Discipline and Faith shall appear to be there also will be the Truth of Scriptures and Expositions and all Christian Traditions Si quid horum per orbem frequentat Ecclesia Amongst such things whatsoever is practised by the Church through the world to dispute whether she ought not to be imitated therein is a mark of most insolent madness Scire sufficit It is a sufficient Motive to reject from our Belief whatsoever we know to be contrary to the teaching of the Church Dicet aliquis si Divinis eloquiis It may be demanded how if both the Devil and his Disciples do make use of and apply Divine Scriptures Sentences and Promises of whom some are false Apostles others false Prophets and all of them Heretics What shall Catholic children of our Mother the Church do How shall they discern truth from falshood in interpreting Holy Scriptures Hereto we answer according as we have received from Holy and learned men before us that they must be very careful to interpret Scriptures according to the Traditions of the Universal Church and according to the Rules of Catholic Doctrine THE SECOND QUESTION BUT WHY ARE YOU A PROTESTANT §. 45 CAth. Sir Have you considered seriously on the Subject of our last Discourse Prot. Yes Cath. And have you found either in Scripture Tradition Councils or Holy Fathers any warrant to remain divided both in Doctrine and Discipline from all Churches antiently existent upon Earth and at the same time to profess notwithstanding a Belief of One Holy Catholic Church out of whose Communion there is no Salvation Prot. I freely accknowledge that I am not able to produce any considerable Quotations to confront yours Quotations I mean asserting the Authority of particular or new-erected Churches independent on others Cath. Then since it seems both Scripture Tradition Councils and Fathers have given their Testimonies against you Why are you still a Protestant §. 46. Prot. Sir I suppose you do believe I should be very glad to find out a Church to whose Authority I could think my self obliged entirely to submit mine own judgment and securely to commit my Soul to her guidance But hitherto not having been able to find such an one I must be content to stay where I am For as for the Roman Church to whose Communion alone you would invite me she appears to me so wholly depraved that I think a real Miracle would hardly draw me to joyn my self to her Communion Cath. I see Sir that you despairing to justifie your own Churches and to excuse them from Schism do seek to draw me to particular Disputes By which notwithstanding you can receive no benefit at all whatever the success of such Disputes shall be For still the unpardonable guilt of Schism will lie upon you However I will not refuse so far to comply with you Therefore tell me Wherein consists that depravation you speak of Prot. It consists in this that both her Doctrines and Discipline are framed as on purpose to comply with wordly interests and by consequence are opposed to the Spirit of Christianity Cath. How does that appear §. 47. Prot. It appears more than sufficiently in this that as the late learned Arcbishop of Spalato observes all those Points of your Belief and Practice which we condemn and for which we separate from your Church are such as manifestly have a strong influence on the satisfying either her Ambition or Covetousness Cath. Which are the Points which you suppose to comply with Ambition Prot. These which here follow 1. Your Churches assuming the Title of Catholic to her self alone with exclusion of all other Churches 2. The Popes assumed Universal Authority 3. His pretended Infallibility in determining Controversies 4. His usurped Temporal Authority 5. A Power to be acknowledged as given to Priests by consecrating the outward Symbols to make the glorified Body of our Saviour present on the Alter 6. The Offering it in Sacrifice to the Father 7. The exposing of it to mens Adoration 8. The Obligation imposed on all sinners to discover their most secret sins to Priests in Confession and to submit to satisfactions enjoyned by them 9. A proud esteem of attaining to Iustification and Salvation by your own Merits Thus your Clergy not content to invent Doctrines proper to procure their own Exaltation would instill Pride into the people also §. 48. Cath. For what Doctrines do you accuse the Roman Church of Covetousness Prot. Of this latter sort are the Romane Doctrines 1. Touching Prayer for the dead and Purgatory out of the torments whereof Souls are to be redeemed by Masses Alms c. 2. The gaining of Heaven by mony given for Indulgences 3. The Invocation of Saints 4. The worshipping of their Images and Relicks To which Pilgrimages are ordained with costly Offerings c. §. 49. Cath. This Observation made by the infamous Apostate you named if rightly considered truly seems to argue a guilt somewhere yet not in the Church but much rather in those who seperated from her For it strongly argues that since to oppose her they made choice only of those Points which regarded the Honour Authority and Wealth of the Clergy the true Motives inducing them to rebel against the Church were not any zeal for Truth or care for their Souls for they acknowledg her Orthodox as to all Points of Doctrine approved by former Heretics That therefore which stirred up their rage against her was Envy Hatred of Obedience and a thirst unquenchable to rob her of the Treasure and Possessions conferred on her by the Piety of their Holy Progenitours Now Sir tell me sincerely If you were to establish a Church would you take for your pattern that Schismatical King Ieroboam who chose Priests from the dreggs of the People or God himself who instituted a splendid Clergy Prot. It cannot indeed be denied but that contemptible needy and depending Directours of Souls will but very meanly discharge so high an Office as Christ has committed to them having made them Spiritual Iudges of Mankind and stiled them the Light of the world and the Salt of the Earth §. 50. Cath. If the first Reformers had been of your Judgment they would first have reformed in themselves their inordinate Passions But Sir if you please let us leave the judgment of mens secret intentions to Almighty God to whom alone they are open and transparent However this may with full assurance be asserted That if Sacriledge and freedom from Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction were not the only prime Motives they were and will be the prime Effects of your multiplied Reformations §. 51. Prot. I am well content to desist from enquiring into the secret thoughts of persons on either side And therefore I will henceforth consider the forementioned Points in debate between us absolutely and in themselves And so doing you must give me leave to say That this also may with full assurance be asserted that whatever Motives the Roman Church may have to
be admitted in France the Pope not only knowing but expresly allowing such refusal as appears by the Bull of Pope Clement the eight sent to King Henry the fourth at his reception into the Church and recited by Cardinal Perron in his Epistles in which Bull we find this Clause His Majesty shall effectually take order that the Council of Trent he published and admitted in all things Excepting only at your must earnest Supplication and Petition those things if there be any such which cannot be put in execution without a real disturbance of public tranquility The King of Spain likewise though believed to be more complyant with the Court of Rome being sollicited by the Pope to publish and admit the same Council in his Belgick Provinces though he willingly yielded thereto yet he did it not without this additional Clause adjoyned Touching the Regalities Rights Prerogatives and Preeminences of his Majesty his Vassals Estates and Subjects the Laycal Iurisdiction hitherto used the Right of Lay-Patronage the Right of Nomination Hearing of causes in the possessory matter of Benefices Tithes possessed or pretended to by Seculars c. in regard of all such things his Majesties Intention is that proceedings shall go on as hitherto they have done without changing any thing at all c. So necessarily scrupulous are Christian Princes to prevent the least diminution of their Temporal Rights and Priviledges More lately likewise when certain Authors of one Order published several Treatises in which they endeavoured to exalt to the height the Popes Iurisdiction Universal in Temporal affairs those Books were censured and condemned by many Catholic Universities and committed to the fire by Public Authority the Pope not being ignorant hereof And moreover which perhaps is yet more considerable the Superior General of the said Religious Order even in Rome it self published an Edict known to all Christendom by which he strictly forbad his Subjects under most heavy Censures to maintain such a Temporal Iurisdiction of the Pope either in Books Sermons or Disputations Now that which makes this so solemn a Prohibition of more weight is this that whereas the foresaid Authors earnestly contended to prove that all Christians were obliged to believe the Popes Right to such Authority as an Article of our Christian Faith the said General by publishing his Prohibitory Edict clearly shewed that he renounced the Belief of such a Doctrine For otherwise Who but a◠Antichrist would so severely under a penalty of Excommunication forbid the teaching or defending an Article of Faith And moreover in a General Chapter not long after assembled the said Prohibition was ratified by all Superiors of the same Order as their own Writers testifie Prot. I must needs confess that Christian Princes and Subjects too are much beholding to that Worthy General for his prudence and zeal to prevent occasions of tumults and Seditions Notwithstanding it seems to me that Princes are not yet secure for though the said Doctrine should cease to be esteemed an Article of Faith why may it not be defended as an Opinion at least Speculatively probable and if so a slender Probability will have force but too great to raise and foment Rebellions when discontents are multiplied among the people §. 66. Cath. You are much deceived Sir For besides that you may be sure that Princes will never permit their Authority to be rendred questionable the very pretending such a Doctrine to be only Probable is equivalently to grant that it is no Authority at all Since every one knows that a meer probable Title against a long established possession such as is that of Princes for their Temporal Soveraignty is in Law and Reason accounted no Title and consequently none who have any sence of Christianity will ever seek with the horrible Scandal of Religion to instill such a manifestly unjust incentive to Rebellion into the minds of Christians And now Sir I beseech you to consider things seriously and then judg with what injustice and cruelty our whole Religion and Church is condemned as teaching Treason and Rebellion and this only for a few private mens Writings so generally abhorred by our selves Prot. All I can say hereto is that for as much as concerns my self I will be no longer an accuser of your Church in this matter Proceed therefore if you please to the other following Points 4. Of the Real Presence and Transubstantiation §. 67. Cath. The next Point of Catholic Doctrine opposed by all Sectaries regards the Holy Eucharist Their rage against the former is indeed greater because interest is more concerned in it but a greater advantage for seducing the ignorant people they make of this because they permit them to judg of this most dreadful Mystery by their outward Senses which Catholics instructed by Holy Fathers tell them are not to be believed here In the Eucharist the first matter of Dispute and ground of the rest is the Catholic Doctrine touching the Real Presence of our Lords Body on the Altar after Consecration of the Symbole thus declared in the Council of Trent I prosess that in the most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist is present truly and substantially the Body and the Blood together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Iesus Christ And that there is made a Conversion of the whole Substance of the Bread into his Body and of the whole substance of the Wine into his Blood Which Conversion the Catholic Church calls Transubstantiation This Article of our Belief is to us solidly established on the Words of Institution THIS IS MY BODY which Words without any figurative explication are repeated alike by three Evangelists and the Apostle Saint Paul therefore we believe following universal Tradition that our Lord sincerely meant as he spake and because we believe so we are hated Prot. But how can you expect that we should assent hereto since our Senses contradict it §. 68. Cath. You cannot say however that our Senses are deceived for in this great Mystery they have a right perception of their proper Objects to wit Colour Extention Figure c. Neither I suppose will you say that the judgment which Reason from the Senses collects is always infallible For if so then for example our Saviour whilst living on earth should have been judged a meer Man And the Angels appearing to Lot and his daughters no Angels but meer men for so would Reason relying on the outward Senses have judged Prot. in these examples Divine Revelation expresly teaches the contrary Cath. Then if in the present case you were assured by Divine Revelation that God by a supernatural Power did on the Priests consecrating the Symbols produce a real Change of the Outward Elements into the Body and Blood of Christ you would believe God against your Senses Prot. I should no doubt §. 69. Cath. Can you have a greater assurance hereof then the express Words of Christ literally understood by the Constant Tradition of all Churches in all ages Prot. Such an assurance
truly would to me be sufficient Cath. Then since we are not met here to mannage a formal Dispute give me leave to desire you seriously to peruse what has passed very lately in Writings on this Argument between Monsieur Arnauld a Doctor of Sorbon and the most subtle of the Huguenot Ministers called Monsieur Claude There besides Testimonies of Antiquity you will find our Catholic Doctrine acknowledged by the Prime Bishops of Greece Muscovy Armenia and many other Oriental Sects who by their Attestations subscribed with their Names before Witnesses have professed that the Doctrine touching the Real Presence and Change of the Visible Elements into the very Body and Blood of Christ is the constant Doctrine of all their respective Congregations and that it has been so delivered to them by their Ancestors from the beginning Prot. Truly Sir if this appear to me I shall not trouble my self with Doubts or Objections from School Philosophy nor examine the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How such a change is made which Examination hath been long since condemned by St. Cyrill of Alexandria but humbly submit my judgment and assent to what God has revealed as I do also in the Mysteries of the Blessed Trinity the Incarnation c. For indeed I find that the Doctrine touching the Holy Eucharist has from the beginning been delivered as a Mystery also incomprehensible by natural Reason §. 70. Cath. You may add hereto that even the Calvinists themselves though the most perverse Enemies to this Mystery yet afford a considerable Proof of it against themselves For seeing clearly the Tradition touching the Real Presence so fully attested in the Writings of the Holy Fathers and in Ancient Councils they even when they endeavour with most eagerness to oppose it oppose it in language counterfeiting that of Antiquity so ashamed are they to renounce both the sense and expressions too of the Primitive Church This may be observed not only in the Polemical Writings of Mestrezat Anbertin and others of their Champions but even in their Catechism and simple Confession of their Faith For there we read That our Saviour nourishes and quickens us with the substance of his Body and Blood That he is given us in the Sacrament according to his proper Substance And that though he be truly communicated to us both by Baptism and the Gospel Yet that is only in part and not entirely so that it seems in the Eucharist they receive him whole and entirely Moreover that the Body of the Lord Iesus in as much as it hath been once offered in Sacrifice to reconcile us to God it is now in the Eucharist given us to rectify us that we have part in that reconciliation § 71. And as for English Protestants the time was within mans memory when not only the Prelates of this Church without Huguenotical hypocrisy delivered their Belief of this Mystery in expressions very Catholic but his Majesties learned and wise Grand-Father giving the world an account of the Faith of that Church of which he was the Head delivers it thus We acknowledg a Presence of Christ in the Sacrament no less true then you Roman Catholics but we dare not determine the manner of it Neither truly dare we Catholics Thus learned Protestants wrote and spoke before this last worse then Zuinglian Reformation and new Rubrick since which time the English Church has permitted all fanatical sectaries to make her a brocher of all their frenzies and a justifier of Doctrines which devour her very vitals Prot. Enough of this Sir Be pleased now to proceed to the next Point 5. Of Adoration of Christ in the Holy Eucharist §. 72. Cath. The next controverted Doctrine regards the Adoration of Christ in the Holy Sacrament Concerning which the sum of the Churches Faith is comprized in this her Decision Whosoever shall say that Christ the only begotten Son of God ought not to be adored in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist with the Supream Worship Latria even external And that his Adorers are Idolaters let him be Anathema Now the Doctrine touching the Real Presence being once established will sufficiently justify this for certainly it is not only lawful but our Duty to adore Christ whereever he is truly present And consequently this Practice of Adoring our Lord in his Sacrament is by the same Universal Tradition delivered and ordained in all Publick Liturgies both of the Grecian and other Oriental Churches §. 73. But the great and too willing mistake of our Adversaries is that they impute to us the Adoration of the Visible Elements Whereas the proper Object of our Worship is not any Visible thing Nay we do not terminate our Worship percisely in the Body of Christ which we beleive invisibly present The proper Object of our worship is the Person of Christ God and Man veiled under the Visible Elements So that in case it should happen through some incapacity in the Minister or defect in the manner or matter that the Elements should not be effectually consecrated and yet we beleiving Christs Body to be Sacramentally present should so worship him in this indeed would be a circumstantial mistake but here would be no Idolatry nor indeed any fault in us the Errour being supposed undiscoverable by us The reason is because the Belief of the Presence of Christs Body is truly grounded on Divine Revelation and not a fond fancy such as was that of the Manicheans worshiping Christ as peculiarly present in the Sun or of the Isrealites conceiving God to be peculiarly present in the Calves at Bethel And to this you may see Daille yeilding his consent in his Apology for the Reformed Churches the eleventh Chapter It is observable with what strange and unreasonable partiality the Calvinists treat Catholics in this Point They give their judgment that there is no dangerous Venome in the Doctrine of the Lutherans touching this matter and therefore have Synodically granted them admission to their Cene which the Lutherans scorn Now the Lutherans profess the Real Presence of Christs Body together with the Bread and some of them acknowledg Adoration due to him there So that to a Calvinists conscience the same or a worse Doctrine held by a Sectary looses all its poyson it is only dangerous to believe what the Church teaches Yea those very Calvinists acknowledg also that if Christ be in such a special manner really present Adoration would be due to him Some Lutherans deny this But whether they affirm or deny any thing upon condition they will stay out of Gods Church they shall be welcome Brethren to Calvinists Prot Truly such a dis-ingenuous want of Honesty and such interessed Compliance is very justly to be condemned You may now proceed 6. Of the Sacrifice and Oblation of Christs Body on the Altar §. 74. Cath. The next Point with regard to the Holy Eucharist quarrelled at by Protestants is our Doctrine touching the Sacrifice of Christs Body on the Altar concerning which the summ
Theological Scar-crow had intended to apply that Expression to single divided Churches whose birth has perhaps been within mans memory and particularly to the Church of England some Fundamental Doctrines whereof to my knowledge he did not assent to and whose Ecclesiastical Government he did not approve his Assertion may be justified to be grounded on Reason For who can tell how a Seperation from any of them can be called Schism or Tenents contradicting their Heresies They all mutually favour one another with the Title of Pure Reformed and Sufficiently Orthodox Churches So that in which soever among them any one shall live and from which soever of them any one shall think fit to depart as liking another better this according to their common grounds must be accounted a matter in a manner indifferent and however there is in it no danger of incurring the guilt of Schism so it be done with an unpretended Conscience It seems therefore to me an Act unjust and unsuitable to the grounds of Pure Reformation in some late Prelatical Writers who charge with the Crime of Schism their tender Conscienced Orthodox Brethren for deserting their Communion as it was anciently in the Donatists those Arch-contrivers of Schisms for doing the same to the Primianists Maximianists and Rogatists subdivided Sects Spawned from them It is plain therefore that among all Reformed Congregations Schism is a meer Scar-crow and the like may be said of Heresie And the reason is because both Heresie and Schism must include an opposition to that Church only which can justly challenge an Authority to determin what Doctrins are true and necessary to be believed by all Christians and to oblige all under penalty of Anathema's to joyn in her Communion Which Authority only belongs to the Catholic Church and which is not so much as pretended to by any Reformed Congregations §. 115. Hence it necessarily follows that the entertaining a perswasion that the Catholic Church to which God hath made a Promise that he will lead her into all Truth is guilty of Errours can proceed only from an excess of Spiritual Pride but it is moreover 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an obstruction of Reason upon a meer suspicion of such Errors to esteem one's Self obliged to separate from her Communion But so pestilent is the Nature of Spiritual Sins that though all men condemn them and most men are deeply stained with them yet not any one can see them in himself Where shall we find an usurping Oppressor acknowledge himself Covetous or an ambitious man proud So never did any Schismatic say or think himself Such He acknowledges that he separates from the Church and boasts of it yet he will not endure to be esteemed a Schismatic as if Sinlurked only in the Greek expression To conclude Unless you will impute to all the Antient Councils and Holy Fathers of Gods Church not only the utmost extremity of ignorance and folly but likewise a base partial interessedness and most execrable Tyranny in denouncing Anathemas against Dissenters and Separatists you will judge Separation from Catholic Communion to be no vain Theological Scar-crow Such a sleight Opinion of the harmlesness of Schism was not first branched in this Age. Saint Augustine will inform us that in his days There were some who said We thought it made no matter where that is in what Communion we preserved the Faith of Christ But saith he thanks be given to our Lord who hath gathered us from separation and hath made manifest to us that this is a thing pleasing to God who is One to be served in Unity Such horror had those great Lights of the Church of the Crime of Schism that according to their judgment even Martyrdom it self cannot cure the deadly poyson of it And that the Martyrdom to which we expose our selves by hindring Schism in the Church is no less glorious then that which is suffered for refusing to Sacrifice to Idols That there cannot possibly be made any Reformation of such importance as the mischief of Schism is pernicious And in a word That it cannot possibly be that any one should have a just cause toâ— separate from Catholic Communion More to this purpose you may find in the Second Section of the Collection of Testimonies out of the Holy Fathers at the end of our former Discourse Prot. I well remember them therefore if you please here we may make an end §. 116. Cath. Farewel Sir and pardon the frequent urging of this most necessary Admonition If I thought you would require it I could very easily have concluded this Discourse as I did the former with a Collection of Testimonies from the Holy Fathers to justifie the Churches Doctrines through all the Points here mentioned But such a Collection having been the only Subject of many great volumns published by Catholic Doctors it will be sufficient to refer you to them I will only desire you to take notice in perusing them first That never any such Book has been written by any Protestant And next that such Collections have been made by Catholics to shew that their whole Religion came by descent from the Antient Fathers Whereas Protestants only upon a particular occasion Select some obscure or ambiguous passages from their Writings with a purpose to cast a mist besore the eyes of unwary Readers that they may so elude the force of those Testimonies far exceeding in number and more perspicuously evident produced by Catholics FINIS 1 Tim. 3. 15 Psal. 122. 3. Matt. 5. 14. Isa. 54. Mat. 18. 17. Calvin Instit. lib. 4. cap. 1. Calvin Epi. ad Melanct. Prejugez con les Calvinists San. Relation pag. 233. Roses his View of Religion pag. 4768. Humsr. in Iesuitiâ—mi part 2. 〈◊〉 5. Mig leb Cent. 6. p. 289. lb. c. 10. p. 748. Cariâ—â— Chron. lib. 4. 〈◊〉 Onanâ— Epitome cent 6. Parker Antih Bâ—it c. 17. Aâ—ch 〈◊〉 pro 〈◊〉 Dom. p. 33. Osiand Epist. p. 290. Whitak cont Dur. l. 5. §. 26. Humfr. ad rat 5. Godwin in Conv. Brit. c. 4. Magdeb. Cent. 6. c. 10. Castal in Praefat. Bibliâ—r Lat. Philip Nicolai de Regno Christi c. 1. p. 53. Auâ— Epist. 165. Calvin Inâ—stit l. 4. c. 2. §. 42. August in Psalm 30. Conc. 2â— Aug. in Ps. 147. Aug. in Psal. 56. August in Epist. Ioan 2. August cont Faust. l. 13. c. 13. Aug. in Psal. 85. Aug. de Baptis cont Don. l. 1. c. 10 Aug. in Ps. 1. 30. Pacian Epist 2. ad Sympron Dionys. Alex ap Euseb l. 6. Aug. Ser. 22. de diversis Aug. in I sal 42. Itâ— l. 4. c. 62. Aug. in Psal. 48 Aug. de Vera Rel g. Aug. Epist. 48. Aug. cont Epist. Fundam c. 3. Fulgent de â—ide ad Pet. cap. 39. Aug. Retract l. 1. Id de Utilitate Aug. de Unitate Eccl. c. 19. Aug. in Psal. 41. Aug. de Baptismo cont Donat l. 2. Aug. cont â—reseon 〈◊〉 33. Aug. de Quantit Animae c. 7. Aug. cont Iulian. l. â— c. 5. Hilar. l. 1. Tertull. de Praescrips c. 18. Aug. Epist. 118. Aug. de Haeres Vincent Lirin Comon c. 38. Sâ—ogli â—el Chr. Nauâ—r 1 Kin. 12. Mat. 5. 13. 14. Conc. Trid. Sess. 4. Io. 16. 13. Mat. 16. 18. Bulla Piiâ— P. 4. Conc. Fâ—r Perron in Ambass Epist. Margaretae Gubernatricis ad Archiepiscopum Camerac Responsis ejusd Confess de Foy Art 36. Catech. Dimanch 53. Ib. 52. Ibid. Epist. aâ— Cardin. Perron Council Trid. Sess. 13. can 6. Bull. Pii P. IV. Concil Trid. Sess. 22. c. 1. Hebr. 9. 26. Ib. 28. Ib. 12. Ioh. 22. 23. Mat. 18. 18. Iam. 5. 16. Concil Trid. Sess. 14. Can. 13. 14. Concil Trideâ— Sess. 2â— Suarez Vasquez Concil Trid. Sess. 21. de Reform c. 9. Ibid Sess. 25. Council Trid. Sess. 6. can 11. Ib. can 34 Ib. c. 9. Ib. c. 8. Ib. c. 16. Ibid. Ib. Sess. 14. cap. 8. Can. Miss â—uth Concil Trid. Sess. 25. Eâ—ius Bull. Pii P. IV. Council Trid. Sess. 25. 2 Mâ—cchab 12. 43 44. Calvin Insti lib. 3. c. 25. §. c. 1. Tim. 4. 1. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Mat. 18. 17. Hâ—le's Discourse of Schism Epiâ— aâ— Diut Aug. Epist 48 Dionys. Alex. ap Euseb. l. 6 Pacian Epist. 2. Iren. l. 4. c. 62. Aug. Epist 48.