sence of the ancient Fathers pag. 5. which plainly shews that he knew nothing of Sâ—cinus his Opinions or Principles who positively denied the necessity of Baptism and protested against being judged by that sence the Fathers or the Primitive Church have given of Scriptures These are sufficient to shew the vast difference between the pretences of the present Dissenters and the ground of our Reformation And that the Argument he draws from the Obligation in Ordination laid on the Presbâ—ters of our Church to minister the Doctrine and Sacraments as this Church and Realm have received the same according to the Commandments of God pag. 4. is of no force against the first Reformers though it obliged Mr. M. not to desert our Church and the Nonconformists not to preach in contradiction to her declared Doctrine and Worship § 9. And so I proceed to his fifth Query Whether an Act of Parliament in France Spain or Germany be not as good an Authority for Popery there as in England for Protestancy I suppose by an Act of Parliament he means the Laws enacted regularly by the Supream Powers of those Nations which he ignorantly expresses by an Act of Parliament and to this I answer That if any Religion is to be established in any Kingdom by temporal Rewards or Punishments to encourage the Obedient and terrifie the disobedient the supream Powers of every Nation only can thus establish that Religion they themselves are sole Judges with what temporal Rewards and Punishments and how far they will establish it and they are answerable only to God for their actings herein If therefore the Supream Civil Government in France or Spain set up Popery a Man must submit to it or burn for it if the Law be so and such a Law though it is unjust is as forcible for a false Religion as a true But there is another way of establishing a Religion and that is by convincing Mens Minds that the Religion is true and that according as men cordially embrace it the shall be secured of the Divine Favour and be happy in the next World. And if this be the Christian Religion of which they are so convinced one Principle of it is that the Professors thereof ought to associate themselves into a Body and that Christ the Author thereof has appointed Governors who are to descend in Succession and that to these regularly appointed a due Obedience is to be paid as Men value the Rewards or Punishments of the next life Now Men thus perswaded cannot think an Act of the Civil Governors alone a sufficient Commission for any one to undertake the Function of a Spiritual Pastor any more than an Act of these Spiritual Pastors is sufficient to capacitate and commissionate a Man to discharge a Civil Function and therfore Mr. M. argues very unnecessarily against the Parliaments Power to preach or administer Sacraments pag. 3. since the 27th Article of our Church denies expresly that Power to the Civil Governors I suppose I have sufficiently shewn that our first Reformers had a Canonical as well as Parliamentary Mission and I suppose that this Canonical Mission is nothing the less valid because the other goes along with it But then it may be objected Have not France and Spain an Act of the Church as well as State for establishing their Religion I answer they have and so has Mahometism in Turkey an Act of what they count the Church for its establishment And therefore it is not sufficient that the Power that establishes a Religion be competent and the Methods regular by which it is settled but likewise it is necessary that the Religion be true in it self and therefore a man must examine whether the Christian Religion be more purely truly taught established in England or in Spain before he either reject or embrace the one or the other For a false Religion may have all the regular settlements that a true can have and the Professors thereof being conscious of its weakness are often more industrious to make the accidental security the stronger And I do affirm that there is not one Argument in this Paper urged by Mr. M. against Protestants but might with equal advantage be urged mutatis mutandis against convert Christians in a Mahometan Country this alone is sufficient to shew them all to be unconclusive The way therefore for every man to be satisfied in his Religion is to examine it apart from the accidental advantages of it and chuse that which has best reasons to recommend it for a man ought to chuse his Church by his Religion and not his Religion by his Church But he asks in case there be no Judge to determine who have the true sence of Scripture Roman Catholicks or Protestants whether the Catholick sence be not as good as the Protestants Pref. p. 3. It were a sufficient Answer to this to put another case like it to him in the person of a Turk And it is this in case there is no Judge to determine as I know of none saith the Turk which is the Word of God the Bible or the Alchoran Why should not the Affirmation of us Mâ—slelmans who are ready to vouch to the death for the Alchoran and are twice the number of you Christians be as good authority for Men to believe the Alchoran came from God as your vouching for your Bibles is sufficient to perswade men to believe that they came from him But I do not love to shift off a Question and therefore tell him that the sence put by Roman Catholicks on the Scripture is not so good as the sence put on them by the Protestants If it were they would not be afraid to put it to the World and let every person that is equally concerned judge for himself but they had rather appeal to themselves as Judges and then they are sure of the cause But then he tells us that he could never understand what Unity of Spirit or agreement in Faith Christians are like to have page 3. upon these Principles To which I Answer more than they have now If National Churches were left to be govern'd by themselves the Subjects of each Church bound to adhere to their immediate Governors in all quarrels with neighbouring Churches those contentions must soon come to an end as the quarrel between St. Cyprian Stephen did For when the Governours of differing Churches find that they cannot hurt one another or advantage themselves by denial of Communion as it must be when the one Church doth not raise a Faction to side with it in the other the quarrel must soon cease for the thing that makes quarrels endless is interest But if it once be counted Lawful for one Church to get a Party in the others Precincts and set up Altar against Altar in the same place this will continue the Schism and is the very fundamental reason of the breaches of Charity amongst Christians that now pester Christendom which are much
Licensed June the 1st 1687. AN ANSWER TO THE CONSIDERATIONS Which obliged PETER MANBY Late Dean of London-Derry in Ireland As he pretends to EMBRACE what he calls THE Catholick Religion By William King Chancellor of St. Patricks Dublin Isaiah 1. 2. I have nourished and brought up Children and they have rebelled against me LONDON Printed for R. Taylor near Stationers-Hall 1687. THE CONTENTS Chap. 1. The Examination of his Preface Sect. 1. THE Introduction Sect. 2. Whether Mr. M. really desired the Information Sect. 3. Catholick Church defined S. 4. Answer to his first Question What Church meant by the Catholick S. 5. To his second Question Whether the Church of England S. 6. To his third Question With what other Church she Communicates S. 7. To his fourth Whether the variety of all Protestants be the Catholick Church S. 8. To his fifth Question Whether we and Lutherans are the same in all material points S. 9. Our Church visible before Edward VI. S. 11. His unfair dealing with Dr. Heylin and Dr. Burnet Chap. 2. About Mission Sect. 1. His Letter to his Grace the Lord Primate examined S. 2. The Questions concerning Mission reduced to five Heads S. 3. The validity of our Orders S. 5. Answer to his first Question What Priesthood had the first Reformers but what they received from Roman Catholick Bishops S. 6. To his second Who Authorized them to teach their Protestant Doctrine c S. 7. To his third Whether Cranmer did condemn the Church of Rome and by what Authority S. 8. To his fourth Whether a Presbyterian can preach against the Church of England by virtue of Orders received from her S. 9. To his fifth Whether an Act of Parliament in France c. be not as good an Authority for Popery there as in England for Protestancy S. 10. Mr. M's Objections against the first Reformers considered S. 11. His Objections against Cranmer in particular Answered to the end Chap. 3. About Confession Sect. 1. Whether We in our Church differ about Confession S. 2. The Doctrine of our Church in this matter whence Confession appears not to be wanting S. 3. His Argument proposed out of St. John 1. 9. compared with John 20. 23. S. 4. The words if we Confess John 1. Ep. 1. 9. shewn not to refer to Auricular Confession S. 5. Gods faithfulness and Justice mentioned John 1. Ep. 1. 9. do not respect particularly the Promise John 20. 23. S. 6. If they did yet this wou'd not prove Auricular Confession S. 7. 8. His second Argument from the practice of all Ages and Churches considered and shewn to be false S. 9. His third Argument from the inconveniency that attends the want of Confession S. 11. His fourth Argument from the interest of the Priest. Chap. 4. About the place of the Catholick Church Sect. 1. Answer to his third Difficulty Where is the Catholick Church S. 2. Whether extant before Cranmer S. 3. Whether Cranmer believed himself a Member thereof S. 4 5. The Reformation justifiable without charging the Church of Rome with Idolatry S. 6 7 8. All Idolatry not inconsistent with the Being of a Church S. 9. The weakness of his Argument brought to prove it Chap. 5. An Answer to the heap of Particulars thrown together at the latter end of his Paper Sect. 1. 2. His endeavour to vindicate his Church in her Devotions S. 3. Whether all elevated and judicious S. 4. His first Answer taken from the Benedicite to Protestant Objections against Prayers in the Mass directed to Saints S. 5. The second from the Angels being Favourites S. 6. The third from their knowing our Affairs S. 7. His Excuses for the Mass being in an unknown Tongue S. 8. His Vindication of the Worship of Images from the Council of Trents forbidding Superstition S. 9. From Kneeling at the Sacrament S. 10. From Presbyterian Objections against our Practice S. 11. His Excuse for the ill Practices and Opinions of some Roman Catholicks S. 12. His recommendation of his Church from her Books of Devotion S. 13. From the Devotion of her People S. 14. From the Unity of her Members that Unity shewed not to be so great as pretended from the Schisms that have been in her about Ordinations S. 15. From the Disputes about Confirmation S. 16. About Confession S. 17. What he objects against the Church of England first from her stealing her Communion-Service S. 18. Secondly from her want of a due Foundation S. 19. For trusting Reason too far S. 20. And contradicting the visible Church S. 21. Thirdly Not yielding a due Submission S. 22. Due Submission shewn to be paid by her to the universal Church and taught to be due to particular Churches S. 23. Mr. M's Transcribing and Englishing Calvin examined together with his Inference S. 24. Mr. M's Submission to the Catholick and the particular Church whereof he was a Member examined AN ANSWER TO THE CONSIDERATIONS Which obliged Peter Manby Dean of Derry to embrace the Communion of the Romish Church CHAP. 1. To the Preface § 1. PEter Manby Dean of Derry has chosen this time for what reasons he knows best to declare himself of the Communion of the Church of Rome Whoever doth so in the present circumstances must run the hazard of being censured for having too great a value for the Favours and worldly Advantages that some late Converts have met with In order therefore to satisfie the World that he had some other Reasons besides this prospect I suppose he published this Pamphlet that I now answer Whoever reads it will find so little Method or Connexion between the parts of it that he must conclude the Writer was never acquainted with close thinking and that the loosness and immethodicalness of it is the greatest trouble lyes on the Answerer the truth is it sticks chiesly on Formalities and Preliminaries which no Advocate ever insisted much upon that was confident of the merits of his Cause and therefore to answer it can hardly be worth any ones labour I confess I should have thought so too if I had not found some of his own party boasting of it and I do now assure him that I do not Answer it out of any apprehension I have of its seducing any of ours and that it had been answered long ago if I had been possessed with any such Suspicion It consists of three parts and each of these do in effect contain the same things and except a man give a distinct Answer to each he may pretend that part is unanswered I shall therefore follow him in his own method and consider first his Preface to the Reader secondly the Pamphlet it self and thirdly his Latine Queries and beg the Readers Pardon if he find the Answers sometimes repeated when Mr. M. repeats the questions so often § 2. His Preface has huddled together some Questions and Dilemma's concerning the Catholick Church and raised some doubts concerning which he professes himself to be at a loss and so desires information
than the Protestants and therefore no wonder if they be more diligent in it 2. If the appearance of Devotion at publick Service be an Argument of the goodness of the Service the Turks who out do the generality of Christians in frequency seeming Devotion and Reverence at their Prayers as we are informed by Travellers must be concluded to have the best Service and he would do ill on Mr M.'s Principles that would Reform the Alcoran into the Mass. 3. The matter of Fact is not true as I am informed by those that have seen their Communicants and ours Protestants have according to Mr M.'s desire compared the Devotions of the Church of Rome with those of the Church of England in a Discourse designed for that very purpose and Printed London 1685 In which it is shewn That whatever the Romanists pretend there is not so true Devotion among them nor such rational provision for it nor encouragement to it as in the Church established by Law among us 4. It is not material what their Devotions appear to be if their Lives are not better than ours which I am sure they are not Open Prophaneness is hardly more provoking to God than shew of Devotion without proportional Sanctity of Life as we learn from the Case of the Jews of old in Isa. 1. Jer. 7. and in many other places of Scripture § 14. The third thing whereby he endeavours to recommend his Church is the Unity of her Members In the Church of Rome he shall find variety of Religious Orders but no Schism nor Discord about their Sacraments or Liturgy In the Garment of the Church there is Variety but no Rent No confusion of Sects nor Disobedience to Superios p. 14. If this be true she is the happiest Church that ever was in the World much happier than the Church of the Apostles time for there were Schisms and Discords about Sacraments and Liturgy in her Witness the Apostle 1 Corin. 1. 11. also 11. 18. Nay there was Disobedience too Gal. 3. 1. 3 Joh. 9. It is therefore strange we should be able to find none in the Church of Rome May we not rather conclude that Mr M. has either partially or negligently sought for these Schisms and Discords Since really there has hardly been greater Schisms and Discords in any Church than in her thô he affirms we shall find none Bellarmine loved the Church of Rome as well as Mr M. and he owns twenty six Schisms in her Onuphrius Panvinius who uses not to speak ill of the Roman Church reckons thirty one he calls the worst and longest which continued fifty Years others were of twenty or fifteen or ten c. These Authors onely reckon those Schisms where the People were divided between two Popes But it were easie to shew that besides these there were in that Church great and enormous Schisms which had no Popes to head them And as for Discords about Sacraments I suppose Mr M. reckons Ordination a Sacrament And concerning it there have been many Discords many Popes have damned their Predecessors and annulled their Ordinations So Stephen VII nulled the Ordinations of Formosus his Predecessor John IX did as much for Stephen and Sergius III. for him Platina tells us That after the time of Stephen VI. or as others reckon the VII it became a Custom for the succeeding Popes to infringe or quite destroy the Acts of their Predecessors Spondanus tells us These are the unhappy times wherein every intruding Pope annulled the Acts of his Predecessors And further that the power of Whores was so great in Rome that they removed true and lawful Popes and thrust in violent and wicked men Who considering this would not think God had forgotten his Church Behold the Mission of the Roman Bishops and their Unity And if notwithstanding these Schisms and Intrusions which continued for many years the Church of Rome continued a true Church and her Ordinations valid let the Reader judge what there is so Horrid or Irregular in our Reformation that should void our Orders or make us cease to be a Church § 15. I suppose Mr. M. counts Confirmation another Sacrament and there have been no less discords about it of late in the Roman Church The Regulars of England on one side and the Bishops of France with the Sorborn on the other And those of each party charge the other with Heresie not without the disturbance of the publick Peace and a rent of brotherly Charity So the Congregation of the Index tells us which Congregation made a Decree to suppress the Writings of both Parties May 19. 1633. And here we do not find that Obedience to Superiors in this matter of which Mr. M. boasts for immediately there came out at Paris a Disquisition against the Decree the Jesuits Reply and the Bishops of France renew their Condemnation and Censure Nov. 29. 1643. and I do not find that they are yet agreed Mr. M affirms we shall find no Rent no Confusion of Sects no Disobedience to Superiors in the Church of Rome But whosoever will read the Decrees and passages about this matter in St. Amours's Collection at the end of his Journal p 26. or in Petrus Aurelius's Vindiciae Censurae will find a great rent of brotherly Charity much Confusion and great Disobedience in the disagreeing Parties and these about no less things than the Sacrament of Confirmation the Hierarchy of the Church and Supremacy of St. Peter § 16. Confession is no less a Sacrament with Mr. M. and the Disputes in his Church have of late been as high about it as about the former one Party charging the other with no less than Heresie as may be seen at large in the Bishops of France's Letter to Innocent the X. at the end of Mr. Arnauld's Book of Frequent Communion If their publick Acts are to be believed there are Rents Scissurae fraternae Charitatis in their Church But if we believe Mr. M. there is no Rent Scissura non est I shall say nothing of the Dispute concerning the Regale in France at this day I need not put him in mind of what Obedincee has been paid to the Pope or to his Excommunications of the Arch-bishop of Tholouse and Regalists He may see the whole in a Book intitled Regale Sacerdotum 1684. I do not see but the King and Church of France make themselves Judge Witness and Accuser in this Affair with the Pope as much as Henry VIII and the English Church did § 17. This is all that Mr. M. seems to say either to vindicate or recommend his Church Let us see next what he objects against ours And in all this last part I can find only three things of this nature One is P. 10. That the Church of England is beholding to the Mass for the best Flowers in her Communion Service The second is that the Protestant Church has no other Foundation than every man's Reason And the third is That we do not pay