 161. That we lock up the Scriptures in an unknown Tongue and forbid the People the use of them which is contrary to Christ's own Design who exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures to St. Luke who commends the Bereans for examining the Scriptures and trying the Apostles Doctrine by that Test and to the ancient Fathers who do most earnestly recommend to the People the Reading and Study of the Scriptures Fourthly That the Scripture being Vol. 1. edit post obit pag. 264. by our own Confession a principal Part of the Rule of Faith it cannot be imagin'd how People shou'd square or measure their Faith by this Ride unless they are allow'd to read and understand it Lastly Vol. 2. edit post obit pag. 369. That we therefore look up the Scriptures in an unknown Tongue because it is certain that if the People were once brought to understand the Scriptures they wou'd soon quit our Religion and go over to them This is the Sum of what he says upon this Subject to which I shall return my Exceptions as plainly and briefly as I can First he saith That the celebrating of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue is contrary to the Practice of the Primitive Church I answer if he means by unknown Tongue such a Tongue as no body understands it is very True but not to the purpose For the Tongue in which we celebrate divine Service is not such but on the contrary the Tongue in the World I believe the best known But if he means by it a Tongue unknown to most of the common people his Assertion has no Degree of Truth in it For first he himself acknowledges and so doth all Mankind that the Primitive Church and all succeeding Generations I mean in the Latin Church till the Reformation appear'd did celebrate divine Service in the same Latin Tongue we now use And secondly even Malice it self cannot deny but that generally speaking all the common people except the Italians were always Ignorant of the Latin Tongue 'T is then manifest our Conduct in this particular is altogether conformable to the Practice of the primitive Church and then the Doctor is out in his first Attempt This he cou'd not but see and therefore in an other place he endeavours to Insinuate tho' he durst not speak it out that the common people spoke all Latin Vol. 3. pag. 469. But this only shews what the Wit of Man is capable of when he must and will maintain a thing What the common people of Spain France Germany Sweden Denmark Norway England Ireland Scotland c. spoke all Latin 'T is indeed confess'd all these People were in Communion with the Church of Rome all receiv'd their Faith and Liturgy from her all celebrated divine Service in the same Tongue and after the same manner with her but that they all spoke and understood the Roman or Latin Tongue is surely so ridiculously absurd that I rather believe I mistook his meaning than that a Man of his Parts shou'd be guilty of so great a Mistake As to what he says that Religious Worship being a reasonable Service ought to be directed by our Understandings and accompanied with our Hearts and Affections I readily agree with him And for that Reason I hope we are as careful to teach the common People their prayers in their own Tongue and to exhort them to say 'em in the same Tongue as our Neighbours Yet this notwithstanding it did not seem good to the Holy Spirit of God who guides his Church into all Truth and consequently into all good Practices to alter that Tongue which venerable Antiquity and a Prescription of now almost seventeen hundred Years have consecrated to His divine Worship The Reasons whereof I have partly touch'd upon before Touching the Second viz. That to pray in an unknown Tongue is contrary to St. Pauâ—'s Doctrine who has no less than a whole Chapter wherein he confutes and condemns this Practice Answ The Chapter the Doctor here refers to is the 14th of the first to the Corinthians which had it been faithfully translated either from their own Greek or our Latin wou'd leave no Room for this Objection The Question is whether St. Paul condemns public prayers in a Tongue which all the common people do not understand This the Doctor affirms and vouches the Authority of the English Translation in the aforesaid Chapter where St. Paul as he says condemns Prayers in an unknown Tongue We say first St. Paul has no such thing as unknown Tongue but the word Vnknown is an Addition of their own Secondly St. Paul does not condemn speaking or praying with Tongues which is the only thing there mention'd And both these we are able to make appear the first from their own Translation in which tho' they give it to us in their Sermons and Disputes for currant Scripture yet they put the word Vnknown in small Italic Characters to
them for which they ought to be worship'd On the contrary we are expresly forbid to give these Pictures or Images any manner of Worship for their own Sake but that the respect which we shew them is to be referr'd to the Originals namely to Christ and his Saints And sure these things which represent Christ and his Saints to our Eyes and put us in mind of the Death and Passion of the One and of the Patience and Sufferings of the Others are worthy of some Respect and may very well be honour'd upon Account of what they represent without any Danger of Idolatry as the Pictures of Kings and Princes and other Men by whom we receive Benefits are in their own degree confessedly respected and had in Esteem without any such Suspition In one Word the Heathens call'd all their Heroes or Saints Gods sacrific'd to them as such worship'd them as such call'd upon them as such but we do not call the Christian Saints Gods we do by no means sacrifice to them nor worship them as Gods nor call upon them as Gods So that upon the whole matter the Doctor might as well resemble Sea to dry Land or Light to Darkness or the obscurest Night to the brightest Day as compare the Worship we give the Christian Saints to that which the Heathens paid to their Heroes or Saints as the Doctor is pleas'd to call them CHAP. VIII Of Images WHat the Council of Trent declares concerning Images is this That the Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and kept especially in Churches and that due Honor and Respect is to be given them not that we believe any virtue or Divinity to be in them for which they ought to be worship'd or that we shou'd ask any thing of them or put any trust or confidence in them as was formerly done by the Gentils who put their trust in Idols but because the Honor done to them is refer'd to the Originals which they represent So that by those Images which we kiss and before which we uncover our Heads and bow down we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness they bear Ses 25. Dec. de invocat Sanct. Here you see this Council only requires that we give duâ— honor and respect to Images which signifies no more than that we ought to give them the honor which is due to them But this is not all for the Council adds that when we uncover our Heads or bow towards Images we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness these Images bear So that it is not so much the Images we honor as Christ and His Saints And since 't is confess'd that the Types and Figures of all sacred things are worthy of some Respect in propotion to what they represent how mnch more ought the Types and Figures of Jesus Christ who is the Source and Fountain of all Holiness and Sanctification and of the Saints to whose Charity and goodness we owe under God our Faith and Religion to be had in Honor and Esteem We honor and respect the Bible more than ordinary Books tho' it is but Paper and Ink like other Books because the Characters therein contain'd are sacred Signs which represent to us the Word and Will of God And even Nature teaches us to honor and respect the Pictures and Images of Kings and Princes and of our Friends for the Excellency of these Persons and the Benefits we receive by them And why may not we likewise honor and respect those Signs or Images which represent to us that which is most Excellent and most August in the Christian Religion namely Christ and His Saints The Chief End of Images and Pictures is to adorn our Churches to put us in mind of the Passion of Christ and of the Piety and Virtue of the Saints and to be Books to the Ignorant And what Ornament so proper for the Church of God as the Picture of Jesus Christ who planted it with His Blood What in the next Place as the Pictures of Saints who water'd it with their's and are now in their own Degree the great Ornaments of the Heavens What can be more powerful to excite us to a greatful Remembrance of the Passion of Jesus Christ then to behold a Crucifix which represents Him to us with Arms stretch'd out as it were to embrace us and Hands and Feet and Side pierc'd for our Sins What pious Christian can then abstain from expressing the Sense of his Heart by some exteriour Act of Honor and Respect to such a Representation if not for its own at least for the sake of that which it represents And as to the Ignorant it cannot be denied but that when they are taught that such a Picture represents Jesus Christ who in that posture Sacrific'd Himself for their Sins that such other Pictures represent the Apostles and Saints who preach'd and deliver'd that Faith and Religion to them by which they are to be eternally happy it cannot be denied I say but that such lessons are easily retain'd and create in their Minds a greatful acknowledement of the Mercies of their Redeemer and a desire to imitate the Virtue and Piety of the Saints And then the Respect which they shew to these Pictures is but the Natural Result of their Sense of the Benefits they receive by the Passion of Christ and by the Piety and Charity of the Saints These were the chief motives that induc'd the Church in all Ages to have and to keep the Pictures of Jesus Christ and His Saints I say in all Ages Eusebius the Great and Famous Ecclesiastical Historian â—ist Eccles lib. 7. cap. 18 edit vol. who flourish'd in the Begining of the fourth Age tells us that the Christians had from the Begining the Pictures of Christ and of St. Peter and St. Paul that he himself had seen the Statue which the Woman whom Christ had heal'd of the bloody flux erected for Him at Paneas that at the Foot of this Statue there grew an Herb which when it touch'd the Skirt of the Statue had a virtue of curing Diseases And Helena's seeking and finding the Cross on which our Lord suffer'd and the Miracle by which it was discover'd are too well known to be question'd But what need I insist upon proofs of the lawfulness of Pictures and Images in Churches or of the respect that is due to them since the Protestants themselves acknowledge both They say they only exclaim against the Abuses committed in the Church of Rome upon this account But for the Thing it self they say they willingly own it This is the Declaration The Ingenious Author of The Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in answer to the Bishop of Meaux makes in the Name of that Church page 18. It may not be amiss to subjoin his very Words We will honor says he the Relicks of the Saints as the primitive Church did We will respect the Images
Purgatory because they pray'd for the Virgin Mary and the Apostles and Martyrs c. else why do they not conclude that we do not believe it because we do the same To sum up all these Evidences then I reason thus The Primitive Church pray'd to God for some Souls departed that they might be deliver'd out of Prison that their Faults and Sins might be forgiven them that they might be eas'd of their Pain that they might be sav'd from the Punishment of Fire that they might be receiv'd into Heaven but such Prayers are inconsistent with a Belief that the Souls departed are immediately taken into Heaven or condemn'd to Hell Therefore the Primitive Church believ'd there was a Third Place wherein some souls departed were detain'd and were capable of being assisted and better'd by their Prayers The first Proposition is taken from the very Words of the Fathers and acknowledged by our Adversaries to be true The second a very small portion of Natural Reason with never so little insight in Scripture and Christian Religion which assure us that Prayers of that nature for those that are in Heaven or Hell are needless and vain will easily discover to be likewise True And I think the consequence is rightly infer'd I now proceed to the Objections 3. The Doctor objects first Vol. 2 Pag. 63. that the Doctrine of Purgatory is not founded in Scripture nor can be prov'd from it and that some of our own Eminent Men do acknowledge it cannot To which I answer that I have produc'd two Passages from Scripture and cou'd produce as many more which the most Eminent Fathers of the Primitive Church have interpreted of Purgatory and therefore I think I may safely tell the Dr. that with submission He was mistaken As to those Eminent Men of our Church who say that the Doctrine of Purgatory cannot be prov'd from Scripture when any one in his behalf names them and points at the place in their Works where they say so I will return him as satisfactory an Answer as I can In the mean time I may reasonably presume they say no such thing Seeing he was never backward in giving citations when they made any thing for him All the Eminent Men He vouches for this is Estius who by the Dr's own confession only says that in his Opinion the Passage of St. Paul above cited does not evince Purgatory but does not say that other Passages of Scripture do not and if he had I shou'd oppose to his Opinion that of Tertulian St. Cyprian St. Ambrose St. Jerom St. Austin and many more of the Ancient Fathers whose Authority in this matter ought I think to weigh more with any reasonable Man than that of any modern Writer whatsoever Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 307. His second Objection is borrow'd from a Text in the Revelations Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from hence forth Yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them cap. 14.13 Here says the Dr. the Spirit pronounces them happy who die in the Lord because they rest from their Labours which adds He they wou'd not do were they to be tormented in Purgatory Fire Ergo c. Answ This Passage is confessedly obscure as to the meaning of some Words in it and the Time whence the blessing there mention'd is to Commence and the Doctor 's bestowing six full Pages upon the Explication of it shews it to be so and for that Reason I think it is against the Rules of Logic to pretend to more Evidence in the conclusion than the Premises will afford But it seems he forgot in his second Sermon upon this Text that in his First he had told us that the Dead which die in the Lord in Scripture Phrase are those who die or are put to death for the Lord's Cause that is as he expresly says suffer Martyrdom for the Lord I say he must have forgot this else he wou'd not have objected that Text against Purgatory since he cou'd not be ignorant that we believe that all the Martyrs who suffer for the Faith of Christ and even other Eminent Saints who do not suffer Martyrdom but live the life of Martyrs do rest from their Labours and pass not thro' the Fire of Purgatory Wherefore in my opinion he shou'd have given us an other Interpretation of this Text or have let Purgatory alone but 't is no new thing to find the Doctor pulldown in one place what he had built in an other and therefore I am not surpriz'd to see Purgatory brought in by Head and Shoulders and spoken against in Season and out of Season 'T is Purgatory that reproaches the Sacrileges and Depredations of the Doctor 's Ancestors of worthy Memory and Bears hard upon their Posterity and upon that account it must be Cry'd down lest the horrid guilt of the Sacrileges of the Fathers shou'd fly in the Face of their Children and give them that Purgatory in this Life which He wou'd perswade them they shall not meet with in the next For a third Objection the Doctor tells us Vol. 2. Edit Post ob Pag. 310. we have a very considerable and substantial Reason to exempt as few as possibly we can from going to Purgatory because says he the more we put in fear of going thither the Market of Indulgences as he calls it riseth the higher and the profit thence accruing to the Pope's Câ—ffers and the more and greater Legacies will be less â—o the Priests to hire their saying of Masses for the delivery of Souls out of the Place of Torments Answ After my hearty thanks to the Dr. for his Charitable Opinion of us I must observe from what is above said that it seems this Market of Indulgences is of a very long standing and that the Ancient Fathers of the Church took great care it shou'd not sink But to be serious 'T is well known and even acknowledged by the Learned of his Church that in the Time of Gregory the Great now a Thousand Years since the Doctrine of Purgatory and all the Practices consequent upon it were believ'd and us'd as they are now And did that great Saint exempt as few as he cou'd from Purgatory only to raise the Market of Indulgences Did all the Bishops of the Western Church nay and of all the World concur with him in this only to fill his Coffers Alas The good Holy Man had but few Coffers and as little Money to fill them with Conversion of Souls not Money was his bus'ness Did St. Austin design the raising of the Market of Indulgences or the putting of the People into a fear of going to Purgatory when he earnestly desires the Readers of his Confessions to pray for his Mother Monica's Soul for the remission of her Sins And had St. Jerom any thoughts of filling the Pope's Coffers when he wrote that much benefit wou'd accrue to the Souls departed by the commemoration made of
are so far from countenancing or abbetting them that it is our earnest wishes and the desire of our Hearts that all such shou'd be intirely abolish'd and taken away We cover no more than that all Christians in Time of Jubileâ—s and Plenary Indulgences shou'd think on their way in the bitterness of their Sâ—als shou'd repent and be sorry for their Sins shou'd have a strong hope and confidence in the Mercy of Almighty God giâ—â— Alâ—â—â— to the Poor and by their 〈◊〉 and servent Prayers dispose themselves 〈◊〉 God is Grace to receive the Indulâ—â—â—â— of Permission of those Canonical Penances which neither the Condition of the Persons nor the Wickedness of the Times nor yet the great Decay of Piety will permit us to require they shou'd fully perform And this we do because we find the same thing practic'd in the best and purest Times of Christianity even in the First Second Third and Fourth Ages especially being warranted by the Word of God who gave to his Church the Power of remitting and retaining Sins And now having found nothing in Dr. Tillotson's Sermons upon this Subject that requires any particular Consideration besides what is here explain'd I shall conclude this Treatise with my Hearty Prayers to the Father of Light that He wou'd be mercifully pleas'd to open the Eyes of our Adversaries that they may see the Innocence and Reasonableness of our Doctrine and give them the Grace to lay seriously to Heart how dangerous it is to reject those Things which the Catholic Church declares to have been deliver'd by Christ and His Apostles Our and Their Creed says I believe the Holy Catholic Church And they own that the Catholic Church before the Reformation did hold and Declare those Things wherein we differ from them to be Truths deliver'd by Christ and His Apostles How then can they believe the Catholic Church when She declares these Things if they do not hold and believe these Things themselves Or how can they in Reason reject them if they believe the Catholic Church which tells them they are Divine Truths But there is yet something more desperate which I beg of Almighty God to give them the Grace to consider Our Saviour saith to His Apostles Go and teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy-Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you Mat. c. 28.19 20. And St. Mark adds He that believeth and is Baptiz'd shall be Sav'd but he that believeth not shall be Damn'd Cap. 16.16 Now if those Things which make the Subject of our Dispute be Truths given in charge to the Apostles then our Adversaries are to my great grief I must say it lost for ever For it is not enough according to Christ's own Words to Believe in the Trinity to Believe the Incarnation to believe in the Holy-Ghost to believe Baptism the Eucharist c. But we must believe all Things whatsoever Christ commanded and that on pain of Damnation But if it shou'd happen as no doubt it cannot that the Points in Dispute were not commanded by Christ or His Apostles where is the harm in believing them since we are commanded to do so by the Church which our Creed tells us we must believe Christ our Saviour doth often reproach the Jews for their Incredulity and the Scripture in several places gives us an Account of the Punishment of such as wou'd not believe the Messengers sent by God to declare His Will to them But we do not find that ever He reproach'd any Body for having too much Faith especially when the Things to be believ'd were declar'd to them by the Messengers of God which sure the Bishops and Priests of the Church are On the contrary we read in the Scripture that Christ has upon several Occasions highly commended and extoll'd Men's readiness to believe O Woman Great is thy Faith Mat. 14.28 Where lyes then the Harm of believing Transubstantiation or the Real Presence which are so plainly deliver'd in Scripture Where is the Harm of allowing due Honor and Respect to be given to Saints and of desiring them to pray for us since it is what we do and are commanded to do to one another in this Life If they hear our Prayers and Intercede for us well and good But if they do not what do we loose by it Where is the Harm in praying for our deceas'd Friends Sure we do but declare our pious Affections to them tho' our Prayers had done them no good And where is the Harm in all this How can it hurt any Body to believe that the Church hath Power to give Indulgences that is to Remit all or part of the Temporal Punishment due for Sins since it is plainly exprest in Scripture that Christ gave to His Apostles and the Apostles to their Successors the Power of Remitting and Retaining Sins and that whatsoever they Loose on Earth shall be Loosed in Heaven How can this hurt any Body I say or where lies the Hazard in believing those Things tho' we had not as much assurance of their being Divine Truths as of other Things since they are not contrary to any other Article of our Faith nor to Right Reason or Good Manners But there is Infinit Hazard in not believing them since they have been declar'd by the Church which our Creed and the Scripture command as to believe and hear on pain of being reputed Heathens and Publicans Now that they are Divine Truths besides what is already offer'd to prove each Point in particular We have all the Eastern Churches on our side All the Greek Church together with the Nestorians Euâ—ychians Monothelites the Christians of St. Thomas in a Word all the Oriental Sects of what Denomination soever do Practice and Believe Transubstantiation the Real Presence the Sacrifice of the Mass Seven Sacraments the Use of the Liturgy in a Tongue which the Common People do not understand Invocation of Saints Veneration of Relicks and Images and Prayers for the Dead See the Critical History of the Learn-Father Simon Of the Religion and Customs of the Eastern Churches 'T is done into English printed in London and very much esteem'd by the Learn'd Seeing then that the Latin Church which together with the Greek and other Eastern Churches make up the whole Body of the Christian World and that all these Churches did hold and profess the said Doctrine when the Reformation began and do still hold and believe the same I think I may confidently affirm that it is Catholic and Orthodox I shall therefore once more beg of Almighty God thro' the Merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and by that Blood which was shed for our Redemption that he wou'd please in His Mercy to Soften the Hearts of our Adversaries and give them Grace to entertain Thoughts of Peace of His Holy Church from which they have so long gone astray To the end that They and We may with one Heart and one Tongue praise and magnifie His Holy Name all the Days of our Lives and when it shall please His Infinite Goodness to call us to Himself that we may meet together at the Resurrection of the Just thro' the Merits of the Death and Passion of our only Saviour and Redeemer Jesus Christ to whom with the Father and Holy Ghost be Honor and Glory now and for ever Amen FINIS
and our Great Master because these only are the Excellencies and Abilities we conceive the Angels and Saints to be endued with and for which we respect them This suppos'd I answer 1. That St. Paul speaks here of Certain Heretics who separated from the Faithful and gave to Angels the supream Worship and Honour which is due only to God as these words of his not holding the Head do plainly denote For by these Words He give us to understand that these Heretics departed from Christ which is the Head and by these other words Worshipping of Angels that they offer'd Sacrifice to Angels whom they believ'd to have been the Mediators of the New Covenant or as Theodoret phrases it that the Law was given by Angels But this I hope the Protestants will not say we believe or hold 2. That the Dr's Interpretation of St. Paul's words is altogether forc'd and by no means warranted by Theodoret or any ancient Father of the Church on the contrary Theodoret is intirely ours For He says in that very Place cited by the Doctor that therefore these Heretics worship'd Angels because they believ'd Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 44. the Law was given by Them He says indeed in an other place which the Doctor quotes that we must send up Thanksgivings to God and the Father by Christ and not by the Angels And this I hope we are careful to do for I am sure we put up all our Prayers to God and the Father by or thro' the Merits of Jesus Christ and not of any Angel or Saint But sure it is not reasonable to believe that Theodoret there meant that we ought not to desire the Angels or Saints to pray for us since he himself as I observ'd before so expresly says We not address our selves to the Saints as Gods but we pray unto them as Divine Men that they wou'd please to be Legats or Intercessors for us Comment in Epist â—d Colos c. 3. v. 17. 3. That the Canon of the Council of Laâ—dicea as Theodoret tells us speaks only of these Heretics meant by St. Paul who forsook the Church and gave themselves to secret Idolatry that is as the Fathers have always understood that word offer'd Sacrifice to Angels But the words of the Canon are so plain and full to this purpose that there needs no reading upon it 4. That the Doctor might very well have forborn his Exclamation for I assure him that excepting the General Confession aâ— aforesaid we do not invocate or pray to Angels in the Public Offices of the Church We have but one Feast in the Year wherein we Commemorate Angels which is that of St. Michael the Arch-Angel and in this excepting one Anthem in the Breviary and one Versile in the Mass which are not properly Prayers where 't is said in the first Arch-Angel Michael be mindful of us and pray for us to the Son of God and in the second Holy Michael defend us in Battle that we perish not in the dreadful Judgement there is no invocating or putting up of Prayers to St. Michael or any other Angel But it seems the Doctor was warm upon the Matter and in such a Case Rhetorical Exclamations are more pardonable pray God they may be pardon'd him in Heaven His second Objection is to this purpose Mediation and Intercession is founded in the Merit and Virtue of the Sacrifice Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 56 57. by which Expiation for Sin is made but this Jesus Christ and no other has done Therefore He only is Mediator and Intercessor Answ This Argument proves too much For it proves that neither our Brethren on Earth nor the Saints in Heaven ought or can lawfully pray or intercede for us because they did not offer the Sacrifice by which Expiation for sin is made Yet the Doctor grants that both our Brethren on Earth and the Saints in Heaven may and do pray for us Well but granting that Mediation and Intercession is founded in the Virtue and Merit of the Sacrifice by which Expiation for Sin is made Does it therefore follow that the Saints may not charitably beg of God to forgive us our Sins 'T is true Christ only has a Right and Title to mediate and intercede for us because he alone paid the Ransom and full Value of our Sins and therefore may in Justice ask of His Father to forgive us But sure this does not hinder but that the Saints may do Us that Charitable Office as to pray to God to have Mercy upon Us tho' they cannot in Justice demand it May not a Friend and Favourite of the King beg the Life of a â—enitent Criminal And have not Kings and Princes often granted such Favours to their Friends tho' they were not in Justice bound to do so And are not the Saints in Heaven Christ's Favourites Does not He call them his Friends Vos Amici mei estis Job 15.14 Mat. 19.28 And what is more Does not He tell His Apostles that they shall sit upon Thrones Judging the twelve Tribes of Israel And why may not then these Judges and Friends and Favourites of Jesus Christ beg of Him to have Mercy upon poor miserable Sinners tho' they cannot in Justice require it at his Hands But the Doctor 's Mistake consists in this that he does not or rather will not distinguish between an Intercession founded in Justice and Equity and an Intercession founded only in Favour and good Will The first I grant is peculiar only to Christ for the Reasons offer'd by the Doctor but the second which is the Effect of Charity is common to every one who is possest of that Divine Virtue Well but says the Doctor the Mediation or Intercession of Saints is not properly speaking Intercession So say I for I own that in the Sense in which Christ is both our Mediator and Intercessor the Saints and Angels in the same sense cannot be call'd Intercessors but whether he calls them Intercessors in a proper or an improper Sense 't is all one to me Since he acknowledges they do pray for us and intercede with God in our behalf I am satisfied for I am sure we desire no more of them After this the Dr. gives us a great many Passages out of the Fathers ibid pag 76 77 78. 79. 80 81 82 83. to prove the Invocation of Saints unlawful namely out of St. Ireneus Origen Novatian for he must be a Father too Clemens Romanus St. Athanasius St. Epiphanius St. Chrysâ—stom and which I must admire at out of St. Austin who if Invocation of Saints be Popery was I am sure a Rank Papist But the Doctor might have spar'd Himself the Labour of quoting these Passages for there is not one of them all to which any Roman Catholic wou'd refuse to Subscribe and therefore I have no Temptation to vex or trouble them His third Objection is level'd at the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which