AN EXPOSITION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE Church of England IN THE Several ARTICLES proposed by Monsieur de MEAVX Late Bishop of Condom IN HIS EXPOSITION of the DOCTRINE OF THE Catholick Church To which is prefix'd a particular account of Monsieur de Meaux's Book LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard MDCLXXXVI THE PREFACE THE smalness of this Treatise would hardly justifie the solemnity of a Preface but that it might be thought too great a rudeness to press without some Ceremony upon a Book which both the Merit and Character of the Author and the Quality of those Approbations he has prefix'd to it may justly seem to have fenced from all vulgar attempts as Sacred and inviolable It may perhaps be some satisfaction to the Reader too to know how it is come to pass that a Meer Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome pretending to contain nothing but what they have always professed and in their Council of Trent plainly declared to be their Doctrine should have become so considerable as not only to be approved by many Persons of the greatest Eminency in that Church but even to be recommended by the whole body of the Clergy of France in their Assembly 1682 Method 10. and whereever it has come done so many Miracles as not only common report speaks but even the Advertisement it self prefixed to it takes care to tell us that it has The first design of Monsieur de Meaux's Book was either to satisfie or to seduce the late Mareschal de Turenne How far it contributed thereunto I am not able to say but am willing to believe that the change that honourable Person made of his Religion was upon some better grounds than the bare Exposition of a few Articles of the Roman Faith and that the Author supplied either in his personal Conferences with him or by some other Papers to us unknown what was wanting to the first draught which we have seen of this The Manuscript Copy which then appeared and for about four Years together passed up and down in private hands with great applause wanted all those Chapters of the Eucharist Tradition The Authority of the Church and Pope which now make up the most considerable part of it and in the other points which it handled seemed so loosly and favourably to propose the Opinions of the Church of Rome that not only many undesigning Persons of that Communion were offended at it but the Protestants who saw it generally believed that Monsieur de Meaux durst not publickly own what in his Exposition he privately pretended to be their Doctrine And the Event shew'd that they were not altogether mistaken For in the beginning of the Year 1671 the Exposition being with great care and after the consideration of many years reduced into the form in which we now see it and to secure all fortified with the Approbation of the Archbishop of Reims and nine other Bishops who profess that Having examined it with all the Care which the importance of the matter required they found it conformable to the Doctrine of the Church and as such recommended it to the People which God had committed to their conduct it was sent to the Press The impression being finish'd and just ready to come abroad the Author who desired to appear with all the Advantage to himself and his Cause that was possible sent it to some of the Doctors of the Sorbonne for their Approbation to be joyn'd to that of the Bishops that so no Authority ordinary or extraordinary might be wanting to assert the Doctrine contained in it to be so far from the suspition the Protestants had conceived of it that it was truly and without disguise Catholick Apostolick and Roman But to the great surprise of Monsieur de Meaux and those who had so much cry'd up his Treatise before the Doctors of the Sorbonne to whom it was communicated instead of the Approbation that was expected confirmed what the Protestants had said of it and as became their faculty marked several of the most considerable parts of it wherein the Exposition by the too great desire of palliating had absolutely perverted the Doctrine of their Church To prevent the open Scandal which such a Censure might have cansed with great Industry and all the Secrecy possible the whole Edition was suppressed and the several places which the Doctors had marked changed and the Copy so speedily sent back to the Press again that in the end of the same year another much altered was publickly exposed as the first Impression that had at all been made of it Yet this could not be so privately carry'd but that it soon came to a publick knowledge insomuch that one of the first Answers that was made to it charged Monsieur de Meaux with this change I do not hear that he has ever yet thought fit to deny the Relation either in the Advertisement prefixed to the later Editions of his Book wherein yet he replies to some other passages of the same Treatise or in any other Vindication Whether it be that such an imputation was not considerable enough to be taken notice of or that it was too true to be deny'd let the Reader judge But certainly it appears to us not only to give a clear account of the Design and Genius of the whole Book but to be a plain demonstration how improbable soever Monsieur de Meaux would represent it That it is not impossible for a Bishop of the Church of Rome Advertisement Pag. 1. either not to be sufficiently instructed in his Religion to know what is the Doctrine of it or not sufficiently sincere as without disguise to represent it And since a Copy of that very Book so marked as has been said by the Doctors of the Sorbonne is fallen into my hands I shall gratifie the * See the Collection at the end of the Preface Readers curiosity with a particular View of some of the Changes that have been made that so he may judge whether of the Two were the Cause of those great advances which the Author in that first Edition had thought fit to make towards us It might perhaps appear a very pardonable curiosity in us after the knowledge we have had of the first miscarriage of this Book at the Sorbonne to enquire how it comes to pass that among so many other Approbations as have with great Industry been procured to the later Editions of it we do not yet see any subscription of theirs to it even now Monsieur de Meaux could not certainly be ignorant of what weight the Censure of that Learned Faculty is with us and that such an Approbation might not only have been more easily obtained but would also more effectually have wiped away the blot cast upon his Book by their former refusal than all the Letters and Complements that could come from the other side the Mountains and which France it self hath taught
Years only an Advertisement was prefix'd to a new Edition of the Book which neither touches at all the greatest part of the Exceptions that had been made against it nor gives any satisfaction to those it do's take notice of It has been the constant method of Monsieur de Meaux having once written to leave his Tracts to the World and take no care to defend them against those assaults that seem with success enough to have been sometimes made upon them We should think the great Employments in which he has had the Honour to be engaged might have been the cause of this did not he who takes no care to defend his old Books find still time enough to write new Perhaps he looks upon his pieces to be of a Spirit and Force sufficient to despise whatever attempts can be made upon them but sure he cannot be ignorant that Protestants make another and far different Conclusion and look upon those Opinions to be certainly indefensible which so able and eminent an Author is content so openly and if I may be permitted to add it so shamefully to forsake What other Answers besides those I have now mentioned have been made to it I cannot undertake to say Two others only that I know of have been publish'd the Author of the latter of which Monsieur de Brueys having in a very little time after his writing left his Religion might have made a new instance of Monsieur de Meaux 's Conquests did not his inability to answer his own arguments against the Exposition give us cause to believe that some other Motives than those of that Book induced him so lightly to forsake a Cause which he had so soundly and generously defended And now after so many Answers yet unreplied to if any one desires to know what the design of the present undertaking is they may please to understand that having by a long Converse among the Papists of our own and other Countries perceived that either by the ignorance or malice of their Instructors they have generally very false and imperfect Notions of our Opinions in the matters in Controversie between us I have suffered my self to be perswaded to pursue the Method of Monsieur de Meaux 's Exposition as to the Doctrine of the Church of England and oppose sincerely to what he pretends is the Opinion of the Roman Church that form of Faith that is openly profess'd and taught without any disguise or dissimulation among us I was not unwilling to take the Method of Monsieur de Meaux for my direction as well upon the account of the great Reputation both of the Book and of the Author as because it is now some years that it has pass'd in our Language without any answer that I know of made to it Besides that the late new Impression made of it with all the advantages of the Advertisement and Approbations which the later French Editions have added to it seemed naturally to require some such Consideration I do not pretend by any thing of this to treat Monsieur de Meaux as an Enemy but rather as both his great Learning and that Character which I have ever learnt very highly to reverence oblige me to follow him as my Guide To render an account to him and to the World what our differences are and point out in passing some of those reasons that are the most usually given amongst us wherefore we cannot totally assent to what he proposes I am perswaded the whole is done with that Charity and Moderation that there is nothing in it that can justly offend the most zealous Enemy of our Church If I knew of any thing in it that without dissembling the Truth might have been omitted I sincerely profess I would most willingly have done it being desirous to please all that so if it be the will of God I may by any means gain some For this cause chiefly have I forborn to set my name to it lest perhaps any prejudice against my Person might chance to injure the Excellence of the Cause which I maintain This effect at least if no other I would willingly hope such a Treatise may have upon those of our Country that have been taught to believe very differently concerning us That they would please no longer to form such horrible Ideas of our Profession as they have heretofore been wont to do at least till it can be shewn that I have either palliated or prevaricated the Doctrine of the Church of England in this Exposition Which I am yet so assured I have not done that I◠here intirely submit both my self and it to her Censure of whose Communion I esteem it my greatest Happiness that I am and for whose preservation and Enlargement I shall never cease as I ought to pray A Collection of some of those Passages that were corrected in the first Edition of the EXPOSITION suppressed by Monsieur de Meaux To which is added the Censure of the Faculty of Louvain upon some part of the Doctrine still remaining in it § I. MOnsieur de Meaux in the very beginning of his Book speaking of the design of it had these Words 1. Edit So that it seems then to be very proper to propose to them the Protestants the Doctrine of the Catholick Church separating those Questions which the Church has decided from those which do not belong to Faith p. 1. It is evident the meaning of Monsieur de Meaux in that passage must have been this That whatsoever was either not at all contained in his Exposition or was otherwise maintain'd by any particular Authors beyond the Exposition he gives us of those Points which are here mentioned was not to be look'd upon by us as any of the Church's Decision nor necessary to be received by us as matter of Faith I shall not need to say how many Doctrines and Decisions not only of private Writers but of the very Council of Trent it self this would have at once cut off It would perhaps have been one of the fairest Advances towards an Union that ever the Church of Rome yet offered But it seems whatever Monsieur de Meaux supposed this was thought too great a condescension by others and he was therefore obliged without changing any thing in his Book to give us a quite other account of the design of it Later Editions So that it seems then we can do nothing better than simply to propose to them the Protestants the sentiments of the Catholick Church and distinguish them from those Opinions that have been falsely imputed to her Which is but little to the Purpose II. 1 Edit p. 7 8. The same Church teaches That all Religious Worship ought to terminate upon God as its necessary End So that the Honour which the Church gives to the Blessed Virgin and to the Saints is religious only because it gives them that Honour with relation to God and for the love of him So that then so far ought one to be from blaming the Honour
acknowledging then this That the Church of Rome do's believe and profess all that is essential to preserve the substance of the Christian Religion so that they cannot reasonably impute to us any Doctrine contrary thereunto they must at the same time acknowledg by their own Principles that the Church of Rome is a true part of the Church of Christ to which every Christian is obliged to unite himself in his Heart and in effect as far as in him lies 1 Ed. Monsieur de Meaux may please to know that we do confess the Church of Rome to be a part of the true Church thô indeed we think one of the worst and that we do with all our Hearts desire a Union with her and in effect do shew it as far as we are able by retaining whatever we can of the same Doctrines and Practices with her And if this were all they desired of us as indeed it is all they ought and all we can do However an absolute Union would not thereby be obtained yet might we live at least like Christians and Brethren in a common Charity with one another and so dispose our Minds as by God's Grace to come in a little time to some better agreement in the rest too than ever we are like to do without it These are some of those Passages that gave occasion to the correction we have spoken of at the Sorbon and to the suppression of the whole first Edition however authorized by the Bishops of France in the same words it now is I might have added many more but instead of it will beg leave to offer the Reader one Correction made very lately by another Faculty that of Louvain if not immediatly of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition yet at least of a Doctrine which they were before-hand given to understand was so explained in it Monsieur de W itte Pastor and Dean of St. Maries in the City of Michlin having in a Discourse with some Persons of that City on the 8th of July last maintain'd the Authority of the Church and Pope according to the manner of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition complaint was made of him first to the Inter-noaen then to his Holiness himself and four Propositions drawn up against him as the Heads of his Heresy Monsieur de Witte maintain'd his Opinion in several Papers printed to that end in the * Intituled Prosecutio probationis locum Mar. 16. non recte resundi in Apostolorum principis successores 4th of which after several other Authorities of Persons of their Church defending the same Doctrine He tells them That the Golden Exposition of Faith of Monsieur the Bishop of Condom Nihil praeterea ad sanam Catholicam Orthodoxam fidem deposcit aurea illa Expositio Catholicae fidei Jacobi Episcopi Condomensis praeter Illustrissima Clarissimonum Virorum Elogia ipsius S. Patris Innocent xi peramantissimis literis comprobata required nothing more to the Sound Catholic and Orthodox Faith in this Matter which Exposition besides the Elogies of many other Eminent Persons was also approved by our Holy Father Innocent the 11th himself in his kind Letter to him But all this could not prevail with them to respect his Doctrine ever the more for Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition or his Holinesses Brief The Faculty of Divinity at the command of the Nonce and with the knowledg no doubt and assent of the Pope to whom the whole Affair had been communicated censured his Propositions Nov. 3. 1685. and especially the second in which Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition of the Catholick Faith was principally concerned as scandalous and pernicious Judicamus eam censurari posse uti scandalosam perniciosam May those who insist so much on the Fidelity and Authority of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition please calmly to consider these things and tell us how we can rely on such an Exposition of their Doctrine as notwithstanding so many formal Approbations first of the Bishops of France was yet corrected in so many places by the Sorbon and secondly of the Pope Cardinals and others in Italy and of the whole Body of the Clergy of France in their Assembly has yet so lately been censured at the command of the Nonce and with the consent of his Holiness by the Faculty of one of their most eminent Universities to be scandalous and pernicious A TABLE OF THE ARTICLES Contained in this TREATISE I. THe Introduction Page 3 II. That Religious Worship is to be paid to God only Page 6 III. Of the Invocation of Saints Page 9 IV. Of Images and Relicks Page 13 V. Of Justification Page 19 VI. Of Merits Page 21 VII Of Satisfactions Purgatory and Indulgences Page 24 PART II. VIII Of the Sacraments in general Page 33 IX Of Baptism Page 35 X. Of Confirmation Page 39 XI Of Penance and Confession Page 40 XII Of Extream Vnction Page 44 XIII Of Marriage Page 45 XIV Of Holy Orders Page 46 XV. Of the Eucharist and first of the Explication of those words This is my Body Page 47 XVI Do this in remembrance of Me. Page 54 XVII The Doctrine of the Church of England concerning this holy Sacrament 55 XVIII Of Transubstantiation and of the Adoration of the Host. 58 XIX Of the Sacrifice of the Mass 62 XX. Of the Epistle to the Hebrews 67 XXI Reflections upon the foregoing Doctrine 69 XXII Of communicating under one kind 72 PART III. XXIII Of the Word written and unwritten 75 XXIV Of the Authority of the Church 76 XXV The Opinion of the Church of England as to the Authority of the Church 80 XXVI The Authority of the holy See and of Episcopacy 81 XXVII The Close 82 ERRATA PReface Page xxix the number of the Sections mistaken to the â—nd P. xxxii l. 15. dele 5 Ed. p. 210. P. xxxiv l. 28. r. Mechlin ib. l. 33. r. Inter-nonce Book P. 13. l. 10. r. Practise P. 20. l. 5. r. works it in us P. 22. in the Margin l. 9. del 16. P. 23. the same P. 24. Marg. del p. 66. P. 34. l. 18. r. Vertue P. 36. l. 13. r. Mr. de Meaux l. 14. Charity P. 40. l. 13. r. Vertue P. 69. Marg. ib. r. ver 24. AN EXPOSITION OF THE Doctrine of the Church of England In the several Articles expounded by Monsieur de MEAUX I. The Introduction IT has always been esteemed more reasonable to doubt of Principles first and then to deny the Conclusions that are drawn from them than having granted the Foundation afterwards to cavil at the clear and necessary Deductions from it To profess that Religious Worship is due to God only and at the same time to say that we ought to adore Men and Women Crosses and Images and all that infinite variety of Follies which these latter Ages have set forth under the pious name of Relicks To declare That we are saved only by Christ's Merits and yet still continue to teach us that we ought to set up our own In a
the greatest glory of S. Athanasius that he stood up alone against the whole World in defence of Christs Divinity when the Pope the Councils the whole Church fell away Conclude we therefore that God who has made us and knows what is best and most proper for us as he has subjected us to the Government and Direction of his Church for our Peace and Welfare so to secure our Faith he has given us his Holy Word to be the last resort the final infallible Rule by which both we and the Church its self must be directed And from this therefore if any one shall endeavour to turn us aside or preach any other Gospel unto us than what we have therein received Gal. 1.8 9. tho he were an Apostle from the Grave or even an Angel from Heaven let him be Anathema ARTICLE XXVI The Opinion of the Church of England as to the Authority of the Church FOR the two last Articles of Monsieur de Meaux's Exposition I might very well have pass'd them by The Church of England whose Doctrine I pretend to explain is but very little concerned in them Therefore only in a word That we allow the Church a just Authority in matters of Faith both the declaration of our xxth Article and the subscription we make to the whole 39 shew Such a deference we allow to her decisions that we make them our directions what Doctrine we may or may not publickly maintain and teach in her Communion In effect we shew whatever Submission we can to her Authority without violating that of God declared to us in his Holy Scriptures Whatsoever deference we allow to a National Church or Council the same we think in a much greater degree due to a General And whensoever such a one which we much desire shall be freely and lawfully assembled to determine the Differences of the Catholick Church none shall be more ready both to assist in it and submit to it ARTICLE XXVII Of the Authority of the Holy See and of Episcopacy FOR the Pope's Authority tho' we suppose no good Consequence can be drawn from that Primacy we are content to allow St. Peter among the Apostles for that exorbitant Power which has of late been pretended to Yet when other Differences shall be agreed and the true Bounds set to his Pretences we shall be content to yield him whatsoever Authority the Ancient Councils of the Primitive Church have acknowledged and the Holy Fathers have always taught the faithful to give him This Monsieur de Meaux ought to be contented with who himself absolves us from yielding to those pretences that have indeed very justly rendred this Authority not only odious but intolerable to the World Let those who are Enemies to Episcopacy and who deny any due respect to the Chair of St. Peter answer for themselves The Church of England has both retain'd the one and will be ready according to what we have before declared when ever it shall be requisite to acknowledge the other THE CLOSE SUCH is the Doctrine of the Church of England in those points which Monsieur de Meaux has thought fit to propose as the principal matters in debate betwixt us May it please the unprejudiced Papist to say what he can find in All these to warrant that bitter and unchristian hatred they have conceived against us To cut us off as much as in them lies from the Communion of Christs Church on Earth and to deny us all part of his promises in Heaven We firmly believe the Holy Scriptures and whatsoever they teach or command we receive and submit to as to the Word of God We embrace all the ancient Creeds and in them all that Faith which the Primitive Christians supposed and which the Religious Emperors by their Advice decreed should be sufficient to intitle us to the common name of Catholicks What new Donatists Gentlemen are you to presume to exclude us from this Character And may we not justly demand of you what S. Augustin once did of them on the same occasion You say that Christ is Heir of no Lands De unitate Eclesia c. 6. but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel out of the Sacred Epistles Read it to us and we will believe We accept the Tradition of Primitive Antiquity truly such with a Veneration we dare confidently say greater than your selves We have shew'd that the very grounds of our difference is that you require us to believe and practise such things as the Holy Scripture forbids us and the Primitive Church never knew You command us to worship Images See Article 4. Is it not evident that both the Law and the Gospel have forbid it and is it not confess'd that both the Apostles and their Successors abhorred the very name You command us to communicate only under one kind That is in our Opinion nay it is in yours too Article 23. to contradict the Institution of our Blessed Saviour and the practice of the very Roman Church for above a Thousand years and of all other Christians to this very day You command us to pray to Saints and Angels Article 3. Col. 2. v. 18. Rev. 19.10 22.9 Does not St. Paul forbid it Did not the holy Angel twice refuse it from St. John And many Centuries pass without One probable Instance of any that did it You command us under pain of your Anathema to believe Transubstantiation Article 19. Do you your selves understand what you mean by it Is it any where written Was it ever mention'd for above a Thousand years You bid us Adore the Holy Sacrament Article 19. Has Christ prescribed it Have his holy Apostles written it Did not here also above a Thousand years pass before any one attempted it You require us to believe the blessed Eucharist to be a true and real Propitiatory Sacrifice for the sins and satisfactions both of the Dead and of the Living Article 20. Have ye any probable proof of it Are ye yet or ever like to be agreed among your selves about it Do not your own principles evidently shew the contrary Men and Brethren Consider we conjure you these things And if you please consider us too what we are and what our Manners and Conversation among you has been Believe us at least that we have no other End but Truth in these Enquiries No other Interest but to save our souls and go the surest and directest way to Heaven The Proofs we offer they are not vain Conjectures they are clear we think convincing Arguments And though the design of this little Treatise has been rather to shew you what our Doctrine is than to give a just account of those Reasons that detain us in it Yet perhaps even in this there may be somewhat to shew that we do not altogether build in the Air but deserve certainly to have our Articles and our Canons both better
thanks for it and by faith and repentance apply to our selves the Merits of it Thus whilst we receive these Holy signs which he has instituted for our Memorial we need no real descent of the Son of God from Heaven no new Crucifying of the Lord of Glory to raise in our Souls those just resentments we ought to have of so excellent a Blessing But as a Child cannot but recollect the kindness and affection of a dear Father as often as he beholds the Monument where his dead Body lies interred So we much more cannot chuse but excite our Love to our blessed Redeemer as often as we see before our eyes these Sacred Elements under which he is vailed Nor is it necessary for this that this Mystick Tomb as Monsieur de Meaux phrases it should any more be changed into the very real Body of our Saviour to raise this remembrance than that natural One into the dead Corps of the Father to recall the tender Affections of his Child at the sight of it In a word As we will not now move any Argument from the nature of this remembrance to oppose that substantial change which we have before combated on more solid grounds so we suppose muchless ought Monsieur de Meaux from the sole opinion of that more lively remembrance which he imagines the actual eating of the very Flesh of Christ would raise in us then only to do it in a figure to conclude him to be substantially there It is evident that they who believe this change and they who believe it not receive him entirely alike They see and taste and feel the same thing It is Faith alone which works in both and makes the one believing him spiritually present to remember him with the same love to honour him with the same reverence and embrace him with the same hope as the other who thinks him corporeally but yet after a manner altogether unperceivable contain'd under the sacred Elements that are presented to him ARTICLE XVIII The Doctrine of the Church of England concerning this Holy Sacrament THe sum of our belief as to the nature of this holy Sacrament is this We esteem it designed by Christ to be a perpetual memorial of his suffering for us That so often as we eat of this Bread and Drink of this Cup 1 Cor. 11.26 we might shew forth the Lords Death till his coming We believe that in this Communion we do not only remember but effectually partake our Blessed Saviour and all the benefits of his passion Insomuch that to such as rightly See our 28. Article and worthily and with Faith receive the same the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ and likewise the Cup of the blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ For the manner of this Participation We believe that the Body and Blood of Christ See the same Article are given taken and eaten in this Supper only after a heavenly and spiritual manner and that the means whereby this is done is Faith We believe that the wicked and such as are void of Faith The same Article tho they may visibly and carnally press with their teeth as St. Augustin saith the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ yet are no way partakers of Christ but rather as St. Paul tells us 1 Cor. 11. eat and drink their own damnation not discerning the Lords body In a word The same Article We believe that Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christs Body and Blood can never be proved by Holy Scripture but is repugnant thereunto contrary to the intention of our Blessed Saviour and to the nature of this Holy Sacrament and has given cause to many great abuses As in the following Article we shall have occasion more particularly to shew This is our Faith of this holy Eucharist And in this Faith we are confirmed not only by those unanswerable proofs which our Writers have given and some of which we have before touch'd upon but also from those irreconcilable differences which this Error has thrown the Writers of the Church of Rome into In effect we find every party exposing the falseness and impossibility of every ones Hypothesis but his own Their greatest men confess the uncertainty of their own proofs That there is not in Scripture any formal proof of Transubstantiation So ‖ Lomb. 4. sent dist 10. Lombard * Scotus 4. dist 2. q. 11. Scotus and many others That there is not any that without the declaration of the Church would be able to evince it * Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 3. c. 13. ss secundo dicit Where be cites many others of the same Opinion So Cardinal Bellarmine himself confesses That had not the Church declared her self for the proper sense of the words the other might with as good warrant have been received So says ⸫ In 3. D. Th. q. 75. art 1. Cardinal Cajetan That if the words of Consecration refer to the Bread which is changed by them then they must be taken in our sense So the generality of that Communion confess In a word ‖ See Scotus cited by Bellar. l. 3. de Euch. c. 23. ss Unum tamen So also Gabriel cited by Suarez T. 3. disp 50. sect 1. So Lombard l. 4. sent dist 11. lit A. That this Doctrine was no matter of Faith till the Council of Lateran 1200 year after Christ and that had not that and the Council of Tent since interposed it would not have been so to this very day And here who can chuse but admire the Power of Truth That after so many Outcries against us for Opposing a Doctrine which they would make the World believe it is as clear as if it were written with a Ray of the Sun after so many Anathema's against us for Hereticks and Schismaticks and ten thousand repetitions of their great Scriptum est This is my Body they should at last be forced to confess That they are not cannot nor are ever like to be agreed in the Explication of them That they contain nothing in them necessary to prove this change That had not the Church declared its self for the Litteral meaning the Figurative interpretation might with as good Reason have been received That for 1200 years this Doctrine was no matter of Faith and but for the Council of Lateran had not been then In short that if the words of Institution refer to the Bread then are we doubtless in the right and if they do not how will they ever prove the change which they pretend is made of the Bread into the Body of Christ by them Certainly confessions such as these ought to awake every Papist careful of his own Salvation into an unprejudiced Examination at least of these things To consider what Foundation there really is for this Doctrine and what desperate Consequences unknown to Antiquity contrary to the formal words
of Christ in the Holy Eucharist is the Sacrifice of the Mass In which we ought to proceed with all the Caution such a Point requires as both makes up the chiefest part of the Popish Worship and is justly esteem'd one of the greatest and most dangerous Errors that offends us Monsieur de Meaux has represented it to us with so much tenderness that except perhaps it be his Foundation of the Corporeal Presence on which he builds and his Consequence that this Service is a true and real Propitiatory Sacrifice which his manner of expounding it we are perswaded will never bear there is little in it besides but what we could readily assent to We distinguish the two Acts which he mentions from one another By the Consecration we apply the Elements before common to a Sacred use by the Manducation we fulfil our Saviour's Command We take and eat and Do this in remembrance of Him This Consecration being separately made of his Body broken his Blood spilt for our Redemption we suppose represents to us our Blessed Lord in the figure of his Death which these holy Symbols were instituted to continue the memory of And whilst thus with Faith we represent to God the Death of his Son for the pardon of our sins we are perswaded that we incline his Mercy the more readily to forgive them We do not therefore doubt but that this presenting to God Almighty the Sacrifice of our Blessed Lord is a most effectual manner of applying his Merits to us Were this all the Church of Rome meant by her Propitiatory Sacrifice there is not certainly any Protestant that would oppose her in it Where is that Christian that does not by Faith unite himself to his Saviour in this holy Communion That does not present him to God as his only Sacrifice and Propitiation That does not protest that he has nothing to offer him but Jesus Christ and the Merits of his Death That consecrates not all his prayers by this Divine Offering and whilst he thus presents to God the Sacrifice ofhis Son does not learn thereby to present also himself a lively Sacrifice holy and acceptable in his sight This is no doubt a Sacrifice worthy a Christian infinitely exceeding all the Sacrifices of the Law Where the Knife is the Word the Blood shed not but in a figure nor is there any Death but in Representation A Sacrifice so far from taking us off from that of the Cross that it unites us the more closely to it represents it to us and derives all its Vertue and Efficacy from it This is if any other truly The Doctrine of the Catholick Church and such as the Church of England has never refused and except it be our doubt of the Corporeal Presence Monsieur de Meaux had certainly reason to expect that there was nothing in this we could justly except against But now that all this is sufficient to prove the Mass to be a True and Proper Sacrifice Concil Trident. Sess 22. truly and properly propitiatory for the sins and punishments the satisfactions and necessities of the dead and the living and that to offer this true and proper Sacrifice our Saviour Christ instituted a true and proper Priesthood when he said Do this in Remembrance of Me This is what we cannot yet understand and what we think we ought not ever to allow of We know indeed that the Primitive Church called the holy Eucharist a Sacrifice in that large extent of the Expression whereby the holy Scripture stiles every religious performance our Prayers our Thanksgivings our Vertues our very Selves Sacrifices to God And accordingly in our own Liturgy we do without all scruple do the same But when it comes to be set in Opposition to a Sacrament and to be considered in the true and proper signification of the Word we must with all Antiquity needs profess That we neither have nor can we after that of Christ admit of any Hence it is that our Church following the Doctrine of the Holy Apostles and Primitive Christians teaches See Article 31. That the Offering of Christ once made is that proper Redemption Propitiation and Satisfaction for all the sins of the whole World and that there is no other Satisfaction for sin but that alone That the Application of Christs Death by Faith in the Holy Eucharist is made to all such as with true Repentance receive the same we undoubtedly believe We are perswaded that by our Prayers which in this holy Solemnity we never fail to offer for the wants and necessities the pardon and forgiveness not of our selves only but of all Mankind of those who have not yet known the Faith of Christ or that knowing it have prevaricated from the right way we incline Gods Mercy to become propitious unto them Only we deny that by this holy Eucharist as by a true and proper Propitiatory Sacrifice we can appease Gods Wrath for the sins of the whole World can fulfil the satisfactions and supply the necessities of other men of the dead and the living of them that are absent and partake not of it This we attribute to the Sacrifice of the Cross only and are perswaded that it cannot without derogation to the Merits of that most absolute Redemption which was there purchased for us be applied to any other When we examine the first Institution of this holy Communion we cannot perceive either in the words or action of our Blessed Saviour any Sacrifical Act or Expression He took bread and brake it and gave it to his Disciples saying Take Eat This is my Body which is given for you Do this in Remembrance of Me. Monsieur de Meaux seems to imply that the Consecration made it a Sacrifice But this Vasquez tells us that others think to be only a preparation to it In. 3. D. Th. disp 222. c. 1. because till after the Consecration Christ is not there and by Consequence cannot be offered The Council of Trent seems to refer it to the Oblation This Bellarmine opposes L. 1. de Miss c. 27. because neither Christ nor his Apostles used any Bellarmine is positive that either Christ sacrificed in Eating Ibid. or there is no other action in which he can be said to have done it Yet even this the greatest part of that Communion reject because Eating is not Offering and in the Ordination where the Priest receives the power of Sacrificing not any mention is made of it In Effect Reason will tell us That this is to partake of the Offering not to offer it and Monsieur de Meaux himself accordingly distinguishes the Two Acts of Consecration and Manducation from one another and refers the Sacrifice wholly to the former If we consider the Nature of a true and proper Sacrifice they universally agree that these Four Things are necessarily required to it 1. That what is Offered be something that is Visible 2. That of prophane which it was before it be now made sacred 3. That
his Apostles or to have been practised ordinarily and directly by the most Primitive Christians Or lastly but to be no way injurious to the excellent Goodness of that Intercessor who has so kindly invited and even conjured us to come to Him in all our needs Then will we not fail to joyn our Ora pro Nobis with them But till then we must beg leave to conclude with a Charity and Moderation which we suppose they themselves cannot but approve in us That it is a fond thing vainly invented and grounded upon no warrant of Holy Scripture but rather indeed contrary thereunto And what we have now said of their Prayers we must in the next place apply to their Sacrifices too To mention the Names of the Holy Saints departed in the Communion this we look upon to be a Practice as innocent as 't is ancient So far are we from condemning it in them that we practise it our selves We name them at our Altars we give God thanks for their Excellencies and pray to him for Grace to follow their Examples But as we allow thus much to their Memories so we cannot but condemn that Practice which Monsieur de Meaux seems to have omitted tho yet the chief thing that offends us that they recommend the Offerings which they make to God through the Merits of their Saints which they commemorate and desire that by their Merits they may become available to the Churches needs As if Christ himself whom they suppose to be the Sacrifice needed the Assistance of St. Bathildis or Potentiana to recommend him to his Father Or that the Merits of an Offering which they tell us is the very same with that of the Cross should desire the joynt Deserts of a St. Martin to obtain our Forgiveness They who shall consider these things as they ought will we doubt not confess that we have some reason to complain both that they derogate herein from Christ's Merits and attribute to their Saints more than they ought to do If this Paactice be reformed our Complaint as to this point ceaseth If it be not in vain does Monsieur de Meaux endeavour to perswade us that they only name their Saints to give God thanks for their Excellencies whilst their publick Practice avows that they desire both the pardon of their Sins and even the acceptance of their very Sacrifices themselves by their Mediation ARTICLE IV. Of Images and Relicks VVHat the Opinion of the Church of England is concerning the Worship of Images and Relicks will need no long Declaration to shew they being joyn'd by her in the same Article with that of the Invocation of Saints before-mentioned Artic. XXII and by consequence submitted by her to the same Censure But then as we before complained that both the Practice of their Church in the publick Liturgies of it and the approved Doctrine of their most reputed Writers should so far contradict what Monsieur de Meaux would have us think is their only design in that Service so we cannot but repeat the same Complaints in this That if all the use their Church would have made of Images and Relicks be only to excite the more lively in their Minds the remembrance of the Originals not only the People should be suffered to fall into such gross Mistakes as 't is undeniably evident they do in their Worship of them but even their Teachers be permitted without any Reproof to confirm them in their Errors Has St. Thomas and his Followers nay and even their Pontifical it self ever yet been censured by them for maintaining in plain terms that the Image of the Cross ought to be worshipped with the same Worship as that Saviour who suffered on it Have the Jesuits been condemned for teaching Men to swear by it Does not their whole Church upon Good-friday yet address her self to it in these very dangerous words Behold the Wood of the Cross Come let us adore it And do not their Actions agree with their Expressions and the whole Solemnity of that day's Service plainly shew that they do adore it in the utmost propriety of the Phrase Does she not pray to it that in this time of the Passion it would strengthen the Righteous and give Pardon to the Guilty Is the Hymn for the day of the Invention corrected wherein they profess that the Cross heals their Sicknesses ties up the Devil and gives them Newness of Life and thereupon desire it to save its Assembly gathered together in its honour Is the manner of consecrating them changed in which they intreat God to bless the Image of the Cross which they there sanctify that it may be for the establishment of their Faith an increase of their good Works the Redemption of their Souls and their Protection against the cruel Darts of the Enemy That Christ would embrace this Cross over which they pray as he did that upon which he suffer'd That as by that he delivered the whole World from its Guilt so by the Merits of this they who dedicate it may receive remission of their Sins In a word that as many as bow down before it may find health both of their Souls and Bodies by it And is all this in good earnest no more than to excite more lively in our minds the remembrance of Him that loved us and delivered himself to the Death for us and to testifie by some outward marks our acknowledgment of that favour by humbling our selves in presence of the Cross to declare thereby our submission to Him that was crucified Is not this rather if not absolutely to fall into yet certainly too nearly to approach to that which Monsieur de Meaux himself confesses to be Idolatry viz. to trust in the Images as if there were some divinity or virtue joyned to them and for which they not only shew all imaginable marks of outward Worship by Kissings Prostrations and the like Ceremonies but make as formal Addresses to them and that in the publick Service of the Church as to God himself How this allow'd practice can be reconciled with the prohibition of the Council of Trent Not to believe any Divinity or Virtue tied to their Images for which they ought to be adored nor to demand any Grace of them nor place any Trust or Confidence in them Monsieur de Meaux may please to expound to us In the mean time as we are so far from condemning the making of all sorts of Images that we think it not any Crime to have the Histories of the Gospel carved or painted in our very Churches which the Walls and Windows of several of them do declare As we publickly use the sign of the Cross in one of our very Sacraments and censure no Man for practising it only without Superstition on any other occasion so we cannot but avow the Scandal that is given us by those Doctrines and Practices before mentioned and that we think that Worship justly to be abolished which the Primitive Church abhorred and which at this
strictly required and more duly observed than it is The Canons of our Church do perhaps require as much as the Primitive Christians themselves did and it is more the decay of Piety in the People than any want of Care in her that they are not as well and regularly Practised We do not believe Penance to be a Sacrament after the same manner that Baptism and the Holy Eucharist are because neither do we find any Divine Command for it nor is there any Sign in it established by Christ to which his Grace is annexed We suppose that if the Ancient Church had esteemed it any thing more than a part of Christian Discipline they would not have presumed to make such changes in it as in the several Ages it is evident they did The Primitive Christians interpreting those places of ‡ Mat. 18.18 John 20.23 St. Matthew and St. John which Monsieur de Meaux mentions of publick Discipline and to which we suppose with them they principally at least if not only refer at first Practised no other For private faults they exhorted their Penitents to Confess them to God and unless some particular Circumstances required the Communication of them to the Priest plainly signified that that Confession was not only in its self sufficient but in effect was more agreeable to Holy Scripture than any other If the Conscience indeed were too much burdened by some Great fault or that the Crime committed was notoriously Scandalous then they advised a Confession to the Priest too But this was not to every Priest nor for him just to hear the Confession and then without more ado to say I absolve thee They prescribed in every Church some Wise Physician of the Soul on purpose for this great Charge that might pray with the Penitent might direct him what to do to obtain Gods favour might assist him in it and finally after a long Experience and a severe Judgment give him Absolution This was the Practise of the Eastern Church till upon occasion of a certain scandal Nectarius first began to weaken it in his Church at Constantinople and St. J. Chrysostome his Successor seconded him in it They reduced the Practise to what it had been in the Beginning that open and scandalous Sins should be openly punished by the publick Discipline of the Church and the private be Confessed only to God Almighty Yet still the publick Confession remained in the Practise of the Western Church Pope Leo I. to take away the occasions of Fear and Shame that kept many from the exercise of it first ordered that it should be sufficient to Confess to God and the Priest only which is the first plausible Pretence offered by them for Auricular Confession Thus this Practise now set up for a Sacrament instituted by our Saviour and absolutely necessary to obtain God's pardon first began But the performance of it was yet left to every Mans liberty About 1215 Years after Christ the Council of Lateran first Commanded it to be of necessary observance But we do not find that till the Council of Trent in the last Age it was ever required to be received absolutely as a Sacrament of Divine Institution and necessary to Salvation This short View of the Practise of Antiquity in this point may be sufficient to shew that unless it were the publick power of the Church to censure open and scandalous Offenders which was the Key of Discipline our Blessed Saviour left to it for the rest several Churches and Ages had their several Practises They advised private Confession as upon many accounts which Monsieur de Meaux Remarks and which we willingly allow very useful to the Penitent but it was not for above a 1000 Years ever looked upon as absolutely necessary nor by Consequence as Sacramental The Church of England refuses no sort of Confession either publick or private which may be any way necessary to the quieting of mens Consciences or to the exercising of that Power of binding and loosing which our Saviour Christ has left to his Church We have our Penitential Canons for publick Offenders We exhort men if they have any the least doubt or scruple nay sometimes tho they have none but especially before they receive the Holy Sacrament to Confess their sins We propose to them the benefit not only of Ghostly Advice how to manage their Repentance but the great comfort of Absolution too as soon as they shall have compleated it Our form of Absolution after the manner of the Eastern Church at this day and of the Universal Church for above 1200 Years is Declarative rather than Absolute Whilst we are unable to search the Hearts of men and thereby infallibly to discern the sincerely contrite from those that are not we think it Rashness to pronounce a definitive Sentence in God's Name which we cannot be sure that God will always confirm When we visit our Sick we never fail to exhort them to make a special Confession of their sins to him that Ministers to them And when they have done it the Absolution is so full that the Church of Rome its self could not desire to add any thing to it For the rest We think it an unnecessary Rack to mens Consciences to oblige them where there is no scruple to reveal to their Confessor every the most secret fault even of Wish or Desire which the Church of Rome exacts Nor dare we pronounce this Discipline Sacramental and necessary to Salvation so that a contrite Sinner who has made his Confession to God Almighty shall not receive a Pardon unless he repeat it to the Priest too This we must beg leave with assurance to say is directly contrary to the Tradition of the Church and to many plain and undoubted places of Holy Scripture And if this be all our Reformation be guilty of That we advise not that which may Torment and Distract but is no way apt to settle mens Consciences nor require that as indispensably necessary to Salvation which we find no where commanded by God as such we assure Monsieur de Meaux we see no cause at all either to regret the Loss or to be ashamed of the Change ARTICLE XIII Of Extreme Vnction OF all those pretended Sacraments of the Roman Church that have no foundation in holy Scripture this seems to stand the fairest for it Here is both an outward and visible Sign and an inward and spiritual Grace tied to it Insomuch that Monsieur de Meaux himself who never attempted to say any thing of it in the two foregoing Instances yet fails not to put us in mind of it in this To interpret rightly that place of St. 1 James 5.6 14.13 James which is alledged to prove it we must remark that anointing with Oyl was one of those Ceremonies used by the Apostles in working their miraculous Cures Mark 6.13 They cast out devils says the Evangelist and anointed many sick persons with Oyl and cured them Sometimes they used only Imposition of hands
of Holy Scripture and without Gods infinite Mercy absolutely destructive of their eternal Salvation have been built upon it As we hope that these declarations have been permitted by God to fall from the greatest and most Esteemed of their Church not only to confirm us in our Faith but also to prepare the way for their return to that Catholick truth from which they have so long erred so we doubt not by Gods blessing but that they will in time attain to it when being sensible of that Tyrannical usurpation that has been made over their Consciences and resolved to use that Knowledg God has given them to search the Scriptures and examine their Faith and not servily follow every Guide that will but pretend to lead them They shall seriously and indifferently weigh all these things and find that therefore only they have thought us in darkness because their own Eyes were shut that they might not discern the light ARTICLE XIX Of Transubstantiation and of the Adoration of the Host WHat remains of this Subject of the Holy Eucharist being wholly consequent upon the foregoing mistaken interpretation of the Words of our Blessed Saviour before considered we should have passed them over as things we have in effect already declared that the Church of England receives not but that we are perswaded the particular consideration of them will yet more fully shew the falsness of that Foundation upon which they are built Monsieur de Meaux in proving the Corporeal presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist from the Words of institution This is my Body had something that at least seemed to favour his mistake but to produce them here for Transubstantiation that is not only to argue the presence of Christ's substance but also the change of the substance of the Bread and Wine into it he has not the least appearance of the Text for him Indeed were there no other way for Christ to be present in the Eucharist but only by this change it might then be allowed that having as he imagines proved the one he had in effect established the other But the number of those who interpret the Words in like manner according to the Letter yet are as great enemies as our selves to this change and suppose Christs Body to be present by a Vnion of it to the Bread rather then by a Conversion of the Bread into it not only shews that there is no necessary consequence at all between the real presence and Transubstantiation but that there is another manner of Christs presence both more agreeable to Holy Scripture than that which they advance and that takes off infinite difficulties which their Transubstantiation involves them in That the Substance of the Sacred Figures remains in this Sacrament after the Consecration those clear expressions of St. Paul wherein he so often calls them * 1 Cor. 10.16 c. 11.26 Bread and Wine after it seem to us plainly to shew †Acts 2.46 c. To break Bread the Holy Scripture tells us was the usual Phrase all the time of the Apostles for receiving the Holy Communion and which the Blessed Spirit himself dictated These passages Monsieur de Meaux certainly ought not to put off with a Figurative meaning unless he can give us some good reason why he follows the High road of the Literal interpretation in the one to establish the Substance of Christs Body in the Sacrament and forsakes it in the other to take away the Presence of the Bread from it For the Adoration of the Host The Church of England consequently to her Principles of the Bread and Wine 's remaining in their natural substances See her Rubrick at the end of the Communion Office professes that she thinks it to be Idolatry and to be abhorred of all faithful Christians Monsieur de Meaux in Conformity to theirs tells us That the presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist ought to carry all such as believe it without all scruple to the Adoration of it This therefore being taken as a Principle acknowledged by them it may not be amiss to observe that since it is certain that neither Christ nor his Apostles appointed or practised nor the Church for above 1000 Years required or taught any Adoration of this Holy Sacrament neither could they according to Monsieur de Meaux's Principles have believed the Corporeal Presence of our Blessed Saviour in it Is there any of the Evangelists that mentions it They all tell us Take Eat Do this in remembrance of me But does any one add This is my Body fall down and Worship it When St. Paul reproved the Corinthians for violating this Holy Sacrament 1 Cor. 11.20 c. is it possible he could have omitted so obvious a Remark and so much to his purpose That in profaning this Holy Sacrament they were not only guilty of the Body and Bloud of Christ which it was instituted to represent to us but even directly affronted their Blessed Master corporally present there and whom instead of profaning they ought as they had been taught to Adore in it With what simplicity do the Ancient Fathers speak of this Communion in all their Writings The Elevation of the Sacred Symbols was not heard of till the Seventh Century and then used only to represent the lifting up of Christ upon the Cross not to expose it to the People to adore it The Bell the Feast of the St. Sacrament the Pomp of carrying it through the Streets all the other Circumstances of this Worship are inventions of yesterday The exposing of it upon the Altar to make their Prayers before it their Addresses to it in times and cases of Necessity their performing the chiefest acts of Religion in its presence never mentioned in Antiquity Nay instead of this Worship they did many things utterly inconsistent with it They disputed with the Heathens for worshipping Gods their own Hands had made Was it ever objected to them that they themselves did the same Worship a Deity whose substance they first formed and then spoke it into a God They burnt in some Churches what remained of the Holy Sacrament They permitted the People to carry it home that had Communicated They sent it abroad by Sea by Land without any the least regard that we can find had to its Worship They buried it with their Dead they made Plaisters of the Bread they mix'd the Wine with their Ink. These certainly were no instances of Adoration Nor can we ever suppose that they who did such things as these ever believed that it was the very Body and Bloud of their dear Master whom they so much loved and whom doubtless they would have been as ready to have worshipped had they so believed as both Monsieur de Meaux supposes they ought to have been and as we see others for the rest no more pious than those Primitive Christians were now to do it ARTICLE XX. Of the Sacrifice of the Mass A Third Consequence of the Corporeal Presence
not only a scandal but a horrour for their Religion Monsieur de Meaux had certainly reason to say that this is the Chiefest and most important of all our controvesies and wherein we are at the farthest distance from one another And would to God they had only offended us by these Errours and had not exposed our common Name to the reproach of the very Heathen who have been confirmed by them in their Idolatry and thought it more rational to adore a Stock or a Stone than with the Christians to Worship this moment what they Eat the very next But Monsieur de Meaux thinks we have no reason to appear so obstinate against them who declare our selves so favourably towards the Lutherans who yet are involved in the same Error T is true we believe the Lutherans mistaken in their Literal interpretation of this Holy Sacrament But we are perswaded they are infinitely less so and less dangerously than the Papists They confess that there is no change made in the Substance of the Sacred Elements They believe that the Bread and Wine continue in their proper Natures and that Christs Body is present only when he is received They adore not the Holy Eucharist They found no Propitiatory Sacrifices upon it They say no Masses for the sins and satisfactions for the wants and necessities of the Dead and the Living They deny not the Cup to the People their Errour in one word whatsoever it be is only a matter of simple belief has no ill consequences attending it nor do they damn us for not receiving it Let the Church of Rome do all this Let them raze their Anathema's out of their Councils and banish their Masses and Adorations out of their Churches Let them no longer scandalize us with any unwarrantable practices nor desire to enslave our Consciences by submitting them to their own inventions and though we shall still think Transubstantiation to be the greater Error yet will we receive them with the same charity we do the Lutherans We will pray to God to give them a better understanding but will not drive them from our Communion for matters of simple belief and which are only to themselves tho' they be wrong But till then in vain do's Monsieur de Meaux exhort us to consider the ways of providence to bring us to a Union which God knows we could be glad to have on any terms but the loss of truth In the mean time if the Church of Rome in good earnest thinks that as we tolerate the foundation of all these Errours the Corporeal presence in the Lutherans so we ought to bear the consequences of it in them Let them at least do what the Lutherans have done let them embrace our Communion let them leave off to persecute us where they have power and damn us where they have not let them receive us as Brethren not Lord it over us as our Masters This will make us hope that they are sincere when they conjure us to be at peace with them and they may justly then accuse us of partiality if we continue to repute them as Enemies when they will be thus content to love and receive and deal with us as friends ARTICLE XXIII Of Communicating only under one kind THis is the last of those consequences that give us a just detestation for that great Errour of the Corporeal presence on which they are founded It is so plainly contrary to the express command of our Blessed Saviour that we are perswaded it has pleased God to suffer them to fall into it on purpose to correct that vanity whereby they have so proudly aspired to an Opinion of Infallibility That whilst they Lord it over mens Consciences and will not so much as give them leave to ask them a Reason of what they do they might here at last be surprised in an Error which the most vulgar Eye is able to discern The Church of England conformably to all Antiquity declares See our 30th Article That the Cup ought not to be deny'd to the Lay-people forasmuch as both parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs Ordinance and Commandment ought to be ministred to all Christian men alike For indeed Did not he who said of the Bread Take Eat this is my Body say also of the Wine with the same expressness Drink ye all of this for this is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for you for the remission of sins Did not he who commanded them Do this in Remembrance of Me for the Bread even according to their own Construction Take and Consecrate and give to Others as I have done to you command them for the Cup in like manner Do this i. e. consecrate and give it to Others as I have done to you in remembrance of Me We confess That the Grace of God is not tied to the outward signs Yet we think withal that without taking the outward and visible signs we can have no pretence to the inward and spiritual Grace of that holy Sacrament which deriving all its Effect from our Saviour's Promise we can have no security that it shall have any good one to them who do not receive it according to his Institution Had Christ esteemed it sufficient for us to receive the Blood in the body we suppose he would not have consecrated the Cup afterwards But if it was our Saviour's pleasure that to commemorate the more lively his Passion we should take his Blood as it was spilt for our Redemption separate from his Body we think it an unwarrantable presumption for us to make our selves wiser than God and say that it is sufficient to participate of Both in One. Monsieur de Meaux has received so full an Answer upon this point from the Reply made to his Treatise written purposely on this Subject that he will have no cause to complain of us for not repeating here what has been so fully and so successfully handled there Only as to that Negligence of these latter Ages which he is pleased to alledge as the reason of this change We must needs say that God be thanked we cannot observe any such Negligence of this holy Communion in our Churches where yet this holy Sacrament is administred to as large Congregations and with as great frequency as any where among Them Both our Priests and the People give and receive it with that Care and Reverence that we find as little grounds for any such pretence as there is reason in it were it never so true to justifie so great and unwarrantable a Change PART III. OF THE CHURCH ARTICLE XXIV Of the Word Written and Unwritten OUR Blessed Saviour having founded his Church upon the Word which He preached we confess that the unwritten Word as to that Gospel which he preached was the first Rule of Christians But God Almighty foreseeing how liable such a Rule must have been to infinite Inconveniencies thought fit to have that Word which was first spoken by Mouth afterwards
consigned to Writing By which means the Word written and unwritten were not Two different Rules but as to all necessary matters of Faith one and the same And the unwritten Word so far from losing its Authority that it was indeed the more firmly Establish'd by being thus delivered to us by the holy Apostles and Evangelists We receive with the same Veneration whatsoever comes from the Apostles whether by Scripture or Tradition provided that we can be assured that it comes from them And if it can be made appear that any Tradition which the Written Word contains not has been received by All Churches and in All Ages we are ready to embrace it as coming from the Apostles Monsieur de Meaux therefore ought not to charge us as Enemies to Tradition or obstinate to receive what is so delivered Our Church rejects not Tradition but only those things which they pretend to have received by it But which we suppose to be so far from being the Doctrine of the Apostles or of All Churches in All Ages that we are perswaded they are many of them directly contrary to the Written Word which is by Themselves confessed to be the Apostles Doctrine and which the best and purest Ages of the Church adhered to ARTICLE XXV Of the Churches Authority THE Church i. e. The Vniversal Church in All Ages having been Establish'd by God the Guardian of the Holy Scriptures and of Tradition we receive from her the Canonical Books of Scripture It is upon this Authority that we receive principally the Song of Solomon as Canonical and reject other Books as Apochryphal which we might perhaps with as much readiness otherwise receive By this Authority we reverence these Books even before by our own reading of them we perceive the Spirit of God in them And when by our reading them we find all things conformable to so Excellent a Spirit we are yet more confirmed in the belief and reverence we before had of them This Authority therefore we freely allow the Church that by her hands in the succession of the several Ages we have received the Holy Scriptures And if as universal and uncontroverted a Tradition had descended for the Interpretation of the Scriptures as for the receiving of them we should have been as ready to accept of that too Such a declaration of the sense of Holy Scripture as had been received by all Churches and in all Ages the Church of England would never refuse But then as we profess not to receive the Scriptures themselves only or perhaps principally upon the Authority of the Roman Church which has in all Ages made up but a part and that not always the greatest neither of this Tradition so neither can we think it reasonable to receive the sense of them only from her though she profess never so much to invent nothing of her self but only to declare the Divine Revelation made to her by the Holy Ghost which she supposes has been given to her for her direction Whilst we are perswaded that neither has any Promise at all been made to any particular Church of such an infallible direction and have such good cause to believe that this particular Church too often instead of the divine Revelations declares only her own Inventions When the dispute arose about the Ceremonies of the Law Acts 15. the Apostles assembled at Jerusalem for the determination of it When any Doubts arise in the Church now we always esteem it the best Method to decide them after the same manner That the Church has Authority not only in matters of Order and Discipline but even of Faith too we never deny'd But that therefore any Church so assembled can with the same Authority say now as the Apostles did then Acts 15.28 It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs This we think not only an unwarrantable presumption for which there is not any sufficient ground in Holy Scripture but evidently in its self untrue seeing that many such Councils are by the Papists themselves confessed to have erred Hence it is that we cannot suppose it reasonable to forbid Men the Examination of the Churches Decisions which may err when the Holy Apostles nay our Saviour Christ himself not only permitted but exhorted their Disciples to search the Truth of their Doctrine which was certainly Infallible Yet if the determination be matter of Order or Government as not to Eat of things offered to Idols c. or of plain and undoubted Precept as to abstain from Fornication and the like Here we fail not after the Example of Paul and Silas to declare to the faithful what her decision has been and instead of permitting them to judg of what has been so resolved teach them throughout all places to keep the Ordinances of the Apostles Acts 16.4 Thus is it that we acquiesce in the judgment of the Church and professing in our Creed a Holy Catholick Church we profess to believe not only that there was a Church planted by our Saviour at the beginning that has hitherto been preserved by him and ever shall be to the end of the World but do by consequence undoubtedly believe too that this Vniversal Church is so secured by the Promises of Christ that there shall always be retain'd so much Truth in it the want of which would argue that there could be no such Church We do not fear that ever the Catholick Church should fall into this entire Infidelity But that any particular Church such as that of Rome may not either by Error lose or by other means prevaricate the Faith even in the necessary Points of it this we suppose not to be at all contrary to the Promise of God Almighty and we wish we had not too great cause to fear that the Church of Rome has in effect done both It is not therefore of the Catholick Church truly such that we either fear this infidelity or complain that she hath endeavoured to render her self Mistress of our Faith But for that particular Communion to which Monsieur de Meaux is pleased to give the Name tho she professes never so much to submit her self to the Holy Scripture and to follow the Tradition of the Fathers in all Ages yet whilst she usurps the absolute Interpretation both of Scripture and Fathers and forbids us to examine whether she does it rightly or no we must needs complain that her Protestations are invalid whilst her Actions speak the contrary For that if this be not to render her self Mistress of our Faith we cannot conceive what is In a word tho we suppose the Scriptures are so clearly written that it can very hardly happen that in the necessary Articles of Faith any one man should be found opposite to the whole Church in his Opinion Yet if such a one were evidently convinced that his Belief was founded upon the undoubted Authority of Gods Holy Word so far would it be from any Horror to support it that it is at this day
understood and better answer'd if it may be than they have ever hitherto been For to resume yet once more some few of our differences You think you ought to invocate the Blessed Virgin and the Holy Saints Article 3. Now not to repeat what we have before said of the Vnlawfulness of it This we suppose to be first needless because we know we have a more excellent and powerful Mediator that has commanded us to come to him and next Vncertain because you are not able to tell us how nay not to secure us that by whatever way it be our Prayers do always and certainly come up to them If we are mistaken at least we run no hazard in it We address our selves continually to the Throne of Grace where we are secure that we shall be both heard and answer'd But now should you err consider we beseech you how many Prayers you every day lose and what a dishonour you put upon your divine Mediator And if you please consider too how unjust you are to damn us for not joyning with you in a practice that has so great danger so little assurance and not any advantage You suppose we ought to fall down before your Images Not to do this is to be sure no sin Article 4. you dare not say it is To do it may be and you can never secure us it is not abominable Idolatry odious to God and contrary to that holy Faith into which we have been Baptized You damn us for doubting of the number of your seven Sacraments Has God revealed it to you Article 10. Have the Holy Scriptures defined it Or even Tradition its self delivered it to you If it be true Can you yet escape the charge of rashness and uncharitableness to damn whole Churches for so needless a matter should it be false how will you escape that Anatheema your selves you have then so falsely as well as uncharitably denounced against us You require us to believe that children dying unbaptized are excluded the Grace of Christ for ever Article 10. To what purpose this For what benefit Were it as evident as it is indeed uncertain and we are perswaded false our modesty is safe in deciding nothing the Errour of such among us as believe it not is charitable founded upon the sure Mercies and Goodness of God who never inflicts any punishment where there is no fault and in a word has not any the least ill consequence upon it We take as great care to Baptize our Infants as you can do who most believe it But now if your Opinion should be false What answer will you ever be able to make to God for peremptorily defining what was so uncertain and uncharitable and for damning us only because we dare not venture to cut off those from Christ for whom he died and whom we hope he will in mercy receive to him Lastly Article 23. You deny us the entire Communion you pronounce an Anathema against us because we will not confess that one part alone is sufficient Is it not certain that if we err we have yet both Christs Institution and the practice and Opinion of many Ages to absolve us But have you any thing to excuse you if you are mistaken To take it as we do you confess can have no danger are you sure that to deny it as you do may not be a Sacriledge And what shall I say more For the time would fail me to speak of every one of those other points Monsieur de Meaux mentions much more to add many others and of no less consequence which he has thought fit to pass by In all which we have at least this undenyable advantage over you that besides the clearest Arguments that we are in the right the hazard we run is not very great if we should not be Whereas for you neither is there any tolerable proof of the contrary Errours and an infinite danger should you chance to be mistaken These things as both the Character of the Book we have now examined and the Style of many other your latter most considerable Authors give us cause to hope begin to be no longer totally hid from your Eyes so shall we never cease in all our Prayers to make mention of you that you may be perfectly enlightned to discern and impartially disposed to receive and to embrace the Truth In the mean time whilst both you and we mutually address our selves to the Eternal Truth for his assistance whilst as we ought we implore his mercy that he would give us a right understanding in all things remembring this that we are all but Men and that it is not therefore impossible for either of us to err That it may be strength of Passion or prejudice of Education or even vehemency of affection more than the light of Reason has hitherto kept us in a too fond partiality for our own Opinions Let us at least we beseech you agree in that mutual Charity which alone can secure us amidst all our Errours which will both best dispose Gods mercy to shew us what is right and will best incline our Minds to that sincerity which we all pretend to and I hope all really have to embrace it If we cannot yet agree in all the points of our Religion let us consider that neither are the dearest friends entirely of the same opinion in every thing Let us wait Gods pleasure if it be his will to reveal even this also unto us Philip. 3.15 16. Nevertheless whereunto we have already attain'd let us walk by the same rule let us mind the same thing We believe in the same God we rely on the same Redeemer we embrace the same Creeds we attend the same hopes of an Everlasting Salvation And in all these amidst all our other Differences have at least an entire agreement in what is most necessary and shall we hope to the Honest and sincere among us be sufficient for our Eternal Security Let these things engage us to have the same love too to be more sparing in our Anathema's and more zealous in our Prayers for one another to seek and to maintain the Truth but to do it so as not to violate our Charity In a word whether we write or speak to do both as Men who in a little time expect to be brought before a divine Tribunal where we must render a severe account for all these things and one Word spoken with this excellent spirit to close those Divisions that so long have seperated us shall be preferred to ten thousand Volumes of endless and uncharitable controversies that serve only to widen our breaches and heigthen our Animosities FINIS AN ADVERTISEMENT Of Books lately Printed for Richard Chiswell THE APOLOGY of the Church of England And an Epistle to one Siginor Scipio a Venetian Gentleman concerning the Council of Trent Written both in Latin by the Right Reverend Father in God JOHN JEWEL Lord Bishop of Sarisbury Made English by a Per on of Quality To which is added The Life of the said Bishop Collected and Written by the same Hand 8o. The LETTER writ by the last Assembly General of the Clergy of France to the Protestants inviting them to return to their Communion Together with the Methods proposed by them for their Conviction Translated into English and Examined by GILBEBT BVRNET D. D. 8o. The Life of WILLIAM BEDEL D.D. Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland Together with Certain Letters which passed betwixt him and James Waddesworth a late Pensioner of the Holy Inquisition in Sevil in matter of Religion concerning the General Motives to the Roman Obedience 8o. The Decree made at Rome the second of March 1679. condemning some Opinions of the Jesuits and other Casuists A Discourse concerning the necessity of Reformation with respect to the Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome 4o. A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an Unknown Tongue 4o. A PAPIST not Misrepresented by PROTESTANTS Being a Reply to the Reflections upon the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented 4o.