would not do his business and was not to the purpose and thereupon challenged him to produce Fathers for that Point promising him at the same time a fair Answer But our Compiler durst not offer to accept of the Challenge dares not meddle with such a thing but if two or three bits of the Old Testimonies out of the Nubes may be admitted they are at my Service and from these it is that he would fain prove that even in matters of Belief the Tradition of the Catholick Church is the best Demonstration What better than the Express Testimony of Scripture it self Methinks our ignorant Compiler might have been contented to have made Tradition only as good or equal to Scripture for the Demonstration of Faith which is the highest the Council of Trent it self durst rise in favour of Tradition and never pretended to mount Tradition so much above Scripture as to make it the BEST DEMONSTRATION of Matters of FAITH But when Ignorance and too great a stock of Confidence meet together such Assertions as these are commonly the fruits of them But for this extravagant Assertion he hath a mind to bring in Origen for a Voucher who speaking concerning the Belief of Christ's being the Son of God says that is to be embrac'd which by a Succession from the Apostles is preserved in the Church by Ecclesiastical Tradition but in Answer to this Is not that Truth and Faith concerning Christ's being the Son of God expresly taught and held forth in the Holy Scriptures and which is more doth not Origen himself expresly tell us in this very place for our Compiler is for looking no further than his own Book that that Truth was to be learnt by us ab IPSO from Christ himself whose Words Doctrine and Actions are used to be thought to have been the Subject of the New Testament which I take to be Scripture and as this Doctrine was to be read in the Scriptures so it was delivered down from thence in Ecclesiastical Tradition which can mean nothing else than either that the Scriptures which did comprehend that Faith were delivered down successively from Age to Age in the Church or that this was always taught in the Sermons and Homilies of the Fathers of the Church successively And to give our Compiler a better knowledge of Origen's sence about these things I will refer him to one Passage which I will set down and desire him to consider of it Origen in Leviticum c. 7. Homilia 5. p. 144. Edit Froben 1536. Origen in his Homilies upon Leviticus speaking of the Old and New Testament tells us that in THEM every word that appertaineteh to God by which Expression the least he can mean is that every Point of Faith may be sought after and found out and all Knowledge of things may be apprehended from THEM But if any thing doth remain which the Holy Scripture doth not determine no other third Scripture ought to be received for the Authorizing any Knowledge but we are to commit to the Fire that which remaineth that is we must leave it to God for in this present World God is not for having us to know all things Our Compiler is next for having Tertullian on his side but why does he not then bring us something to prove it or rather why did he not disprove what I had produced for the Authority and Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures from Tertullian He neither does the one nor offers at the other and yet this must pass it seems for vindicating And just thus he serves me after for when I in Vindication of S. Basil had quoted him declaring for the necessity of Scripture-Evidence for Matters of Faith he says not one Syllable in Answer to it but is for referring me to the old Quotations out of Basil Epiphanius and Lirinensis which I had shewn him before were not to the purpose which is such perfect trifling as none but such a Compiler as he is would be guilty of He then falls to thanking me for saying in relation to the Testimony from Gregory Nyssen that we allow the Tradition of Antiquity to be highly useful and necessary in the Interpreting or giving us the genuine Sense of Points of Faith all the Answer I will give him is much good may it do him however how far that Expression was from doing us any hurt or them any good I have abundantly shewn in my Vindication which I am loth to transcribe hither but that I may not be behind-hand in Civility for the Compiler's Thanks I will present him in Token of my Gratitude with a Passage or two from his Gregory Nyssen and other Fathers which I must recommend to his Consideration Gregory Nyssen in his Dialogue de Animâ Resurrectione lays it down for a Position which no Man ought to contradict that in that only the Truth (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Nyssen Dial. de Animâ Resurrect Tom. 2. P. 639. Edit Paris 1615. must be acknowledged which hath upon it the Seal of Scripture-Testimony And in another part of his Works he calls the Holy Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem in Orat de iis qui adeunt Hierosol Tom. 2. p. 1084. a true or streight and inflexible Rule S. Austin is as clear and full against our Compiler while he assures us that in those things which are laid down plainly in the Scripture all those things are found which concern Faith or Manners (c) In iis quae aperte in Scripturâ posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi August de Doctr. Christianâ l. 2. c. 9. Tom. 3. p. 17 18. S. Hierom speaking of the Hereticks in his time which made so much noise and pretended so highly to Apostolical Tradition gives this severe Doom upon them but those things also which they of themselves invent and yet feign to have received as it were by Tradition from the Apostles without the Authority and Testimonies of the Scriptures the sword of God doth smite (d) D. Hieron in Aggeum c. 1. Tom. 6. p. 230. Edit Basil 1565. I could give him several such Testimonies from other Fathers but I will neither trouble him or the Reader with any more at present it will be time enough to send him the rest when he hath answered these And will now pass to his next Chapter and the Vindication of it But here it seems there was no need of any Vindication for I am brought in as one of their own side for saying and granting that our Church doth honour the Saints in observing days in honour or memory of them and I have the Compiler's thanks for it here we have had this Concession up once already it made one of the most terrible Articles of Popery against me in our Compiler's masquerading Letter from a Dissenter to the Divines of the Church of England In my Answer to that scurrilous Letter I did sufficiently acquit my self and our
his little touches at me I had like to have slipt I know not how over his saying I impose sillily upon the Reader when in answer to the Objection made about no one 's denying the Bishop of Rome 's power of Excommunicating the Asiaticks I had said Every Bishop might deny to communicate with any other Bishop or Church against whom they had sufficient reason As if says he denying to communicate were the same thing as to Excommunicate to the doing of which an Authority or Jurisdiction over them who are Excommunicated is required whilst refusing Communion may be done without any such power Well then this Man shall have his Will and I therefore tell him that by denying Communion I meant a doing it authoritatively that is a putting the other Bishop from them by Ecclesiastical Censure but I must also tell him that an Authority or Jurisdiction over the persons to be Excommunicated is not required but that an Equality of State with the other persons is sufficient and this of his is dangerous Doctrine since every Greek can prove their Bishops of Constantinople to have Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Rome by this Argument since Photius's time who did Excommunicate the then Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of that Church do continue to excommunicate yearly to this day the Bishop and Church of Rome and not only the Greeks but the French Bishops also may by this Argument also be proved to be above the Pope since they so long ago as Monsieur Talon told the Parliament of Paris the other day threaten'd the Pope that if he came to Excommunicate them He should be Excommunicated himself for medling in things he had nothing to do with So that I suppose I shall hear no more of my imposing sillily about this thing nor the Compiler have any thanks for his untoward Observation Such little things will not serve to build that Supremacy upon which is pretended to by the Bishops of Rome And as the Primitive Fathers neither knew of nor believed nor therefore could submit to any Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome for the first six Centuries so they were as far from the Romish Doctrines about Tradition grounding all Matters of Faith as we do upon the Holy Scriptures and were as far from Invocating Saints as we of the Church of England and from the Belief of Purgatory or Transubstantiation and did detest the Worship of Images and Reliques as much as we can so that since in all these Points their Doctrines were contrary to the Doctrines of the Church of Rome and their Practices contrary to the present Practices of that Church we are bound to vindicate them to the world and to inform our Readers that they were no more Papists as to those Points mentioned by the Compiler in his Nubes Testium than we of the Reformation are and therefore I have Reason to conclude my Defence as I did my last Book against the Nubes with asserting it upon further Reasons That the Primitive Fathers were no Papists THE END Books lately Printed for Richard Chiswell A Papist not Misrepresented by Protestants Being a Reply to the Reflections upon the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented 4 to An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the several Articles proposed by the late BISHOP of CONDOM in his Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church 4to A Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the Exceptions of Mons de Meaux late Bishop of Condom and his Vindicator 4to A CATECHISM explaining the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome With an Answer thereunto By a Protestant of the Church of England 8vo A Papist Represented and not Misrepresented being an Answer to the First Second Fifth and Sixth Sheets of the Second Part of the Papist Misrepresented and Represented and a further Vindication of the CATECHISM truly representing the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome 4to The Lay-Christian's Obligation to read the Holy Scriptures 4to The Plain Man's Reply to the Catholick Missionaries 24. An Answer to THREE PAPERS lately printed concerning the Authority of the Catholick Church in matters of Faith and the Reformation of the Church of England 4to A Vindication of the Answer to THREE PAPERS concerning the Unity and Authority of the Catholick Church and the Reformation of the Church of England 4to Mr. Chillingworth's Book called The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation made more generally useful by omitting personal Contests but inserting whatsoever concerns the common Cause of Protestants or defends the Church of England with an exact Table of Contents and an Addition of some genuine Pieces of Mr. Chillingworth's never before Printed viz. against the Infallibility of the Roman Church Transubstantiation Tradition c. And an Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist with his Confutation of the said Motives An Historical Treatise written by an Author of the Communion of the Church of Rome touching Transubstantiation Wherein is made appear That according to the Principles of that Church this Doctrine cannot be an Article of Faith. 4to The Protestants Companion or an Impartial Survey and Comparison of the Protestant Religion as by Law established with the main Doctrines of Popery Wherein is shewn that Popery is contrary to Scripture Primitive Fathers and Councils and that proved from Holy Writ the Writings of the ancient Fathers for several hundred years and the Confession of the most learned Papists themselves 4to The Pillar and Ground of Truth A Treatise shewing that the Roman Church falsly claims to be that Church and the Pillar of that Truth mentioned by S. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothy chap. 3. ver 15. 4to A Sermon preached on St. Peter's Day published with Enlargements A short Summary of the principal Controversies between the Church of England and the Church of Rome being a Vindication of several Protestant Doctrines in answer to a late Pamphlet intituled Protestancy destitute of Scripture-Proofs 4to An Answer to a late Pamphlet intituled The Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England concerning one special Branch of the King's Prerogative viz. In dispensing with the Penal Laws A Discourse of the Holy Eucharist in the two great Points of the Real Presence and the Adoration of the Host in Answer to the Two Discourses lately printed at Oxford on this Subject To which is prefixed a large Historical Preface relating to the same Argument Two Discourses Of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead The People's Right to read the Holy Scriptures asserted The Fifteen Notes of the Church as laid down by Cardinal Bellarmine examined and confuted 4 to With a Table to the whole Preparation for Death being a Letter sent to a young Gentlewoman in France in a dangerous Distemper of which she died By William Wake M. A. 12mo The Difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in opposition to a late Book Intituled An Agreement between the Church of England and the Church of Rome 4to A Private Prayer to be used in difficult Times A True Account of a Conference held about Religion at London Sept. 29. 1687. between A. Pulton Jesuit and Tho. Tenison D. D. as also of that which led to it and followed after it 4to The Vindication of A. Cressener Schoolmaster in Long-Acre from the Aspersions of A. Pulton Jesuit Schoolmaster in the Savoy together with some Account of his Discourse with Mr. Meredith A Discourse shewing that Protestants are on the safer side notwithstanding the uncharitable Judgment of their Adversaries and that Their Religion is the surest way to Heaven 4to Six Conferences concerning the Eucharist wherein is shewed That the Doctrine of Transubstantiation overthrows the Proofs of Christian Religion A Discourse concerning the pretended Sacrament of Extreme Vnction with an Account of the Occasions and Beginnings of it in the Western Church In Three Parts With a Letter to the Vindicator of the Bishop of Condom The Pamphlet intituled Speculum Ecclesiasticum or an Ecclesiastical Prospective-Glass considered in its false Reasonings and Quotations There are added by way of Preface two further Answers the first to the Defender of the Speculum the second to the Half-sheet against the Six Conferences A Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the new Exceptions of Monsieur de Meaux late Bishop of Condom and his Vindicator The FIRST PART in which the Account that has been given of the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition is fully vindicated the Distinction of Old and New Popery Historically asserted and the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in point of Image-Worship more particularly considered 4to The incurable Scepticism of the Church of Rome By the Author of the Six Conferences concerning the Eucharist 4to Mr. Pulton considered in his Sincerity Reasonings Authorities Or a Just Answer to what he hath hitherto published in his True Account his True and Full Account of a Conference c. His Remarks and in them his pretended Confutation of what he calls Dr. T 's Rule of Faith. By Th. Tenison D. D. A Full View of the Doctrines and Practices of the Ancient Church relating to the Eucharist wholly different from those of the Present Roman Church and inconsistent with the Belief of Transubstantiation being a sufficient Confutation of Consensus Veterum Nubes Testium and other late Collections of the Fathers pretending to the contrary 4to An Answer to the Representer's Reflections upon the State and View of the Controversy With a Reply to the Vindicators Full Answer shewing that the Vindicator has utterly ruin'd the New Design of Expounding and Representing Popery An Answer to the Address presented to the Ministers of the Church of England
did see it necessary to speak out more plainly the Sense of their Church about the Nature of Purgatory and therefore upon the Fifth Article in the Apostles Creed about the Descent into Hell when they come to give the various Senses in which the word Hell is used they tell us it is first taken for the Receptacle of the Damned wherein the Souls of them are tormented with an Eternal and Vnquenchable Fire They next will have it to signifie Purgatory and these are their own Words Furthermore there is a PURGATORY FIRE in which the Souls of the Pious are * Praeterea est PURGATORIUS IGNIS in quo Piorum Animae ad definitum tempus cruciatae expiantur ut iis in aeternam Patriam ingressus patere possit in quam nihil coinquinatum ingreditur Catechism ad Parochos Pars 1. p. 50. Edit Lugd. 1676. TORMENTED FOR A SET TIME in order to their being expiated that so an Entrance into their Eternal Country may lye open unto them into which nothing polluted does enter And to let the World see they did not give their own Sense herein but that of their Church they quote in the Margin the Council of Trent it self for it in the 25th Session about Purgatory and tell us immediately after that Holy Councils by which they must mean that of Florence as well as that of Trent have declared for the Truth of this Doctrine that it is confirmed by the Testimonies of Scripture and Apostolical Tradition and therefore the Parish Priest is to treat more diligently and more frequently of Purgatory because we say the Authors of the Catechism are fallen into those times wherein Men do not endure SOUND DOCTRINE If the Times were thought so bad when that Catechism was drawn up what must be thought of ours when not only the Protestants will not endure this SOUND DOCTRINE but the Present Writers of the Church of Rome the Bishop of Meaux his Vindicator and the Compiler will no more endure this SOUND DOCTRINE of a PURGATORY FIRE than the Hereticks but cry out so often that the Church doth not believe that the Church doth not teach a Purgatory FIRE Whereas it is as evident as that there is Day and Night that this Catechism drawn up by the Order of the Council of Trent and confirmed by Pope Pius the Fifth doth not only here deliver it as Sound Doctrine that there is a PURGATORY FIRE WHEREIN THE SOULS of the FAITHFUL are TORMENTED FOR A SET TIME but in the next Page speaking of the Souls of the Faithful which departed this Life before Christ's Resurrection says that they went not to Heaven which was not opened to any before Christ's Death and Resurrection but that they were carried either into Abraham 's Bosom or as it NOW happens to those who have something to discharge when they dye were expiated or purged by the FIRE OF PURGATORY But I have a better evidence than all these to prove that by Purgatory the Church of Rome doth certainly mean a Place of Torment wherein those Souls that are detain'd in it undergo Fiery-Torments which differ no otherwise from Hell-Torments but only in the Duration of them that Purgatory Torments are but for a time but the other are everlasting and it is no other than the Office for the Dead in the Romish Missal In the Mass for the Dead the Offertory runs thus O Lord Iesu Christ King of Glory DELIVER the SOULS of all the FAITHFUL DECEASED from the PAINS OF HELL and from the BOTTOMLESS PIT Deliver them l Domine Jesu Christe Rex Gloriae libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de Poenis Inferni de profundo lacu libera eas de Ore Leonis ne absorbeat eas Tartarus ne cadant in Obscurum sed signifer Sanctus Michael repraesentet eas in Lucem Sanctam quam olim Abrahae promisisti semini ejus Missa pro Defunctis in Missali Romano fol. 51. Edit Paris in 8o. 1582. from the MOUTH of the LION that HELL may not SWALLOW THEM UP FOR EVER and that they may not fall into outer Darkness but let thy Holy Angel Michael convey them unto that Heavenly Light which thou hast promised of old to Abraham and to his Séed This is the service of the Church of Rome at this very day for the Dead the only enquiry now to be made is who these are for whom the Church of Rome is so solicitous to have them delivered out of the Pains of Hell and out of the Mouth of the Lion c. And who can I better inquire of than our Compiler himself He shall be the Man that the World may see how very fairly I deal with my Adversaries This Prayer then must be put up for one of these three sorts of men either for the Souls who are in Heaven or for the Souls who are in Hell or for some Souls who are neither in Heaven nor Hell but in a middle State or Place which their Church doth call Purgatory Is this Prayer therefore used for the Souls in Heaven No says our Compiler for it is needless to pray for those that are in Heaven there being no want there at all no want of Relief of Refreshment and consequently no Hell-Torments undergone by any Souls there of Pardon there being no Guilt there of Sins Is it for the Souls in Hell No replies the Compiler again it is as fruitless to pray for those in Hell that State being wholly irreversible So that by his help we have light upon the Souls that are prayed for there and those are the Souls in Purgatory which according to this Prayer undergo their Hell-Torments and are in a Condition nothing different from the damned but meerly in the Duration of their Pains these Souls torments being but temporary but those of the damned eternal And for the Condition of the Place in which these miserable Souls are we find it here represented in this Prayer as the same with Hell and we meet in this short Prayer with all the Terms by which Hell is described to us in the word of God so that there is no danger of our mistaking the sense of the Church of Rome about Purgatory since we find it so plainly set forth in her Office for the Souls in it as a Place of Fiery Torments However to put this thing without the possibility of a Reply that the Compiler may see that it is not I alone who gather thus much out of that Prayer I will give the Reader an account of Cardinal Capisucchi's Opinion in his 5th Controversy about the Words of this very Prayer which I have made use of and put down above The Cardinal first puts down the Opinion of them who look upon that Prayer as offer'd up for those that are in Hell who may come to be deliver'd thence as Trajan the Heathen Emperour is said to have been but This he refuses as most false and erroneous upon the reasons commonly given in
of that Church cannot evade and this doth so firmly strengthen and back the other Argument against Invocation of Saints drawn from the Practice of the Primitive Church And this one would think would stop their mouths and make them lay aside their Pretensions to Instances of Invocation of Saints practised in the fourth and fifth Centuries to shew them not only that Invocation of Saints was not practised then but that the Doctrine of the first Ages and Fathers were directly against and utterly inconsistent with any such Invocation of Saints as is practised in the Church of Rome And this is that which I will endeavour to shew from the Writings of the several Fathers putting them down methodically in their several Ages to wit That the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers was directly against and inconsistent with any Invocation of Saints Century I S. Ignatius who lived immediately after the Apostles in his Epistle to the Philadelphians gives the Virgins of that Church his advice to direct all their Prayers to the blessed Trinity O ye Virgins says he have Christ h Ignat. in Ep. ad Philadelph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alone before your Eyes and his Father in your Prayers being illuminated by the Holy Spirit If they are to direct all their Prayers to the Father and Son I am sure it is against this Doctrine of S. Ignatius to practise Invocation of Saints and direct some of their Prayers to the Virgin Mary and other Saints which the Church of Rome now does expresly against this First Father's Advice Century II The Church of Smyrna in their Golden Epistle concerning the Martyrdom of S. Polycarp giving an Account of the Devil and the Jews slandering them as if they would have left Christ and worshipped Polycarp if they could but gain his Martyred Body expose that gross Calumny by shewing i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Smyrn in Ep. de Martyr Polyc. p. 27. Edit Usser that Christians could never leave Christ who had suffered all for them nor pay any Worship to any other Person or as the Old Latin Translation hath it nor offer up the Supplication of Prayer to any other Person If they could not do it then I suppose it is not grown more lawful to do it since S. Irenaeus in the same Century discoursing about the many Graces bestowed by God upon his Church and the great benefits done by the Church to the whole World without either design of seducing or desire of gain thereupon says that as the Church doth receive those Graces freely from God's hands so she freely ministers them k Nec Invocationibus Angelicis faciat aliquid nec incantationibus nec aliqua prava curiositate sed mundè purè manifestè Orationes dirigens ad Dominum qui omnia fecit Nomen Domini nostri Jesu Christi invocans virtutes secundum utilitates hominum sed non ad seductionem perficit S. Iren. adv Haer. l. 2. c. 57. Edit Feuardent and then tells us also that the Church doth nothing by Invocation of Angels or Charms or any such curious Art but directing her Prayers purely and manifestly to her Lord who made all things and Invocating the Name of our Lord Iesus Christ doth those Miracles for the good of Mankind not for their seduction As Irenaeus is plain for the Prayers being directed only to God and his Christ and does in express Terms deny that there was any Invocation of Angels practised in the Church then so Clemens of Alexandria in the same Century and not long after him is so express against any Prayers being then put up to either Saints or Angels that he defines Prayer it self to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a conversing with God which had been a very false definition had Prayers then been put up to Saints and Angels also But Clemens had reason sufficient to define Prayer in this manner to the Exclusion both of Saints and Angels since in the same Book he delivers it for the Doctrine of his time that l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clemens Alexandr Strom. l. 7. since there is but ONE GOOD GOD both we and Angels ought to make our Prayers to HIM ALONE for the obtaining of those good things which we want and for the continuance of those which we enjoy There are a great many more such Expressions to be met with in this Learned Father but this doubtless is able to convince any reasonable Person that in Clemens's time the Doctrine of the Church was that all Prayer or Invocation should be offered up to the GREAT GOD ALONE Century III That there was no alteration made in the next Century in the Doctrine of the Fathers herein we can easily shew from the most considerable Writers of that Age. Tertullian in his Apology for the Christians to the Roman Judges gives an account of the Practice of the Christians that they did invocate the Eternal God for the safety of the Emperours and acquaints them withal that They durst not offer up their Prayers to any other m Nos enim pro salute Imperatorum Deum INVOCAMUS Aeternum Haec ab alio orare non possum quà m à quo me scio consecuturum quoniam ipse est qui SOLUS praestat ego sum cui impetrare debetur famulus ejus qui eum solum observo qui propter disciplinam ejus occidor qui ei offero opimam majorem hostiam quam ipse mandavit Orationem de carne pudica de anima innocenti de spiritu sancto profectam Tertul. Apologet. c. 30. I cannot says he pray for these things to any other but to HIM at whose hands I am certain of obtaining them since it is HE ALONE that does afford them and I alone have a Right of obtaining them that am his Servant and observe HIM ALONE who am killed for his Religion and do offer unto Him that rich and best Sacrifice which He himself hath commanded Prayer proceeding from a chast Body from an innocent Soul and Holy Spirit In his Prescriptions the same Father tells us Idem de Praescript c. 33. that the serving or Worshipping of Angels brought in first by Simon Magus was reckoned to be Idolatry In considering these passages of Tertullian I cannot believe that He and the Church of Rome are of the same Faith as to this very thing about Prayer I am sure this Doctrine of his is no less than Heresy in some parts of the World and that Tertullian and the Honest Monk who translated S. Thomas of Canterbury or to speak more intelligibly Thomas à Becket's Life into English Metre were not of the same Church Tertullian told the Romans that the Christians of his time offered up their Prayers to GOD ALONE for the Welfare of the Emperours and Empire and that it was contrary to God's Will for them to offer up any Prayers to any other but this Romish Monk was of another Church sure when he gives us a very different
this Case He next puts down their Opinion that will have it to relate to those who are just a dying and drawing on but this Opinion he says is generally rejected not only because those that are only drawing on cannot be with any propriety of Speech called the Souls of the Dead but because the Custom of the Church is to use this Prayer for those Souls which have many years ago left the Body After which He concludes that this Prayer is used for those that are in Purgatory and gives us this Exposition of the Words of the Prayer Deliver O Lord the Souls of all the Faithful Deceased from the Pains of Hell that is from PURGATORY-FIRE WHICH IS HELD TO BE ALTOGETHER THE SAME WITH HELL-FIRE and from the Bottomless-Pit and from the Mouth of the Lion that is from the Prison hid under m Juxta haec singula illius Orationis verba exponi possunt nam dicitur Domine libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis Inferni id est à PURGATORIO IGNE qui IDEM prorsus esse perhibetur atque IGNIS INFERNI de profundo lacu de Ore Leonis à Carcere nimirum sub Terram abdito ubi detentae expurgantur animae piorum Ne absorbeat eas Tartarus hoc est ne amplius diutius eas profundi illius Carceris Cavernae vincula remorentur nec Inferni poenae tanquam fauces quaedam belluae immanis saevae truculentae detineant Unde IGNEM PURGATORIUM cum sit IDEM qui IGNIS INFERNI appellat Ecclesia Tartarum Ne cadant in Obscurum id est ne obscurum quas cadentes excepit longius detineat Fr. Raimund Capisucchi Controversiae Theolog selectae Controversia 5 ta p. 237. Edit Romae 1677. the Earth wherein the Souls of the Faithful are detain'd to be purged that HELL may not swallow them up for Ever that is that the Receptacles and Bands of that deep Prison may not stay them further or any longer nor the PAINS OF HELL as the Jaws of some fierce cruel and savage Beast detain them Whereupon the Church doth call PURGATORY-FIRE Hell because Purgatory-Fire and Hell-Fire is the same that they may not fall into outer darkness that is that this Obscure Place may no longer detain the Souls which it receives falling into it Here is the Interpretation of a Great Cardinal of the Church of Rome now alive and which is more the Chief Licenser of all Divinity Books at Rome as Master of the sacred Palace one of the qualifications for which place certainly is to understand the Faith and Doctrines of the Church of Rome Here we meet with him explaining that Prayer in the Mass for the Dead as relating to Purgatory and calling it over and over again a place of Torment Purgatory-Fire and declaring it to be the same with Hell-Fire I took the pains to peruse and transcribe that large passage about the Exposition of this Prayer hither because I could not call it to mind without a secret Indignation that this Cardinal Capisucchi but two years before the Printing of this Book which was not then first written but Reprinted was one of those who Licensed and so much commended the Bishop of Condom's Exposition in which we find an account of Purgatory perfectly inconsistent with what the Cardinal had written in his Controversies In the Bishop of Condom's Exposition we find these expressions about Purgatory This is what the Council of Trent proposes to our Belief touching the Souls detained in Purgatory without determining n Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church By the Bishop of Condom p. 15. in WHAT Their PAINS consists or many other such like things concerning which this holy Council demands great moderation blaming those who divulge what is uncertain or suspected Such is the innocent and holy DOCTRINE of the CATHOLICK CHURCH touching Satisfactions But for all Cardinal Capisucchi's Licensing and approving this passage in that Exposition He himself had written the direct contrary when he makes the Pains of Purgatory to be by Fire and makes Hell-Fire and Purgatory-Fire to be the SAME and not only knew this to be but published that it was the Faith of their Church that does in that Prayer for the Dead call Purgatory Hell because Purgatory-Fire and Hell Fire were the very same All the defence that can be made for Cardinal Capisucchi must be that the Bishop of Condom's words were restrained to the Council of Trent which Council it is certain did not determine any thing about what the Purgatory pains consisted in but this can by no means excuse him since it is false that the Bishop of Condom's words are confin'd to that Council for he just after the mention of the Council says that what he had set down there about Satisfactions in this World or in Purgatory was the innocent and holy Doctrine of the CATHOLICK CHURCH which thing Cardinal Capisucchi did not only know in his Conscience to be false but had written the contrary to it which I suppose he is willing should be thought the truer of the two But granting that the Bishop of Condom's words had been restrain'd wholly to the Council of Trent Cardinal Capisucchi ought not to have Licensed or approved that Bishop's Exposition if he would have approved himself a sincere Man since he could not but know that this passage of the Bishop of Condom about Purgatory was a perfect Juggle and altogether unbecoming a Christian much more a Bishop for tho' the Council had been so reserved about the nature of the Pains in Purgatory yet he knew too well that their Church their Catholick Church had plainly and fully determined about the nature of those Purgatory Pains in her Office for the Dead by which she had spoken her sense intelligibly enough to the very meanest Capacities that those pains are by FIRE by FIRE which is the SAME with HELL-FIRE I will urge this thing no further but only pray to God that those great men may repent of such unwarrantable actions and of such arts which are altogether a dishonour to our Holy Religion I think I have very fully shewn what I did undertake for upon this business to wit that the Romish Purgatory is a place of Torment wherein the Souls of those who are in it undergo the same pains that the damned do and that there is no other difference betwixt Hell-Fire and Purgatory-Fire but that the One is Eternal and the other but Temporal Having shewn all this so effectually from their approved Writers from the Council of Florence from the Catechism ad Parochos and from the Office for the Dead in their Romish Missal it would be the veriest loss of Paper and the greatest affront to Readers of any sense to set formally here to the shewing how inconsistent this Romish Purgatory is with the Opinions of the Primitive Fathers about the State of the Deceased Faithful whom they believed to be when they