in a different manner according to the condition of those they had to do with or the temper of him that managed them yet they must needs seem more or less grievous to all when power sufficient was not left to the greatest Monarchs to defend themselves or protect their Subjects preserve the peace or promote the welfare and provide for the security of their own Countries Then no marvel if some of them grow weary of so insupportable oppressions and at last take courage to grapple with and extricate themselves from such manifest encroachments upon their own and the Peoples Civil Rights as well as the Ecclesiastical of the Church in their Dominions and be forced to some harsh and almost violent methods when the more gentle and benign could prevail nothing 3. But beside these more publick Invasions upon Church and State that which made the usurpation more odious and insufferable was the farther abuse of the same extravagant power to bring in strange and dangerous Doctrines corrupt and unlawfull practices into the Church and impose them upon all in their Communion exactly fitted to feed their Ambition enrich their Coffers secure their Authority and promote their ease and Luxury Such of the first sort are their Doctrine of Transubstantiation and Purgatory of Merit and Supererogation the multiplicity of Vows and delusions in the Principles of Repentance and ministration of Penance Of the latter sort are the Invocation of Saints and Angels Adoration of Reliques and Images their half Communion the Scripture lock'd up and Divine Service performed in an unknown tongue c. These and diverse like them have proved great Scandals abroad and stumbling blocks at home and whatever varnish they may put upon them by the fairest pretences or however they may cast a mist before the eyes of their Disciples by nice distinctions yet they have so disfigured the face of Christianity that he who compares the late appearances of it in the world with the model of it laid down in Scripture or the Records of the Primitive Church can hardly believe it the same thing But the particulars are not here to be disputed they have sufficiently been confuted and exposed by Protestant Writers and were by several before excepted against and disclaimed though some suffered severely for so doing and many more we may suppose waited an opportunity to free themselves from their pressure That which I am now most to insist upon is this that if the charge we draw up against these of falshood in judgment gross Superstition or Idolatry in Worship and immorality in manners be true and impartial as we have been ever ready to make good and shall do against all the Artifices of the Defendants Then no Authority whatever regularly founded or unexceptionably conveyed can oblidge us to these against the revealed Will or Word of God the Dictates of our Consciences as we hope carefully and righty informed the sense and reason of mankind and the Belief and practice of the Church in the first and purest Ages Greater cause was there to endeavour by all lawful means to throw off such an usurped power that made so ill use of what it had unjustly gotten and to restore Religion to its primitive beauty in Doctrine Worship and Precepts of Life But alas many difficulties lay in the way of its accomplishment and all possible struglings and contentions by force and policy were used by the adverse Party to prevent its beginning or obstruct it Progress Great was their Interest in every place Strong was the influence they had upon persons in Authority Numerous were their Assistants and Dependants at home and abroad Weighty was their concern which lay at stake and many were the advantages which they had of any that opposed them So that no wonder if a Reformation so long wish'd for and much wanted were so slowly effected It is rather more strange that in so many places it did master these and such like incumbrances and in so short a time made so considerable a progress If in some places it proceeded with less Order Uniformity and calmness then could have been wish'd for in a Religious Reformation Necessity in part with many perplexed difficulties and incumbrances may in some measure excuse what no Law before hand fully warrants IV. But leaving others to answer for themselves in my next particular I am to consider how regularly and sedately it proceeded in the church of England within the bounds of catholick Unity 1. With the concurrence and encouragement all along of the Supreme Power to free it from any but suspicion of Rebellion So it began at first with the breaking of the Papal yoke of Supremacy the Translation of the Bible and some like preparatives to Reformation under Henry the Eight and the united Suffrages of his Parliaments and the Bishops themselves therein It proceeded suitably to a further improvement in most particulars under his Son Edward the Sixth And at last it came to its full settlement and establishment under Queen Elizabeth The beginning and carrying on of the Reformation here was by such loyalty of Principles and Practices that we challenge any Church in the World to a Comparison therein Indeed this was so notorious that her Roman Adversares have turned her Glory into a Reproach by upbraiding her though most invidiously with the name of a Parliamentary Religion because it received all along so much countenance and assistance from those great Assemblies of all the three Estates of the Kingdom under their Head and Soveriagn 2. But farther to clear her of all just imputation from hence it must be added that the whole work was carried on with the advice and mature deliberation of the Clergy assembled in Convocation representing the intire body of them and therein a National Council That they from their Education and presumed Knowledge as well as from their Office and Ecclesiastical Authority are ordinarily fittest to judge debate and determine of Religious matters will be soon granted But that the civil Power may and ought sometimes to remind them of their Duty and restrain them from gross Defections from it may be proved by several Scripture Examples in the Old Testament and the Supereminence of their place But happy is that Order and Unity in which both Powers are joyned together for the service of GOD the security of his Church and promotion of his true Religion as it was here though it could not be expected but the first attempts would meet with several difficulties fierce Debates and Controversies yet still the entire establishment was ratified by the regular determination of the Clergy so assembled as before as well as was after confirmed by the Royal Assent 3 Yet farther to justifie themselves from any affected innovation in such a change all was done with the greatest Reverence Respect and Deference to the Ancient Church to clear their continued Unity therewith 1. In Doctrine The ancient Creeds were taken for the foundation of its Confession the four
penalties then of temporal death and Eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of so false a Doctrine and to lay open the monstruous absurdity of it And in the handling of this Argument I shall proceed in this plain method I. I shall consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine II. I shall produce our Objections against it And if I can shew that there is no tollerable ground for it and that there are invincible Objections against it then every man is not only in reason excused from believing this Doctrine but hath great cause to believe the contrary FIRST I will consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine Which must be one or more of these five Either 1. The Authority of scripture Or 2ly The perpetual belief of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an belief of of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an evidence that they alwayes understood and interpreted our Saviour's words This is my body in this sense Or 3ly The authority of the present Church to make and declare new articles of Faith Or 4ly The absolute necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive this Sacrament Or 5 ly To magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle 1. They pretend for this Doctrine the Authority of Scripture in those words of our Saviour This is my Body Now to shew the insufficiency of this pretence I shall endeavour to make good these two things 1. That there is no necessity of understanding those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation 2. That there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise First That there is no necessity to understand those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation If there be any it must be from one of these two reasons Either because there are no figurative expressions in Scripture which I think no man ever yet said or else because a Sacrament admits of no figures which would be very absurd for any man to say since it is of the very nature of a Sacrament to represent and exhibit some invisible grace and benefit by an outward sign and figure And especially since it cannot be denied but that in the institution of this very Sacrament our Saviour useth figurative exressions and several words which cannot be taken strictly and literally When he gave the Cup he said This Cup is the new Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you and for many for the remission of Sins Where first the Cup is put for Wine contained in the Cup or else if the words be literally taken so as to signifie a substantial change it is not of the Wine but of the Cup and that not into the bloud of Christ but into the new Testament or new Covenant in his bloud Besides that his bloud is said then to be shed and his body to be broken which was not till his Passion which followed the Institution and first celebration of this Sacrament But that there is no necessity to understand our Saviour's words in the sense of Transubstantiation I will take the plain concession of a great number of the most learned Writters of the Church of Rome in this Controversie a de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. Bellarmine b in 3. dis 49. Qu. 75. Sect. 2. Suarez and c in 3. part dis 150. Qu. 75. art 2. c. 15. Vasquez do acknowledge Scotus the great Scholman to have said that this Doctrine cannot be evidently proved from Scripture And Bellarmine grants this not to be improbable and Suarez and Vasquez acknowledge d in sent l. 4. dist 11. qu. 1. n. 15 Durandus to have said as much e in 4. sent Q. 5. quod 4. q. 3. Ocham another famous schoolman sayes expresly that the Doctrine which holds the substance of the Bread and Wine to remain after the consecration is neither repugnant to Reason nor to Scripture f in 4 sent Q 6. art 2. Petrus ab Alliaâ—â— Cardinal of Cambray say plainly that the Doctrine of the substance of Bread and Wine remaining after Consecration is more free from absurdity more rational and no wayes repugnant to the authority of scripture nay more that for the other Doctrine viz. of Transubstantiation there is no evidence in scripture g in canon Miss Lect. 40. Gabriel Biel another Schoolman and Divine of their Church freely declares that as to any thing express'd in the Canon of the scripture a man may believe that the substance of Bread and Wine doth remain after Consecration and therefore he resolves the belief of Transubstantiation in to some other Revelation besides scripture which he supposeth the Church had about it Cardinal h in Aquin 3. part Qu. 74 art 1. Cajetan confesseth that the Gospel doth no where express that the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ that we have this from the authority of the Church nay he goes farther that there is nothing in the Gospel which enforceth any man to understand these words of Christ this is my body in a proper and not a metaphorical sense but the Church having understood them in a proper sense they are to be so explained Which words in the Roman Edition of Cajetan are expunged by order of Pope i Aegid â—â—nink de sacrâ—â—â— Q. 75. art 1. n. 13. Pius V. Cardinal k de sacram l. 2. c. 3. Contarenus and l Loc. Theolog l. 3. c. 3. Melchior Canus one of the best most judicious Writers that Church ever had reckon this Doctrine among those which are not so expresly found in scripture I will add but one more of great authority in the Church and a reputed Martyr m contra captiv Babylon c. 10 n. 2. Fisher Bishop of Rochester who ingenuously confesseth that in the words of the Institution there is not one word from whence the true presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in our Mass can be proved So that we need not much contend that this Doctrine hath no certain foundation in Scripture when this is so fully and frankly acknowledged by our Adversaries themselves Secondly If there be no necessity of understanding our Saviours words in the sense of Transubstantiation I am sure there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise Whither we consider the like expressions in scripture where our Saviour sayes he is the door and the true Viue which the Church of Rome would mightily have triumph'd in had it been said this is my true Body And so likewise where the Church is said to be Christ's body and the Rock which followed the Israelites to be Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. They drank of that Rock which followed them and that Rock was
to our Faith The means which Goâ— hath given us towards the certain Prop. IV. attaining of it is not the Authority of any infallible Guide on Earth This will not be disbelieved by those who weigh well the following considerations First God did not set up such a constant infallible Guide among the Jews though at first he gave Assurance Consid I. to them by Miracle that Moses had received his Commission from him and had brought to them the Tables which he had Written for their direction with his own finger Some of the Sanedrim were of the Sect of the Sadducees who erred in the Fundamental point of a future State Most of them erred in the Quality of the Messiah not considering their Scriptures so much as their Traditions And of the errors of the Levitical Priesthood there is in the Old Testament * Isai 56 10. Jer. 2. 8. Ez. 7. 26. C. 22. 26. frequent mention and great complaint And the Prophet Malachy †Mal 2. 7. 8. as soon as he had said The Priests lips shall preserve Knowledge he adds this reproof but ye are departed out of the way It is true the Israelites were by God directed in difficult cases to an Assembly of Judges * Deut. 17 8. to 12. But they were not Judges of controversies in Doctrine but in Property To their sentence the People were to submit as to an expedient for Peace though Judgment might be perverted or mistaken See Levit. 4. 13. It must be also confessed that God spake to them by the Oracle of Vrim and that the voice of it was infallible But its answers concerned not the necessary Rudiments of the Mosaick Law but emergencies in their civil affairs those especially of Peace and War But if we admit that there was under Judaism a living infallible Guide it does not thence follow that it must be so under Christianity For their small precinct the People of which were thrice in a year to come up to the Temple was much more capable of such a Judge then the Christian Church which is as wide as the World Also the new Revelation is more clear and distiâ—ct then the old one was and stands not in such need of an Interpreter Secondly God hath no where promised Christians such a Judge He hath no where said that he hath given such a Consid II. one to the Christian Church And seing such a one cannot be had without God's supernatural assistance the most knowing amongst Men being subject both to Error and to Falshood it is great arrogance whilst the Scripture is silent to say he is in beeing And to affirm that if there were not such a Guide God would be wanting in means sufficient for the maintenance of Peace and Truth is presumptuously to obtrude the schemes of Man's fancy upon God's Wisdom He can Govern his Church without our methods Now God hath no where promised such a Judge to Christian Men though he hath promised help on Earth and assistance from Heaven to Men diligent and sincere in their inquiries after truths which are necessary for them There are two places of Scripture which are by some taken for promises of such a nature though they were not by the Divine Wisdom so intended Of these the First is that which was spoken by Christ unto St. Peter * S. Mat. 16. 18. The gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church Which Promise concerneth the Church in general and the necessary Faith of it and not any particular persons or places or successions of persons in them And Christ doth here assure us that the Gates of the Grave shall not swallow up the Church that it shall not enter in at them that it shall not die or perish But he doth not say he will preserve it by the means of any Earthly infallible Guide He can by other waves continue it till time it self shall fail The other place of Scripture is the promise of Christ a little while before his Ascension into the Heavens †S. Mat. 28. 20. Lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World As long as this Age of the Messiah shall last and that is the last time or Age. This promise is indeed made to the Apostles and to their successorrs also But it is a promise of general assistance and it is made upon condition that they go forth and make Disciples of all Men of all Nations and Baptize them and give them farther instruction in the things which Christ gave in charge to them And some of the successors of the Apostles have not performed these conditions and the Governour of the Church of Sardâ—s had not held fast what he had received heard Rev. 3. 1. 2 3 As GOD hath not promised an unerring Guide so neither hath he said he hath set up such an one in any Church on Earth He hath not said it either directly 〈◊〉 by consequence Tâ—â— places which are supposed directly to affirm this are two and both mistaken One of them is that of Christ to his Disciples after he had given Commission to them to preach the Gospel * Luke 10. 16. He that heareth you heareth Me Me the infallible way and the Truth This Speech if it be extended to all Ministers it makes them all infallible Guides And it is certain they are so as long as they deliver to the People what they received from Christ But the words are especially directed to the seventy Disciples who were taught to preach a plain Fundamental Truth that the Kingdom of GOD was come nigh to the Jews †S. Luke 10. 1 9. And these Disciples were able to give to the Jews a demonstration of the Truth of that Doctrine which they taught by miraculous signs By healing the sick ‡ verse 12. and doâ—ng among them mighty works Another place used as an express Testimony * 1 â—im 3. 15. is that in the first to Timothy to whom St. Paul saith that the Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth But this place also is misapplied It seemeth to be spoken of that Church of Ephesus in which St. Paul advised Timothy to behave himself with singular care Which place hath so farre failed that the loâ—ty Building called St. John's Church †is now become a Turkish Mosch But iâ— it Ryc of the Greek Ch. p. 44. were spoken in a general sense it would amount only to this meaning A Christian Church is like a Pillar sustained by a Pedestal on which a writing is so fixed that all who pass by may see it It is as Jerusalem once was to the Heathen-World a City on a Hill It is a visible Society which giveth notice to Jews and Gentiles of Christianity and is instrumental to awaken their observation and by their sense to prepare the way to their belief For this advertisement being so publickly given to them they have fair occasion of examining the grounds of Christian
Tertulliâ—â— argues against Hereticks in his Book De Praescriplionibus â—â—t when they reason about the sense of Scripture they never direct us to any infallible Judge but use such Arguments as they think proper to convince Gain-sayers Nay this is the way which was observed in all the Ancient Councils the Bishops of the church met together for common counsel and advice and in matters of Discipline and Government which were subject to their Authority they considered what was ' most for the publick benefit of the church and determined them by their Authority not as infallible Judges but as Supreme Governours of the church In the disputes of Faith they reason from Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not from their own Authority and what upon a serious debate and inquiry they found to be most agreeable to the sense of Scripture and the Doctrine of the church of former Ages that they determined and decreed to be received in all churches as the catholick Faith That this is so is evident from all the Histories of the most Ancient and celebrated councils which any man may consult who pleases Now I would ask some few Questions about this matter 1. Whither-these councils took a sure and safe way to find out Truth If they did not what reason have we to believe that they determined right If they did then we may use the same way which they did for that which is a good way in one Age is so in another and then there is no necessity of an Infallible Judge to find out the sense of Scripture because we have other certain wayes of doing this the same which all the ancient Councils observed 2. I would know whither it be not sufficient for every Christian to receive the Decrees and Determinations of these councils upon the same Reason and Authority which moved the Fathers assembled in council to make these Decrees Whither for instance we must not believe the Eternal God-head of Christ and that he is of the same substance with his Fatherâ— for the same Reasons for which the Nicene Fathers believed this and required all christians to believe it If we must then Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not the Authority of a general council or any Infallible Judge is the Reason of our Faith For the Nicene Fathers who were the first that met in a General council could not believe this upon the Authority of any other General council much less upon their own Authority unless we will say that they first Decreed this then believed it because they themselves Decreed it If Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church antecedently to the determinations of a General council or any other pretended Infallible Judge be not a sufficient foundation for our Faith then the whole christian World before the council of Nice which was the first general council had no sufficient Foundation for their Faith for there was no particular Bishop or church in those dayes which pretended to be the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures We Protestants have the same way to understand the Scriptures have the same Reason and Foundation of our Faith which the Nicene Fathers themselves had or which any christan could have before there was any general council and if the church of Rome do not think this enough we cannot help that we are abundantly satisfied with it The Authority of a general council in those dayes was deservedly sacred and venerable not as an infallible Judge which they never pretended to but as the most certain means they could possibly have to understand what was and in all Ages had been the received Doctrine of the catholick church They met together not to make new Articles of Faith which no council in the World ever had any Authority to do but to declare what was the truly ancient and. Apostolick Faith and to put it into such words as might plainly express the catholick sense and meet with the distempers of that Age. For this end Grave and Reverend Bishops assembled from all parts of the christian World not meerly to give their private Opinions of things but to Declare what was the received Doctrine oâ— those churches over which they presided and I know no better Argument of an Apostolick Tradition then the consent of all churches as remote from each other as East and West which were planted by several Apostles and differed very much from each other in some External Rites and Usages but yet all agreed in the same Faith And this is the true Authority of those ancient councils that they were most likely to understand the true sense of Scripture and of the Catholick Church This is the Protestant Resolution of Faith and the Nicene Fathers themselves had no other way nor pretended to any other Nay the church of Rome her self as much as she talks of Infallibility makes very little use of it She has never given us an infallible comment on Scripture but suffers her Doctors to write as fallible comments and in many things as contrary to each other as any Protestant Divines do And I cannot imagine what good Infallibility does if an infallible Church has no better means of understanding Scripture then the comments of fallible men that is no better means then every fallible Church has for no man can understand the Scripture ever the better for the Churches being infallible unless this infallible Church improve this glorious Talent of Infallibility in Expounding Scripture which she has not done to this day and I believe never will Indeed it is apparent that infallibility as it is pretended to by the church of Rome can be of no use either in the Refolution of Faith or in confuting Hereticks who deny this Infallibility and then I cannot imagine what it is good for but to multiply Disputes instead of ending them As for the Resolution of Faith suppose I ask a Papist why he believes such Articles as the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the dead to be contained in Scripture If he answer as he must do Because he is taught so by the church which is infallible my next Question is How he knows the Church to be infallible If he says he learns this from Scripture I ask him how he comes to understand the Scripture and how he knows that this is the sense of it If he know this by the infallible interpretation of the church then he runs round in a circle and knows the Scripture by the church and the church by the Scripture as I observed before if he can find out the Churches infallibility by the Scripture without the help of an infallible Judge then it seems the Scripture is to be understood without the infallible interpretation of the Church and if men can find out infallibility in Scripture without the Church I am confident they may find out any thing else in Scripture as well without the Churches infallibility For there iâ— no Article of our creed so hard to be
an unfeigned Repentance is absolutely Necessary and not a Verbal one only That it is out of our power and of any Man 's in the World to turn Attrition into contrition We pretend not to dispense with any for not obeying the Command of God We have no Taxa Camere by which the Papists are shewn how all sins are fined in their Church for in that Book Men see at what Charge they may kill a Father or commit Incest with their Sisters But we assure all that the Wages of sin is Death Death Eternal if indulged and not most earnestly repented of And we tell all that Devotion is necessary for all though the Church of Rome hath wayes of gratifying every Inclination so as they that will not lead a strict Life need not and yet may have hopes of Salvation We own their Policy in this Contrivance but do not so much admire their Religious regard to the Salvation of Mens Souls And to conclude though we thus forcibly press all Christian Duties on all Men yet at the same time we warn them not to pretend to Merit Heaven at God's Hand but after they have done their best to confess they are unprofitable servants Wee say of our Charity or whatever else we do in Obedience to God that of his own we give to him and we are bound to thank him both for the will and the Ability to give The most that we pretend to ' is onlie to make a small Acknowledgment by way of Sacrifice for what we have received we beg of God to accept it as a Testimonie of a grateful Mind and we know that his Goodness is so great that he will abundantlie reward an honest and sincere servant though he hath done no more then was his Duty And we hope that what we offer though mingled with many Imperfections he will be pleased to accept for the sake of Christ as if it were perfect These are the Grounds that we go on in our Devotions ' and whatever we do for the Honour of God and thus designing and thus acting and persisting we need not doubt but the good Providence of God which watcheth over his whole Church will in an especial manner watch over this which is so pure a Member of it that he will accept of the Devotions which are offered to him in it and hear the Prayers that are made unto him for it and defend it against all its Enemies on every side which God of his Infinite Mercy grant for the sake of Jesus Christ our Lord. A DISCOURSE Concerning Invocation OF Saints How shall they call upon him in whom they have not believed Rom. 10. 14. EDINBVRGH Re-printed by John Reid Anno DOM. 1686. A DISCOURSE Concerning Invocation 〈◊〉 Saints AMongst many other very corrupt and erroneous Doctrines of the Romanists the Church of England in her twenty second Article condemns that of Invocatioâ— of Saiâ—â—s as a â—ond thing vainly invented and grounded upon no warrantry of Scriâ—ture but rather repugnant to the Word of God and in her Learned Homily against the peril of Idolatry passes yet a much severer Censure upon it and makes all those that believe and practise it Guilty of the same Idolatry that was amongst Ethnicks and Gentiles How sharp soever this charge may be thought to be 't is you see the plain sense and judgment of our Church and what I believe is the Truth and no hard matter to make good To proceed therefore in the easiest and clearest method I can I purpose to sum up all that I think needfull to be said upon it under these following heads 1. What 's the profest Doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome as to Invocation of Saints 2. On what occasion it began and spread in the Church 3. That there is not the least p â— of for it from Scripture 4. That there is no proof for it from the Fathers of the first three hundred years and more 5. That there is full and evident proof in Scripture against it 6. That the Fathers of the first and purest Ages till after three hundred are all express and positive in thâ—â—â— writings against it 7. That the Doctrine and Practice of Saint-Invocation is impious and Idolatrous I. What 's the profest Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome as to Invocation of Saints AN Account of this I shall give you first in general as it is set down in the decree of the Trent Council and then lay it before you more at large distributed under several particulars In the twenty fifth Session of that pack'd Synod we have its decree in these words That all Bishops and Pastors that have the cure of souls do diligently instruct their Flock that it 's good and profitable Humbly to pray unto the Saints and to have recourse to their prayers help and aid And then to reinforce the Obligation of it it denounces an Anathema against all those who shall find fault with it or refuse to practise it so that now whosoever shall be so hardy as to think and teach the contrary to say that either it ought not to be done or that it 's a foolish thing to do it that the practice is little less then Idolatry repugnant to the Glory of God as sole Governour of the World and highly injurious to the Honour of Christ as the only Mediator betwixt God and Man does in the judgment of that Church think impiously and if the Popes Power as well as his Infallibility does not fail him he most be Curs'd and Damn'd for it But for once not to be frighted with his vain Thunder I shall proceed in due place by Gods assistance to prove all the foregoing particulars against it when I have given you yet a fuller description of it First then 1. The least and most excusable thing in this Doctrine and practice is to pray to Saints to pray for them Thus much is not only confest by them but made the pretence to bring off this Doctrine without the charge of Idolatry and Creature Worship We do no more in praying to Saints departed say they then one living Christian does to another when he sayes pray Sir pray for me or remember me in your prayers But was this indeed the true meaning of such Devotions it 's so far from being any justification of them that the Apologly it self is sinful and admitting the excuse the practice no less to be condemned For When they Pray to Saints departed to pray for them those Saints do either hear their prayers and become acquainted with their desires or they do not If they do hear all those prayers that are put up to them at the same time by innumerable persons and that in far distant places what 's this but to ascribe to them that ubiquity and omnipresence that 's solely peculiarly and incommunicably in God If they do not then it 's very absurd and ridiculous and a great abuse of that reason God hath given men for other
they saw them were deceived then there might be no Miracles wrought and consequently it may justly be doubted whither that kind of confirmation which God hath given to the Christian Religion would be strong enough to prove it supposing Transubstantiation to be a part of it Because every man hath as great evidence that Transubstantiation is false as he hath that the Christian Religion is true Suppose then Transubstantiation to be part of the Christian Doctrine it must have the same confirmation with the whole and that is Miracles But of all Doctrines in the world it is peculiarly incapable of being proved by a Miracle For if a Miracle were wrought for the proof of it the very same assurance which any man hath of the truth of the Miracle he hath of the falsehood of the Doctrine that is the clear evidence of his senses For that there is a Miracle wrought to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not bread but the body of Christ there is only the evidence of sense and there is the very same evidence to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not the Body of Christ but bread So that here would arise a new Controversie whither a man should rather believe his senses giving testimony against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or bearing witness to a Miracle wrought to confirm that Doctrine there being the very same evidence against the truth of the Doctrine which there is for the truth of the Miracle And then the Argument for Transubstantiation and 〈◊〉 Objection against it would just balance one another and consequeâ—â—ly Transubstantiation is not to be proved by a Miracle because thâ— would be to prove to a man by some thing that he sees that he dâ— not see what he sees And if there were no other evidence that Trâ—â—substantiation is no part of the Christian Doctrine this would â—â— sufficient that what proves the one doth as much overthâ—â—â— the other and that Miracles which are certainly the best and higâ—â— external proof of Christianity are the worst proof in the world of Trâ—â—substantiation unless a man can renounce his senses at the same tâ—â— that he relies upon them For a man cannot believe a Miracle withoâ—â— relying upon sense nor Transubstantiation without renouncing it Sâ— that never were any two things so ill coupled together as the Doctriâ—â— of Christianity and that of Transubstantiation because they draw sâ—veral ways and are ready to strangle one another because thâ— main evidence of the Christian Doctrine which is Miracles is resâ—â—ved into the certainty of sense but this evidence is clear and poiâ—â— blank against Transubstantiation 4. And Lastly I would ask what we are to think of the Argumeâ—â— which our Saviour used to convince his Disciples after his Resurrectâ—on that his Body was really risen and that they were not deluded by â— Ghost or Apparition Is it a necessary and conclusive Argâ—ment or not * Luke 24. 3â— 39. And he said unto them why are yâ—â— troubled and why do thoughts arise in your heartsâ— Behold my hands and my feet that it is I my self â—â—â— a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me hâ—â— But now if we suppose with the Church of Rome the Doctrine oâ— Transubstantiation to be true and that he had instructed his Disâ—ciples in it just before his death strange thoughts might justly havâ— risen in their hearts and they might have said to him Lord it iâ— but a few dayes ago since thou didst teach us not to believe our senses but directly contrary to what we saw viz. That the bread whicâ— thou gavest us in the Sacrament though we saw it and handled iâ— and tasted it to be bread yet was not bread but thine own natural body and now thou appealest to our senses to prove that thiâ— is thy body which we now see If seeing and handling be an unquestionable evidence that things are what they appear to ouâ— senses then we were deceived before in the Sacrament and if they be not then we are not sure now that this is thy body which we now see and handle but it may be perhaps bread under the appearance of flesh and bones just as in the Sacrament that which we saw and handled and tasted to be bread was thy flesh and bones under the form and appearance of bread Now upon this supposition it would have been a hard matter to have quieted the thoughâ—â— â—f the Disciples For if the Argument which our Saviour used did â—â—rtainly prove to them that what they saw and handled was his â—â—dy his very natural flesh and bones 〈◊〉 because they saw and â—andled them which it were impious to deny is would as strongâ—â— prove that what they saw and received before in the Sacrament was â—ot the natural body and bloud of Christ but real bread and wine â—nd consequently that according to our Saviours arguing after his â—esurrection they had no reason to believe Transubstantiation before â—or that very Argument by which our Saviour proves the reality of his â—ody after his Resurrection doth as strongly prove the reality of bread â—nd wine after consecration But our Saviours Argument was most â—â—fallibly good and true and therefore the Doctrine of Transubstanâ—â—ation is undoubtedly false Upon the whole matter I shall only say this that some other â—oints between us and the Church of Rome are managed with some â—ind of witâ— and subtilty but this of Transubstantiation is carâ—ied out by mere dint of impudence and facing down of Manâ—ind And of this the more discerning persons of that Church are of â—ate grown so sensible that they would now be glad to be rid of this â—odious and ridiculous Doctrine But the Council of Trent hath fastâ—ned it to their Religion and made it a necessary and essential Point of their Belief and they cannot now part with it if they would it is like a Mill-stone hung about the neck of Popery which will sink it at the last And though some of their greatest Wits as Cardinal Perron and of late Monsieur Arnauld have undertaken the defence of it in great Volumes yet it is an absurdity of that monstrous and massy weight that no humane authority or witâ— are able to support it It will make the very Pillars of St. Peter's crack and requires more Volumes to make it good then would fill the Vatican And now I would apply my self to the poor deluded People of that Church if they were either permitted by their Priests or durst venture without their leave to look into their Religion and to examine the Doctrines of it Consider and shew your selves men Do not suffer your selves any longer to be led blindfold and by an implicit Faith in your Priests into the belief of nonsense and contradiction Think it enough and too much to let them rook you of your money for pretended Pardons and counterfeit Reliques but let not the Authority of any Priest or Church perswade you out of your senses
Doctrine of the Church of Rome as Apelles did with Antigonus his face they must draw but one part half of it that so they may Artificially conceal it as deformed and its blind side That all these do so I shall shew by stating the controversie carefully and truely which is the chiefest thing in this dispute for they love to hide their own Doctrines as much as they can and they cunningly contrive most of them with a back door to slip out at privately and upon occasion The Council of Trent has in this as in other things used art and not spoke out in one place as it does in another that so we mistake half its words for its full meaning as Bellarmine and others were willing to do or at least to have others do so In its sixth Canon on the Eucharist it only sayes a Council Trident. Can. 6. De Euchor si quis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae Sacramento Christam Vnigenitum Dei filium non esse cultu Latriae etiam externo adorandum Anathema sit If any one shall say that Christ the only begotten Son of God is not to be adored with the external Worship of Latria in the holie Sacrament of the Eucharist let him be accursed Who will not say in those general words that Christ is to be adored with outward and inward Worship both not only in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist but of Baptism too and in every Christian Office and in every Prayer and solemn Invocation of him either publick or private But they mean a great deal more then all this by Worshipping Christ in the Sacrament and in as plain words they say b Ib. 13. Sess c. 5. That the Sacrament it self is to be adored that whatever it be which is something besides Christ even according to them which is placed in the Patin and upon the Altar which the Priest holds in his hands and lifts up to be seen this very thing is to be adored There is no doubt sayes the Council c Ib. Nullus dubitandi locus relinquitur quin omnes Christi fideles pro more in catholica Ecclesia semper recepto lâ—triae cultum qui vero Deo debetur huic sanctissimo Sacramento in Veneratione adhibeant neque enim minus est adorandum quod fuerit a Christo Dâ—mino ut sumatur institutum but that all faithful Christians according to the custom alwayes received in the Catholick Church ought to give Supreme and Soveraign Worship which is due to God himself to the most Holy Sacrament in their Worship of it for it is nevertheless to be adored tho' it was instituted of Christ to be received That which is to be received which is to be put into the Peoples Mouths by the Priest for since they have made a God of the Sacrament they will not trust the People to feed themselves with it nor take it into their hands and they may with as much reason in time not think fit that they should eat it this which was appointed of Christ to be taken and eaten as a Sacrament this is now to serve for another use to be adored as a God and it would be as true Heresie in the church of Rome not to say that the Sacrament of the Altar is to be adored as not to say that Christ himself is to be adored But what according to them is this Sacrament It is the remaining Species of Bread and Wine and the natural Body and Blood of Christ invisibly yet carnally present under them and these together make up one entire Object of their Adoration which they call Sacramentum for Christs body without those Species and Accidents at least of Bread and Wine would not according to them be a Sacrament they being the outward and visible part are according to their School-men properly and strictly called the Lombard sent l. 4. dist 10. Sacramentum and the other the res Sacramenti and to this external part of the Sacrament as well as to the internal they give Latreia and Adoration to those remaining Species which be they what they will are but creatures religious Worship is given together with Christs Body and they withh that are the whole formal Object of their Adoration Non solum Christum sed Totum visibile Sacramentum unico cultu adorari sayes Suarez a In Th. Quaest 9. disp quia est unum constans ex Christo Speciebus Not only Christ but the whole visible Sacrament which must be something besides Christs invisible Body is to be adored with one and the same Worship because it is one thing or one Object consisting of Christ and the Species So another of their learned men b Henriquez Moral l. 8. c. 32. Speciebus Eucharistiae datur Latria propter Christum quem continent The highest Worship is given to the Species of the Eucharist because of Christ whom they contain Now Christ whom they contain must be something else then the Species that contain him Let him be present never so truely and substantially in the Sacrament or under the species he cannot be said to be the same thing with that in which he is said to be present and as subtil as they are and as thin and subtil as these species are they can never get off from Idolatry upon their own Principles in their Worshipping of them and they can never be left out but must be part of the whole which is to be adored totum illud quod simul adoratur as Bellarmine calls it must include these de Euch. l 4. c. 30. as well as Christs Body Adorationem sayes Bellarmine a Bellarmine de Euch l. 4. c. 29. ad Sybola etiam panis vini peâ—â—nere ut quod unum cum ipso Christo quem continent Adoration belongs even to the Symbols of Bread and Wine as they are apprehended to be one with with Christ whom they contain and so make up one entire Object of Worship with him and may be Worship'd together with Christ as T. G. b owns in his Answer to his most learned Adversary and are the very term of Adoration as Gregory de Valentia c Cathol no Idolaters p. 268. sayes who farther adds that they who think this worship d De Idol l. 2. c. 5. does not at all belong to the Species in that heretically oppose the perpetual custome and sence of the Church Qui censeunt nullo mâ—do ad Species ipsias eam Venerationem pertinere in eo Haeretice pugnare contra perpetuum usum sensum Ecclesiae de Veneratione Sacram. ad Artic. Tom. 5. Indeed they say That these species or Accidents are not be Worship'd for themselves or upon their own account but because Christ is present in them and under them and so they may be Worshipp'd as T. G. sayes d Ib. with Christ in like manner as his Garments were Worship'd together with him upon Earth which is a similitude taken out of Bellarmine
te vivere te illi semper dulce sapere Rythmus St. Thom. ad Eucharist in Missal Sacrament which is before them Prayers they call them to the Eucharist f Laus sacratissimo Sacramento and 't is become a common form of Doxology amongst them instead of saying Praise be given to God to say Praise be given to the most holy Sacrament g Ad Sacram Eucharistiam Rithmus Rom. breviar as 't is in one of their Authors instead of ye shall pray to God ye shall pray to the Body of Christ i e. To the Sacrament h Orlandinus hist Sanders in his Book of the Supper of the Lord i Corpore sangiâ—â— Christi sub speciebus panis vini omnis honor Laus Gratiarum actio in secula seculerum Sanderus de caena Dom. instead of Glory be to the Father Son and Holy Ghost turns it thus To the Body and Blood of our Saviour under the species of Bread and Wine be all Honour and Praise and Thanksgiving for evermore as if it were another Person of the blessed God-head This Adoration is not only in the time of Communion when it is properly the Lords Supper and Sacrament but at other times out of it when ever it is set upon the Altar with the Candles burning and the Incense smoaking before it or hung up in its rich Shrine and Tabernacle with a Canopy of State over it And not only in the Church which is sanctified they say by this Sacrament as by the presence of God himself k Bellarm. de sanct c. 5. but when it is carried through the Streets in a solemn and pompous Procession as it is before the Pope when he goes abroad just as the Persian fire was before the Emperor l Curt. l 3. S. 3. meerly by way of state or for a superstitious end that he may be the better Guarded and Defended by the company of his God m Ad capit is illius sacri custodiam praesidialem patronalem perron de Euch. l. 3. c. 19. In all these times it is to be worshipped and adored by all persons as it passeth by as if it were the Glory of God which passed by They are like Moses to make hast and bow their heads to the Earth and worship n Exod. 34. â— but above all upon that high day which they have dedicated to this Sacrament as if it were some new Deity the Festum Dei as they call it the Feast of God or the Festum Corporis Christi the Feast of the Body of Christ for to call the Sacrament God is a general Expression among them as when they have received the Sacrament to say I have received my Maker to day and the Person who in great Churches is â—o carry the Sacrament to the numerous Communicants is called Bajulus Dei the Porter or Carrier of GOD and they alwayes account and so alwayes reverence it as Boileau falsly sayes o Eucharistiam pro praesente numine â—emper habuisse Veteres the Ancients did as a present Numen and Deity This Feast was appointed by Pope Vrban the 4th about the middle of the twelfth Century and again by â—lement the fifth in the begining of the 13th as is owned by themselves upon the occasion of a Vision to one Juliana who saw a crack in the Moon that signified it seems a great â—efect in the Church for want of this Solemnity such was the rise of this great Festival p Bzovii Annal in Contin Baron Anno Dom. 1230. and so late was its Institution in the Roman Church in which alone and in no other Christian Church of the World it is observed to this day And that the whole practice of the Adoration to the Host is Novel and unknown to the primitive Church and to the Ancient Writers I shall endeavour to make evident against that bold and impudent Canon of the Council of Trent which is the first Council that commanded it in these words q Siquis dixerit non esse hoc Sacramentum peculiari festivia celebritate venerandum neque in processionibus secundum laudabilem Vniversalem Ecclesiae sanctae ritum consuetudinem soleâ—niter circumgeslandâ—â— vel â—on publice ut adoretur populo proponendum ejus Adoratoresesse Idololatr as anathema sit Concil Trident. Can. 6. Sess 13. If any one shall say that the Sacrament is not to be worship'd by a peculiar Festival nor to be solemnly carried about in Processions according to the laudable and universal manner and custom of the Holy Church nor to be publickly proposed to the people that it may be adored by them and that the Worshippers of it are Idolaters let him be accursed To confront this insolent pretence of theirs that it was an universal custom of the church thus to carry the Sacrament in processions the ingenuous confession of their own Cassander is sufficient The Custom sayes he r Consuetudo quae panis Eâ—charistiae in publica pompa conspicuus circumferetur ac passim omnium oculis ingeritur praeter veterum morem ac mentem haâ—d ita longo tempore inducta recepta videtur Illi enim hoc mysterium in tanta religione ac veneratione habuerunt ut non modo ad ejus perceptionem sed ne inspectionem quidem admitterent nisi fideles quos Christi membra tanta participatione dignosesse existimarent quare ante Consecrationem Catecbumeni Energumeni poeniteâ—tes denique non Communicantes Diaconi voce Osliariorum Ministerio secludeb antur Cassand consult of carrying about the Sacramental Bread in publick pomp to be seen and exposed to all eyes is contrary to the mind and custom of the Ancients and seems to be lately brought in and received for they had this mystery in such religious Veneration that they would not admit any not only to the partaking but not to the sight of it but the Faithful whom they accounted members of Christ and worthy to partake of such a Mystery Wherefore all those who were but Catechumeni or were Energumeni or Penetents and not Communicants were alwayes put out and dismist at the Celebration of it Whither they be Idolaters for adoring the Sacrament I have considered already and their practice joyned with their Doctrine maks it more evident I shall now prove that this Adoration of theirs was neither commanded nor used by Christ or the Apostles nor by the Primitive Church nor is truely mean'd and designed by those Authorities of the Fathers which they produce for it and upon a general view of the whole matter That it is a very absurd and ridiculous thing that tends most shamefully to reproach and expose Christianity 1. That it was not used or commanded by Christ or the Apostles is plain from the account that all the Evangelists give us of Christs celebrating this Sacrament with his Apostles where is only mention of their taking and eating the Bread and drinking the Wine after it was blessed by
Governed by Apostolical Men when we cannot reasonably suspect any Deviation from the Primitive Practice and this is the Rule which the Church of England owns in such matters and by which she rejects and confutes both the Innovations and corruptions of the Church of Rome and the wild pretences of Phanaticism So that we do in the most proper sense own the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best means for Expounding Scripture We do not leave every man to Expound Scripture by a private Spirit as our Adversaries of the Church of Rome reproach us we adhere to the ancient Catholick Church which the Church of Rome on one side and the Phanaticks on the other have forsaken And though we reject the new invention of an infallible Judge yet we are no Friends at all to Scepticism but can give a more Rational account of our Faith then the Church of Rome can Had we no other way of understanding the sense of Scripture but by Propriety of the Language and the Grammatical construction of the Words and the scope and design of the Texts their connexion and Dependence on what goes before and what follows and such like means as we use for the understanding any other Books of humane composition I doubt not but honest and diligent Inquirers might discover the true meaning of Scripture in all the great Articles of our Faith but yet this alone is a more uncertain way and lyable to the Abuses of Hereticks and Impostors The Socinians are a famous Example what Wit and Criticism will do to pervert the plainst Text and some other Sectaries are as plain a demonstration what wâ—rk Dullness and Stupidity and Enthusiasm will make with Scripture but when we have the practice of the Catholick Church and an ancient and venerable summary of the Christian Faith which has been the common Faith of Christians in all Ages to be our Rule in Expounding Scripture though we may after all mistake the sense of some particular Texts yet we cannot be guilty of any great and dangerous mistakes This use the Church of England makes of the Catholick Church in Expounding Scripture that she Religiously maintains the ancient Catholick Faith and will not suffer any man to Expound Scriptures in opposition to the ancient Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church But though the Belief and Practice of the Catholick Church be the best means of understanding the true sense of Scripture yet we cannot affirm this of any particular Church or of the Church of any particular Age excepting the Apostolick Age or those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles Notwithstanding this the Church of Rome may be no good Expositor of Scripture for the Church of Rome though she usurp the name of the Catholick Church as presuming her self to be the Head and Fountain of catholick Unity yet she is but a part of the catholick Church as the Church of England and the Churches of France aind Holland are and has no more right to impose her Expositions of Scripture upon other Churches then they have to impose upon her If there happen any controversie between them it is not the Authority of either Church can decide it but this must be done by an appeal to Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of it For when we say that the belief and Practice of the Catholick Church is the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture we do not mean that the Church is the Soveraign and absolute Judge of the sense of Scripture but the meaning is that those Churches which were founded by the Apostles and received the Faith immediately from them and were afterwards sor some Ages governed by Apostolical men or those who were taught by them and convers'd with them are the best Witnesses what the Doctrine of the Apostles was and therefore as far as we can be certain what the Faith of these Primitive Churches was they are the best Guides for the Expounding Scripture So that the Authority of the Church in Expounding Scripture being only the Authority of Witnesses it can reach no farther then those Ages which may reasonably be presumed to be Authentick and credible Witnesses of the Doctrines of the Apostles and therefore if we extend it to the four first general councils it is as far as we can do it with any pretence of Reason and thus far the Church of England owns the Authority of the Church and commands her Ministers to Expound the Scriptures according to the Catholick Faith owned and profess'd in those days but as for the later Ages of the church which were removed too far from the Apostles dayes to be Witnesses of their Doctrine they have no more Authority in this matter then we have at this day nor has one church any more Authority then another 3. And therefore if by the church being the means of knowing the sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures be understood the Judgment and Sentence and Decree of the church that we must seek no farther for the reason of our Faith then the infallible Authority of the church in Expounding Scripture this also is absolutely false and absurd This is more then Christ and his Apostles assumed to themselves while they were on Earth they were indeed infallible Interpreters of Scripture but yet they never bore down their Hearers meerly with their Authority but Expounded the Scriptures and applied ancient Prophesies to their Events and took the vail off of Moses's Face and shewed them the Gospel state concealed under those Types and Figures they confirmed their Expositions of Scripture by the force of Reason and appealed to the Judgments and consciences of their Hearers whither these things were not so Christ commands the Jews nor meerly to take his own word and to rely on his Authority for the truth of what he said but to study the Scriptures themselves and the Bereans are commended for this generous temper of mind that they were more noble then those of Thessalonica for they daily search'd the Scriptures to see whither the Doctrine the Apostles preach'd were to be found there or not Now I think no Church can pretend to be more infallible then Christ and his Apostles and therefore certainly ought not to assume more to themselves then they did and if the Church of Rome or any other Church will convince us of the truth of their Expositions of Scripture as Christ and his Apostles convinc'd their Hearers that is by enlightning our Understandings and convincing our Judgments by proper Arguments we will gladly learn of them This course the Primitive Christians took as is evident in all the Writings of the ancient Fathers against Jews and Hereticks they argue from the Scriptures themselves to prove what the sense of Scripture iâ— they appeal indeed sometimes to the sense of the Catholick Church not as an infallible Judge of Scripture but as the best Witnesses of the Apostolical Doctrine Thus
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
to this effect That Tradition which was of so much use in the Primitive Church was not unwritten Traditions or Customs commended or ratified by the supposed infallibility of any visible Church but did especially consist in the Confessions or Registers of particular Churches And the unanimous consent of so many several Churches as exhibited their Consessions to the Nicene Council out of such Forms as had been framed and taught before this Controversie arose about the Divinity of CHRIST and that voluntaâ—ily and freely these Churches being not dependent one upon another nor overswayed by any Authority over them nor misled by Faction to frame their Confessions of Faith by imitation or according to some patern set them was a pregnant argument that this Faith wherein they all agreed had been delivered to them by the Apostles and their Followers and was he true meaning of the holy Writings in this great Article and evidently proved that Arius did obtrude such interprerations of Scripture as had not been heard of before or were but the sense of some private persons in the Church and not of the generality of Believers In short the unanimous consent of so many distinct visible Churches as exhibited their several Consessions Catechisms or Testimonies of their own Forefathers Faith unto the Council of Nice was an argument of the same force and efficacy against Arius and his Partakers as the general consent and practice of all Nations in worshipping a Divine Power in all Ages is against Atheists Nothing but the ingrafted notion of a Deity could have induced so many several Nations so much different in natural disposition in civil Discipline and Education to effect or practise the duty of Adoration And nothing but the evidence of the ingrafied word as St. James calls the Gospel delivered by CHRIST and his Apostles in the holy Scriptures could have kept so many several Churches as communicated their Confessions unto that Council in the unity of the same Faith The like may be said of the rest of the four first General Councils whose Decrees are a great confirmation of our belief because they deliver to us the consent of the Churches of CHRIST in those great Truths which they assert out of the holy Scriptures And could there any Traditive Interpretation of the whole Scripture be produced upon the Authority of such Original Tradition as that now named we would most thankfully and joyfully receive it But there never was any such pretended no not by the Roman Church whose Doctors differ among themselves about the meaning of hundreds of places in the Bible Which they would not do sure nor spend their time unprofiâ—ably in making the best conjectures they are able if they knew of any exposition of those places in which all Christian Doctors had agreed from the beginning V. But more then this we allow that Tradition gives us a considerable assistance in such points as are not in so many letters and syllables contained in the Scriptures but may be gathered from thence by good and manifest reasoning Or in plainer words perhaps whatsoever Tradition justifies any Doctrine that may be proved by the Scriptures though not found in express terms there we acknowledge to be of great use and readily receive and follow it as serving very much to establish us more firmly in that Truth when we see all Christians have adhered to it This may be called a confirming Tradition of which we have an instance in the Doctrine of Infant-Baptism which some ancient Fathers call an Apostolical Tradition Not that it cannot be proved by any place of Scripture no such matter for though we do not find it written in so many words that Infants are to be baptised or that the Apostles baptised Infants yet it may be proved out of the Scriptures and the Fathers themselves who call it an Apostolical Tradition do alledge testimonies of the Scriptures to make it good And therefore we may be sure they comprehend the Scriptures within the name of Apostolical Tradition and believed that this Doctrine was gathered out of the Scriptures though not expresly treated of there In like manner we in this Church assert the authority of Bishops above Presbyters by a Divine right as appears by the Book of Consecration of Bishops where the persons to be ordained to this Office expresses his belief That he is truly called to this Ministration according to the will of our LORD JESVS CHRIST Now this we are perswaded may be plainly enough proved to any man that is ingenuous and will fairly consider things out of the holy Scriptures without the help of Tradition but we also take in the assistance of this for the conviction of gain-sayers and by the perpetual practice and Tradition of the Church from the beginning confirm our Scripture proofs so strongly that he seems to us very obstinate or extreamly prejudiced that yields not to them And therefore to make our Doctrine in this point the more authentick our Church hath put both these Proofs together in the Preface to the Form of giving Orders which begins in these words It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been three Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons I hope no body among us is so weak as to imagine when he reads this that by admitting Tradition to be of such use and force as I have mentioned we yield too much to the Popish Cause which supports it self by this pretence But if any one shall suggest his to any of our people let them reply That it is but the pretence and only by the Name of Tradition that the Romish Church supports it self For true Tradition is as great a proof against Popery as it is for Episcopacy The very foundation of the Popes Empire which is his succession in St. Peters Supremacy is uâ—terly subverted by this the constant Tradition of the Church being evidently against it And therefore let us not lose this Advantage we have against them by ignorantly refusing to receive true and constant Tradition which will be so far from leading us into their Church that it will never suffer us to think of being of it while it remains so opposite to that which is truely Apostolical I conclude this with the Direction which our Church gives to Preachers in the Books of Canons 1â—71 in the Title Concionatores That no man shall teach the people any thing to be held and believed by them religiously but what is consentaneous to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the Catholick Fathers and Ancient Bishops have gathered out of that very Doctrine This is our Rule whereby we are to guide our selves which was set us on purpose to preserve our Preachers from broaching any idle novel or popish Doctrines as appears by the conclusion of that Injunction Vain and old Wives Opinions and Heresies and Popish Errours abhorring from the Doctrine and