other Material Question answer'd Whether he may be admitted into our Communion with that which he calls old Popery For if his old Popery be the Pulpit-Popery he sees we reject it and I tell him that whatsoever Church would receive him with the profession of all those scandalous Doctrines the Pulpits charge against us I would be sure to be no member of it Here our Author slinks away from the Case For as soon as ever the Answerer had put the Question he proceeds Will the Representer take us by the hand and present us to his Church if we should come with the Lateran Popery about deposing Soveraigns for Heresie and with the Trent Popery about the Worship of Images as it is understood by Bellarmin or rather by Capisucchi and as it is practised by the Tartuffs of the Roman Church and with all that old Popery which the former Answerer gives an account of Why has not our Author laid the case as it was put to him Why not the old Popery of Lateran Bellarmin and Capisucchi as well as Pulpit-popery And when he has thrown the Cover of Pulpit-Popery over it yet why must he needs add with All the scandalous Doctrines the Pulpits charge For surely if there be such abomination in them any one of them should be sufficient to an honest soul to fly the Communion where the belief or practice of it is requir'd Well let Schoolmen and Cardinals Aquinas and Scotus Bellarmin and Capisucchi let old Missals and Rituals nay let Councils the old one of Lateran and the new one of Trent be call'd in they are but Tartuffs for Exposition and Representation are now the Standard of Romish Doctrine And if the Tartuffism of Deposition of Princes and Adoration of Images and the rest of the once old and new Pulpit-Popery be part of its Faith and Doctrine we have our Authors word for it I would be a Turk as soon as their Papist A very gross affront sure to those Venerable Heads and if he hath not some reserve and somewhat of the Art of Cardinal Capisucchi may throw him into bad circumstances and he would do well to keep from Goa or Bourdeaux left a Recantation or somewhat worse be the effect of such a frank declaration But it seems after all the Protestations and Abominations the Answerer was not satisfied in our Author's sincerity and would bind him to hard Terms which is to tell us in particular what those Monstrons things are that he so frequently declares against which because our Author answers only in general to I shall remind him of and conclude It s this Here I challenge you to declare what those particulars are Those Monsters Those Doctrines and practices which you do detest and abominate And if you refuse so to fasten upon you the mark of insincere and juggling for offering that all be received into the Church of Rome without them FINIS Papist Misrepr pref Doctr. and Pract. p. 11. Pulpit-Sayings p. 55. Epist. to the Reader Ibid. P. 55. P. 55. To the Reader Doctr. and Pract. p 9 10. To the Reader and p. 56. Doctr. and Pract. p. 12. View p. 106. to 119. P. 61.102 103. To the Reader Pulpit Sayings p. 10. Good Advice to the Pulpits p. 67. Apology for the Pulpits p. 3. Pulpit Sayings p. 43. Pag. 6. To the Reader Pag. 54. Pulpit-Saying Pag. 13. Ibid. Character 1 2 3 4 5. p. 13 c. P. 5. To the Reader P. 16. Fox's c. Part 2. p. 88. and 91. Exact Collect p. 647. Lond. 1643. L'Histoire des Troubles de la Grand Bretagne p. 165. Foxes and Firebands Pt. 1. p. 14 c. Ibid. p. 31 c. The Copy of this was taken out of the Registry of the Episcopal See of Rochester Pulpit-Sayings Pag. 20. Legatio Philippi 3. and 4. Paulo 5. Gregor 15. per Luc. Wadding p. 89. Char. 6. Epil to Trag. l. 3. c. 5. p. 11. Char. 7. De Sacram. Poenit. Sect. 70. Ibid. Sect. 46. Catech Trid. Art. Symb. 9. Sect. 19. Edit Lugd. 1676. Char. 8. Lib. Omnem probum esse liberum Char. 9. Somners Antiq of Canterb p. 248. Caesar. Hist. Memor l. 8. c. 69. De Purgat l. 1. c. Pap. Repres and not Misrepres Ch. â— Chap. 2. p. 7 10.11 Chap. 3. p. 7 9. Chap. 2. p. 12. Chap. 2. p. 8 12. and Chap. 3. p. 8. P. 45. Histoire de'l Inquisition de Goa Chap. 4. Char. 10. Char. 11. Apology p. 13 14. Sayings p. 21. P. 21 22. L. Vives ad Calcem Libri de Corruptis Artibus Espencaeus ut supra Lib. 5. Sayings p. 21 22. De dogmatibus libris Apocryphis l. 4. c. 1. Espencaeus ut Supra Sayings p. 37. Maimburgs History of the Holy League l. 1. p. 79. l. 2. p. 95. l. 3. p. 428. l. 4. p. 806. Char. 12. Bp. Taylor 's Disswasive from Popery Sect. 10. Defence p. 3. Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England Preface In Hen. 3. De Schismate l. 1 c 68. p. 73. Sayings p. 35. In Tit. Digress 1. 11. Turpilucri Defence p. 8. Ibid. p. 11. Bulla Clem. 6. Ultraject A. D. 1653. Defence p. 6. De Purgat l. 1. c. 2. Sect. Ad quintum Bull. to 4. p. 86. Doctrines and Practices c. 8. p. 64. L. 1. c. 10. de Indulg Sect. Altera Review du Concile de Trent l. 5. c. 1. Gravam Ger. n. 3. Paris 1550. De Indulgent l. 1. c. 7. Sect. 4. Propositio c. Doctrines and Practices c. 8. p. 66. Bullar To. 3. p. 74. Altisidor Sum. l. 4 c. Char. 13. Serm. p. 31 32 33. Entretiens de Philalethe c. p. 2. p. 160 c. Orat. Propr Enchir. c. 1. n. 31. Reginaldus de Contrit l. 2. c. 4. Soto in 4 Sent. Dist. 17. q. 2. Art. 6. Concl. 2 a. C. 16. In Cassandri Liturg. Collectio quorundam Auth. cum decretis Par. 1661. In 1 Cor. 16. Disp. 30. Sayings p. 47. Sum. par 3. tit 13. Instruct. Sacer c. 13. n. 5 6. Char. 14. Doctrines and Practices c. 25. p. 123. Pap. Misrep c. 25. Sect. ac ut rem C. 13. in Barklaium Antonini Summa See the View p. 106 c. See before p. 4. Sayings p. 53. The Mirror of Truth p. 10 12 c. 1688. Mirror p. 15 17. Epistle to the Reader Sayings p. 54. P. 56. To the Reader To the Reader See before Char. 9. To the Reader p. 9. To the Reader p. 1 2 3. P. 54. To the Reader p. 11 12. Doctrin and Pract. p 13. To the Reader P. 56. P. 57. P. 5. P. 3. To the Reader p. 1â— To the Reader p. 8. Sayings p. 7. Sayings p. 57. Answer to the Representers Reflect on the View p. 67. Sayings p. 12. Answer to the Repr Reflect p. 28 c. Sayings p. 55. Answer to Reflec p. 32. Sayings p. 56. Pag. 35. Pag. 54. Answer to Reflect p. 37.
of it For thus he saith If any make Exceptions against the Character of a Papist thus disguis'd as 't was drawn there in the Papist Misrepresented I 'le never quarrel upon that score let that be raz'd out But however tho he thus drops his own Apprehensions as well as he had his 37. Points of Representation and at once gives away half his Labour yet like a true Master of Defence he mounts the Stage again and renews the Fight for by the help of some Pulpit-Sayings he thinks he has given life to his otherwise dying Cause Let that saith he be raz'd out and these others take place which 't is likely are more Authentick What! more Authentick than his own Apprehensions O yes for its such a Popery and such a Papist as is describ'd by Ministers in their Pulpits In which there are many things charged upon them without either Truth and Sincerity and consequently 't is not without grounds they complain of Misrepresenting 1. But why the Pulpits Are not the same things in Books of Controversy and are they not there more fully explain'd and debated Thither therefore in reason we ought to be sent to understand how the Protestants Represent the Papist But then our Author had not had the opportunity of exclaiming against those high Places as he Phrases it from whence it seems they have received no little Damage or which is worse he had been engaged in a Dispute which is not his Province as he tells us p. 28. 2. But if some Pulpits have misrepresented them in some cases what is that to the Pulpits in general What is that to our Church He has been already told that we are far from defending such Misrepresentations if such there be That which we adhere to is the Doctrine and Sense of our Church as it is by Law established and what Representations are made agreeable thereto we undertake to defend and no other Can he think we are any more concern'd in the mistakes or infirmities of others then he thinks himself to be in the loose and extravagant opinions of their own Doctors Schoolmen and Casuists And is it not reasonable he should allow the same Law to others he is forced so frequently to plead in his own defence 3. But further supposing that some of the Pulpits have Misrepresented the Papist in some points and in those points he disclaims yet are there no points besides they differ in And if these were set aside would the Church of England and Rome be one What thinks he of the many points I find in the same Sermons he quotes that he civilly passes by Such as these That the Church of Rome is alone the Catholick Church out of which is no Salvation That the Pope is the Universal Head of that Church That that Church is Infallible What thinks he of Transubstantiation Purgatory Invocation of Saints Communion in one kind Divine Service and Scriptures in an Unknown Tongue Merit and Works of Supererogation the Worship of Images Implicit Faith Indulgences Deposition of Princes c. Lastly What thinks he of the great point he all along omitted as he is charged that a Papist doth not only believe the Doctrines defin'd in the Council of Trent to be true but also to be necessary to Salvation Are not these the Doctrines of the Church of Rome And are not the Pulpits as much employ'd in confuting these as those of praying to Images and putting their trust in them and the other Follies and Abominations as he calls them charged on his Church And do not the Protestants think as ill of those points he owns as of those he disclaims 4. But how come they of the Church of Rome to start this charge of Misrepresentation who are of all Churches in the world the most guilty of it Or how comes our Author to continue it who neither durst so much as vindicate others or himself when convicted of it The learned Author of the View enter'd the Field and threw down the Gantlet but our Author fairly slinks aside and leaves his Brethren to sink under the imputation of the soulest Misrepresentations And this is not to be wonder'd at when he has not one word of Reply to all the Accusations of that kind there produced against himself And yet to give a further Specimen how far this disingenuous quality has prevail'd upon his temper he still proceeds in the same course and to be quit with the Pulpits which he saith are forward in making characters of the Papists he is as forward in making characters of the Pulpits The business of so many Pulpits ten thousand open every week he saith is chiefly to make exceptions pick holes quarrel ridicule and the more excellent they are at their work the more they gain upon their Auditory And that he may not be wanting he will be at his Plots too and follow what he calls Oat's Divine way of Information He had tried once before to form a design of this kind when he would have Sermons preach'd many years ago against Popery to contain severe reflections upon his present Majesty But that he was soon made sensible of and has not a syllable to excuse And yet he will be again at his Innuendo's for thus he lays the Scene Methinks the Pulpits saith he should be more tender of their Soveraign than to venture upon the same Method which he before charges them with with the Son which prov'd so fatal to the Father and dangerous to the Brother But I fear the excess of jealousie for their Religion puts them upon being too bold with their Prince and that by a just judgment of Heaven they are blindly practising the very principles they have so often charged upon the Papists making their Churches Interest the center of their Religion Preaching Faction instead of Faith c. Such expressions as these are not thrown out at all adventure and we may soon guess what they tend to and it 's a fair warning Thus far for the Pulpits but to shew what a Talent he has at Character-making he will furnish us also with that of the true Son of the Church of England viz. A Genuine Son of the Church of England is to have a good stock of this implicit Faith by him and to believe and speak though he knows nothing at all Again This is to the Protestant Tune If a man can't tell how to run down Popery though he knows nothing of it he 's no true Son of the Church of England So that quarrelling and ridiculing is the work it seems of the Preachers and a delight in it the temper of their Auditors and to speak all at once Ignorance and Arrogance Slander and Impudence are in his opinion the Ingredients of a true Son of the Church of England This is the faithful Representer the soft Adviser the prudent Cautioner the impartial Character-maker the Preacher of Charity the Detecter of Impostures
has been made to all sorts of Protestants to produce even Ten Papists I may say Two that in all that Confusion of Civil Wars ever drew Sword against him I shall not here offer him the Instances of Capt. Tho. Preston and Capt. Wright mentioned in Foxes and Firebrands both because they served under Oliver and also because it 's one of his Street-Pamphlets as he calls them but shall lay before him undeniable Authorities Such is that of the Royal Martyr himself who in a Declaration of his saith All men know the great number of Papists which serve in their Army Commanders and others We are confident a far greater number of that Religion is in the Army of the Rebels than our own The other shall be that of Rob. Mentet de Salmonet a Secular Priest who in his History of the Troubles of England saith That at the Battel of Edge-hill several Priests were found slain on the Parliament side For although in their Declarations they called the King's Army a Popish Army thereby to render it odious to the people yet they had in their Army two Companies of Walloons and other Roman Catholicks The Book perhaps may not lye in every ones way but the passage is transcribed into Sir William Dugdale's View of the late Troubles in England P. 564. An. 1642. As for the Authority of the French Preacher let it be as it will but I think it would have been a greater satisfaction to the World if they had accepted his Challenge Printed and Reprinted and questioned him for it when alive rather than after his death to appeal to Protestants whether it be not a Fable Third Character of a Pulpit-Papist The Papists were the Instruments in the Fire of London c. This he charges upon the Preacher as an Aggravation of his Misrepresentation That he should vent this almost Twenty years after 1683 when the whole matter had been throughly consider'd And tho there were no other grounds whereon to build this charge besides the clamour and affected jealousies of the people and the confession of a distracted man whose Religion was not much of any kind but still professedly a Protestant Yet upon these grounds c. I am not so well acquainted with the History of this as to know when this whole matter was througly consider'd And it 's likely the Preacher was as ignorant as I am Nor do I know upon what grounds he proceeded but tho it might be as our Author saith That the distracted Man's Religion was not much of any kind yet I have been assured upon good grounds that he did not dye a Protestant Fourth Character of a Pulpit-Papist The Papists have their Emissaries up and down to preach Schism and Sedition into the Peoples ears By such Arts as these they insinuate themselves among the poor deluded People of our separate Congregations and joyning with them in their Clamours against the Church of England crying it down for Superstitious and Popishly affected they pass for gifted Brethren and real Popery is carry'd on by such Disguises Here our Author first of all inveighs against the thing and then against the Pulpits for charging it upon them Here saith he the Papists are set forth in a Sermon before the Honourable the Judges as great Hypocrites Religious Cheats and Impostors A foul Crime and if true sufficient to cast the Papists he should say such spiritual Factors out of the number of Christians but if false and not as here set out as sufficient on the other side to bring the Pulpits under that as black Character of Misrepresenting This is indeed to come up to the point and I shall readily close with him upon it The Apologist to shorten his Work and to take down the Confidence of the Adviser without bearing too hard upon the Party contented himself with pointing his Adversary to three or four Authors for Information in this Case such as the Quaker Vnmask'd the New Discovery the false Jew and Foxes and Firebrands Now to this he replies Who would not have expected that the Answerer would have spent a few Lines in making good such Authorities and proving them to be Authentick beyond Exception And then after his manner breaks forth into a wonderful Exclamation Good God! that Men should pretend to teach their Auditory the Gospel and when they are thus challenged in a particular of this Moment then to fly to Foxes and Firebrands and laying by the Scripture take Refuge in Libels and Street-Pamphlets Now who would not have expected that he would have spent a few Lines in disproving these Authorities If he could have done this he had done somewhat but it 's easier to call a thing a Libel than to prove it Well! What is the proof he expects That it be Authentick beyond Exception But when shall it pass for Authentick beyond Exception Nothing less it seems than Scripture is sufficient For saith he when they are thus challenged laying by the Scripture they take refuge in Libels and Street-Pamphlets Here I must ingenuously confess that we are at a loss and that we read no more in the Scripture of such Emissaries as Faithful Commin and Thomas Heth than he does of the Miracles of Xaverius or the Revelations of St. Bridget and the Extasies of Magdalen de Pazzi But did ever any man in the World before our Author put a case upon this issue and require Scripture-proof for matters of Fact or charge his Adversary with laying aside Scripture because he brings not Scripture to prove it But supposing they have as good Authority as what they can produce for the Legends of their Church will it not be as Authentick Let us therefore proceed as he calls it to the Examen The first Book which he has a particular pique against is what is call'd Foxes and Firebrands which is full of Relations of this kind There we read of one Faithful Commin a Dominican who in the year 1567. came over to England pretending to be a Protestant refused to be present at the Prayers of the Church alledging that they were but the Mass translated had a separate Congregation prayed for hours together with much Groaning and many Tears and in his Sermons spoke as much against Rome and her Pope as any of the Clergy as he pleaded before the Queen and Council And yet all this while acted a part to delude the People and do Service to his Church This Narrative is an Extract out of the Memorials of the Lord Cecil and was transmitted to Bishop Vsher and among his Papers came into the hands of Sir James Ware late one of His Majesties Privy Council in Ireland and published by his Son Robert Ware Esq In the next year 1568. there was another of our Author's Impostors detected Thomas Heth a Jesuit who pretended much to spiritual Prayers declaiming against Set-Forms and when brought before the Bishop of Rochester said he thereby endeavoured to make Religion the purer and
insinuate as if the 2 d Commandment is never expunged by them which he dares not stand to If it be expunged elsewhere to what purpose doth he refer us to the Bible and Catechisms For if it be in the Bible and Catechisms but not in the Offices of the Church it 's still a true Charge against them And I remember it was both shew'd that it was not in several of their Offices and it was put to him to shew in what publick Offices of their Church it is to be found But however it is in their Bibles but what is this to those that have not the use of the Bible permitted to them However it is in their Catechisms Surely our Author is not sincere For he once confess'd it to be left out in their short Catechisms or if he is improv'd since that time in his Confidence I will produce Catechism after Catechism where it is not such as the Child's Catechism 1678. And as for the Abstracts even in those the two first Commandments are thrust into one and often there is nothing at all of the second but an c. in the place as in the Abstract of the Scripture Catechism An. 1675 which I suppose is that which he himself refers to p. 57. 2. For his Absolution 't is not necessary he should be sorry for his Sin but only for the Penance Here I presumed our Author would have expatiated upon the point and have clear'd their Church if he could from the Imputation charged upon them by the Preacher and maintain'd by the Apologist who shew'd from the Council of Trent their Catechism and the Practice of their Church that a Sorrow for the Penance alone or Attrition with Confession to the Priest is sufficient without Contrition but to all this our Author gives no Reply 3. If this should fail 't is but being at the Charge of an Indulgence or Pope's Pardon that is to purchase so many penny-worth of other mens Merits And this is what is requir'd instead of Regeneration Sanctification and a Godly Life This saith our Author involves an absolute Falsity whilst it supposes that a Papist who is sorry neither for his Sins nor the Punishment that attends them has no more to do than to procure the Pope's Pardon and that this is sufficient instead of Repentance This is a most abominable Doctrine in it self and most injuriously charg'd upon us And yet as abominable Doctrine as it is it 's found and prov'd upon them by the Apologist from the Indulgences granted in their Crusado's and upon other Occasions But saith our Sayer The only ground for it is the Practice of some prostigate Men in the number of which he must then place several of his Popes But to all the Evidence for this our Author saith not a Word Of this let the Reader see before Char. 12. 4. Auricular Confession their great Intelligence and Leiger Nuntio is the main Curb of the Laity whereby the Clergy holds them in aw in being admitted to all their Secrets of States and Families thereby to work their Purposes and Plots 't is a matter of meer Interest and were there no gain in it they would be ashamed of it Of this he saith It 's a most odious Character of an Institution allowed even in the Church of England What is their Auricular Confession as it 's described from the Council of Trent in the Apology an Institution of the Church of England Doth the Church of England hold it necessary jure Divino to Confess to the Priest all and singular mortal Sins even the most Secret whether Acts Thoughts or Desires with all their Circumstances so far as may change the nature of the Sin and without doing which no Absolution is to be given He may as well say Transubstantiation is the Doctrine of the Church of England because they own the Eucharist as their Auricular Confession is an Institution of our Church because it allows and approves Confession in some cases But what saith our Author to the Charge What to the use made of it in intruding into the Secrets of States and Families and to work their Projects What to the Allegations from their own Historians Here the old Refuge is made use of Silence Of this see before Char. 9. n. 3. 5. Ignorance is the Mother of their Devotion which they are bound to by Vow and under the severest Penalties This saith our Author is a great Calumny and an empty Consequence of the Preacher Methinks our Author should not be so brisk upon this Sermon which he has made so extremely bold with sometimes mollifying the Sense of it when it looks two broad upon them at other times sharpning it leaving out and altering as it was here when he made the Preacher say before they are bound to vow Ignorance This he saith the Apologizer pretends to make out But if it be but Pretence why has not the Sayer expos'd him and run down the Instances of St. Benedict Francis Ignatius Loyala I acknowledg the Learning of many of their Fryers and Monks but they are not beholding to their Vows and Rules for their Learning For the more they keep to them the less Learned they will be or else I know not why the Jesuits are not as strictly tied up to their Hours c. as the Benedictines But what is become of Assertion 25. Their avowed Principles are to keep the People in Ignorance Where are we to expect the Answer to what the Apologist there produced in Confirmation of it That 's reserved to a more convenient time See before Char. 8. Here again we want an Answer to what was said on Assertion 26. They teach their People better Manners than to rely upon the all-sufficient Merits of Christ. All which the Apologist did undetake to prove upon them But instead of that our Author throws in a new Instance to make up the Defect viz. 6. They must wholly submit their Reason to an Infallible Judg even so far if one of their greatest Authors say true as to be bound to believe Virtue to be Bad and Vice to be Good if it shall please his Holiness to say so This saith he is a gross Abuse of Bellarmin But first of all what saith he to the general Proposition That they must wholly submit their Reason to the Infallible Judg Is that an Abuse of their Church And setting aside Bellarmin for the present Is there none of his gross Doctrine to be found elsewhere What thinks he if the Pope should declare the right Hand is the left are they bound to believe it This was once call'd a Misrepresentation in the Preacher but their own Lyra was beforehand with him tho our Author had the good manners to leave out the Quotation What thinks he of the Rule of Ignatius That if the Catholick Church define that to be black which appears to be white they are bound to account it to be black What 's think he of meriting by believing an
Protestants that agree with the Papists Character of them There are few Papists but have some Relations Neighbours Correspondents Acquaintance or Conversation with some Protestants What I require of them then is to compare these Protestants they know with the Ideas Notions and Characters of a Papist-Protestant that is with the Notions that have been taught them by their Priests Pulpits and Books Let 'em tell me upon due Consideration whether they are meer Atheists and worship the Devil and act in defiance of their own Conscience and Profess the Broad way leading to Destruction and grant Libertinism to the highest degree of Wickedness c. 2. It 's Contingent as the same Persons and People may be good and bad better and worse in divers States and Circumstances If this be a good Argument it will always be so in all Ages and Cases and go where you will and take them where you will you will always find the Papist to answer our Authors Character and never to come up to the Pulpit-Character of him But I dare say our Author will not allow this to be a fair Method of proceeding and that for Example a Protestant should describe a Papist according to the great number of Matters of Fact which with our Author he may find by Writers of their own charg'd upon them such as Massacres Vsurpations Murders of Princes Treasons Plots Conspiracies Persecutions the vicious and scandalous Lives of some of her chief Prelates Popes their Pride Covetousness and Luxury as likewise the ill Examples of other Ecclesiastical Dignitaries as of Cardinals Bishops Priests their Ignorance Simony Oppression Cruelties Excesses c. And I may add the dissoluteness of manners prevailing throughout the Papal Dominions in some Ages Was ever this the State of the Papacy If it was as our Author cannot deny then why may not we take the Character of a Papist from such an age as well as the Age or Place where we live Or why not from another Country as well as from our own This indeed our Author sometimes refers to For saith he This That 't is only mistake and passion makes Popery so deform'd a Monster every one will conclude to be true who has taken a prospect of Holland and those Towns of Germany in which Papists and Protestants live together in one Corporation under the same Laws and making use in some places even of the same Churches too and this with such Freedom Amity and good Correspondence that their different Communion cannot be easily discovered and a man that should come out of England with his Head glowing with our pulpit-Pulpit-Popery would not be easily convinc'd of the being of any Papists there Now 't is certain the Papists here and there are of the same Church Principles and Faith and 't is no Difference in this kind makes them there like other Men and here like Monsters but 't is because there the Papists are what they are and here they are made to be what they are not but what their Maligners please to render them I might here shew how far our Author is out in matter of Fact that tho these live together yet it is with great difference However supposing what he saith to be true yet that is no fit way to judge of their Religion by since whatever Freedom Amity and good Correspondence they have or exercise is not from their Church Principles and Faith but from other reasons which are Political such as Interest and Self-preservation c. For if it was from their Church Principles and Faith Popery would be all over the World the same Popery as it is in Holland and the places of Germany he speaks of But there is a vast difference betwixt Popery and Popery betwixt Popery when it is alone and Popery when it is diluted with Protestantism And if we would know what it is the fairer way to judg of it is where it is alone not as in Holland and Germany or England but as in Italy Spain Portugal and I may add now in France For there is the Church Principles and Faith in puris naturalibus and if we are to be referred to judg of what it is by the Lives and Practices of its Professors thither in reason we are to go pass we over the Alps and the Pyrenean Mountains or indeed the narrow Seas and there we may take a better View and Prospect than in a few Converts here who yet I doubt will generally be found without being rigorously observ'd not to have chang'd their Lives for the better no more than their Religion 2. After all this is not to the purpose For the Question is what is Popery and whether the Pulpits have truly represented it or not And Popery certainly was not there describ'd from the Lives of the present Professors of it in this Nation but from its Principles and the Practices of their Church in Conformity to those Principles Our Author surely will acknowledg that Popery is always the same that it is what it hath been and it hath been what it is and if so his way must conclude against it self unless he will say in all Ages and all Countreys Men of that Religion have lived alike and therefore to know whether the Pulpits have represented Popery aright or no we must go not to the Lives of any Age or Place alone nor to the Refinements and Expositions of a new Generation but to the Authorities the Preachers went upon But this is a troublesome task and what suited not our Author's temper or design and so he quitted the one for the other It 's a pleasant Entertainment to write a Character or a Representation the Pen runs smoothly along when it has Comparison before it and all the business is to describe invite or inveigh but when there are Breaks and Interruptions when it is to argue closely to manage an Argument or to Answer it it requires another sort of Talent and what our Author warily avoids And if he is beat out of his Road and the Artifice has been detected yet it shall go hard if he finds not out some Retrenchments to secure himself Thus has he proceeded from Representation to Reflection from Reflection to Protestation from Protestation to Accommodation from Accommodation to Reflection again from Reflection to Caution from Caution to Character and at last for the ending of this Controversy to prospect that is from the Principles and Practices of the Papists he appeals to their Lives amongst us This is his last Refuge and if that fails him it is but to find a new Title or Method and then he appears without Wound or Scar. And he may in the Conclusion of his Book tell the World what Feats he has done what Religious Frauds he detected and how unsuccessful he render'd them in his first Book So that if his Reader be as credulous as he himself is confident â—nd secure in his own good Opinion this may be a Windingsheet to the â—ontroversy
Pulpit-Popery TRUE POPERY BEING AN ANSWER To a BOOK Intituled PULPIT-SAYINGS AND IN VINDICATION OF THE APOLOGY for the PULPITS AND THE STATER of the CONTROVERSIE against the REPRESENTER LONDON Printed and are to be Sold by Randall Taylor near Stationers-Hall MDCLXXXVIII THE CONTENTS THE whole Controversy is resolv'd into the Author himself Page 1. The Vnreasonableness of charging Misrepresentation on the Pulpits p. 2. None more guilty of Misrepresentation than those of the Church of Rome and our Author in particular p. 3 4. Our Author's mistake in framing Characters p. 6. Character I. About the Popish-Plot p. 7. Character II. About the Murther of K. Charles the 1st with an Answer to the Challenge p. 8. Character III. About the Fire of London ibid. Character IV. Of Popish Emissaries p. 9. Character V. Of the Divisions and Fanaticism in the Church of Rome p. 12 15. Character VI. Of a proper Propitiatory Sacrifice in the Sacrament p. 17. Mr. Thorndike Vindicated p. 18. Of a Sacramental Presence and breaking of a true Body p. 20. Character VII Popery puts out the understanding of those of her Communion p. 21. The Difference betwixt the Severity of the Church of England and Rome p. 23. The Absurdity of Auricular Confession p. 24. In Transubstantiation they renounce their Senses p. 25. The Popish-Plea That Hearing is for Transubstantiation ibid. The Pope alone cannot Err and all others cannot but Err. p. 26. Character VII Of Praying and Prophesying in an Vnknown Tongue p. 27. Of the Sense of Prophesying p. 29. Of the ill Vse made of Auricular Confession p. 30. Character IX Of Saints Canonized for Money and Treason ibid. Of Praying to a Crucifix p. 31. Auricular Confession tends to the debauching Laity and Clergy And of Confession in the Church of England p. 32. Character X. The Churches Interest the Centre of their Religion p. 33. Character XI Of the Legends in the Church of Rome p. 34. Of the turning Sacraments into Shews p. 37. Of Preaching Purgatory instead of Repentance p. 38. And Faction instead of Faith. p. 39. Of the Preachers in the Holy League p. 40. Character XII Of Alms in the Church of Rome p. 40. Of Exorcisms p. 41. Of the Difficulty of knowing the Doctrine of the Church of Rome p. 42. Of compounding for unforsaken sins p. 43 45. Dr. T. Translation of Poenitentia Vindicated p. 44. Indulgences for Thousands of years to come p. 46. Indulgences not a Relaxation of Canonical penances p. 48. Character XIII If a Papist be false and deceitful yet Euge c. p. 49. No man can be a Papist but he that 's blinded by Education c. p. 50. About Picturing the Divinity ibid. Of Praying to an Image p. 52. Of Worshipping Bread and Wine as God p. 53. Of the Passion of Christ taking away the guilt and not the punishment ibid. Of the Non-necessity of Repentance till the point of death ibid. Bare saying of Prayers without attendance to what they say is sufficient to Divine Acceptance p. 54. Of Prayers in an Vnknown Tongue and the Translation of the Mass-Book p. 55. Character XIV They take away the second Commandment p. 56. 'T is not necessary to be sorry for the sin but the penance p. 57. An Indulgence serves instead of a Godly life ibid. Auricular Confession the great Intelligencer p. 58. Ignorance the Mother of Devotion ibid. They must submit to an Infallible Judg so as to believe Vertue to be bad and Vice good p. 59. Their Clergy must lead a single life whether honestly or no it makes no matter p. 60. Of the several Artifices used by our Author p. 64. Of his Reply to the Answerer of his Reflections p. 65. His appeal to the Lives of Papists amongst us shew'd to be impertinent ibid. A further Account of his Artifice p. 67. His Answers all along insufficient p. 70. Of his insincerity in the offers he makes to receive us into his Church upon the Representing Terms and detesting some Principles and Practices charged upon the Church of Rome p. 71 72. ADVERTISEMENT TRansubstantiation contrary to Scripture or the Protestant's Answer to the Seeker's Request The Protestant's Answer to the Catholick Letter to the Seeker Or a Vindication of the Protestant's Answer to the Seeker's Request An Apology for the Pulpits being in Answer to a late Book Intituled Good Advice to the Pulpits Together with an Appendix containing a Defence of Dr. Tenison's Sermon about Alms in a Letter to the Author of the Apology ERRATA PAg. 22. l. 5. r. 15. p. 33. l. 35. r. in terminis p. 41. l. 6. a bringing p. 43. l. 2. r. saith he Pulpit-POPERY True POPERY IN ANSWER TO Pulpit-Sayings WHEN the Author of the Pulpit-Sayings first appeared in the World he undertook to shew what the Papist is not or how he is Misrepresented and what he really is and how he is to be Represented The first he tells us He exactly describ'd according to the Apprehension he had when a Protestant And the latter he represents according to his own private Opinion when a Papist as he is told So that in the issue the whole is resolv'd into himself Thus it was and thus he still maintains the Humour for what are the Characters he gives of a Papist but for the most part the fruits of his own Imagination And what doth he bring to confirm it but it is the Papist I am What course doth he take to confute his Adversaries to confront their Authorities but if that be a Papist I am none I profess I renounce such Popery Nay as if he acted sub sigillo Piscatoris and had by Deputation the Authority of the Chair to determine and renounce and the Keys of St. Peter to bind and loose to let in and out of their Communion as he sees fit he assures us that whoever will be a good Papist must disclaim every point that is here set down by the Pulpits as Articles of Religion And again the Papist Represented I own it it 's the Papist I am and whoever assents to that Character in that very Form of the Papist Represented has done what is required as to those particulars to be made a Member of our Communion So that if I declare I profess I renounce on one side and I am I do own on the other is sufficient to determine the Point and will be taken for an Answer by his Adversaries there is no more to be said But though our Author may suitably enough to the temper of the Church he is now of be thus assuming and dogmatical and may for ought we know thus expound transform and determine with Allowance yet there is no reason why he should prescribe to the Church he has forsaken and that his Apprehensions be taken for the Apprehensions of all of that Communion This he now thinks a little unreasonable and could be content for once to own it if his present Undertaking be allowed to come in the place
that he laboured to refine the Protestants and to take off all smacks of Ceremonies that in the least do tend to the Romish Faith and the better to conceal himself spoke against the Jesuits and declared that he was fallen from that Society And yet all this while was as much theirs as ever and did all by Allowance For he was discovered by a Letter drop'd out of his Pocket in the Pulpit at Rochester and written from one Samuel Malt a Jesuit of Note which after Directions given to him how to govern himself in these matters thus concludes This we have certified to the Council and Cardinals That there is no other way to prevent People from turning Hereticks and for the recalling of others back again to the Mother Church than by the Diversities of Doctrines There was besides found in his Boots a License from the Jesuits and a Bull dated the first of Pius Quintus to teach what Doctrine that Society pleased for the dividing of Protestants And in his Trunk were several Books for denying Baptism to Infants c. This was a Cause openly heard and he openly punish'd for it and in our Author's Opinion very deservedly for as he well observes upon this occasion Tho Dissimulation and Delusion be abominable every where yet never more than in spiritual Matters and concerns of the Soul. So much for this Book and its Authority Proceed we to the next the False Jew this Book contains the History of one Thomas Ramsey Son to Doctor Ramsey Physician to the King who being bred up in the Jesuits College in Rome and well instructed in the Hebrew Tongue was sent forth and became a pretended Jew under the name of Joseph Ben Israel having been also Circumcised and coming for England at Newcastle professed himself a Christian Convert but soon struck in among the Anabaptists and was baptized by them at Hexham The whole cause after the Discovery was heard before H. Dawson the Mayor 1653 where this was partly prov'd against him and partly confest The Narrative was published by the Ministers of Newcastle at that time The two other Books The Quaker Vnmask'd and the New Discovery were publisht by Mr. Pryn 1656. In which he gives an account of one Coppinger a Franciscan that with others of the same Order were chief Speakers among the Quakers this was deposed upon Oath If our Author is curious this way I shall soon furnish him with other Authentick Testimonies of this kind But I suppose this may be more than he desires For if this be true how will he reconcile this to Christianity and who are they that in his opinion deserve to be cast out of the number of Christians As for his long Excursion about Legends I shall reserve it to its proper place Fifth Character of a Pulpit-Papist The different Orders of Religion amongst the Papists are neither better nor worse than so many Sects and several Casts of Religion only they have that advantage in managing their Divisions which we have not to pack up their Fanaticks in Convents and Cloysters and so bring them under some kind of Rule and Government Here the Apologist had charged the Adviser with a Falsification but he is so kind to himself as to pass it over and truly so will the Apologist in consideration of the kindness he hath now done in giving him a further account of the Sermon here quoted which for want of direction as to Author or Bookseller he could not procure The Preacher being desirous saith our Author to take off that foul blemish of so many Sects and Divisions rending the Protestant Church it seems there is now in his opinion another Church of England inconsistent with the unity of Christ's true Church and so often objected against them by Catholicks falls into that common Topick of covering the defects of his own Church by calumniating that of his Neighbour and therefore he boldly makes up to his Auditory and tells them That the Vnity the Papists boast of in their Communion is but a pretence whereas they have really more Divisions in their Religion than they charge ours with and then goes on in the words of the Character above cited Out of this Discourse of the Preacher our Author draws three Particulars pag. 27. 1. That in the Church of Rome there are more Divisions than they charge ours with 2. That their Religious Orders are neither better nor worse than so many Sects and several Casts of Religion 3. That they have their Fanaticks packt up in Convents And he should have added another from the Apology 4. That thus to pack them up in Convents is an advantage their Church makes of it Our Author having thus drawn out the sense of the Preacher and made what he will of the sense of the Apologist concludes He must give me leave to set down these three Assertions of the Pulpit for so many clear Instances of most foul Misrepresenting But by his leave I shall review his account of this matter I am not obliged in strictness to concern my self in the first Head being neither charged upon the Preacher in the Good Advice nor so much as mentioned in the Apology but yet he shall find me a fair Adversary and not willing to stand upon my Terms but take the work as he has cut it out for me 1. The Vnity the Papists boast of is but a pretence whereas they have really more Divisions in their Religion than they charge ours with This our Author saith is a Calumniating of them and is one of his Foul Misrepresentations And yet after all I doubt it will return upon himself For if there be a real and perfect Union it 's surely to be seen in their present obedience to the same Church-Authority as our Author words it pag. 26. or in a perfect Union of Members among themselves in charity Or in being of the same belief as our Author suggests And yet if we come to examine it in this Method we shall find Breach upon Breach For 1. What Schisms have there been in that Church-Authority no less than thirty as Onuphrius reckons in the Papacy some of which continued ten some twenty and one fifty years 2. What actual Disobediences to that Authority in the times of Innocent 4 th Vrban 8 th and at this season are in the Gallican Church 3. What infinite Quarrels betwixt the Bishops and the Friers the Friers and Parish-Priests in the times of Gregory 9 th Innocent 4 th Alexander 4 th Martin 4 th Boniface 8. Clement 5 th Benedict 10 th c. from age to age even to that infamous one in the last age here betwixt the Seculars and Regulars One Pope revoking anothers Decrees and oftentimes annulling their own as did Innocent Martin and Boniface c. 4. Come we to their Union in Doctrine and we shall find that but a pretence For where have there been sharper conflicts than among them about the Seat and Extent of Infallibility Predetermination
refers to But what if it be not the common acceptation of the word but that it 's taken vulgarly for foretelling things to come Who then is the Calumniator 2. They make no other use of Confession than what profest Drunkards do of Vomiting Our Author saith This is a most putid Calumny and that the Vindicator dares not defend but only that so it is in the practice of many of their Church This he complains of and with good reason but then what shall be said of one that after he has told a story of one that declaim'd against the Papists for a Generation of Vipers and a profligate sort of men knowing but two Families and those good men from thence takes occasion to exclaim But this is to the Protestant-tune if a man can't tell how to run down Popery though he knows nothing of it he 's no true Son of the Church of England This is Case for Case But was this all the Apologist had to say in defence of the Preacher did not he produce Authorities of their own as to the General practice Did he not refer to their Doctrines and Penances and the Taxa Camerae Apostolicae in confirmation of it This had more become him to have answered than to put a Case Ninth Character of a Pulpit-Papist It consists of three Paragraphs 1. He pays his Devotions to Saints Canonized for Money and Treason Here the Apologist charges the Sayer with an alteration of the Preacher's words from which he would bring himself off by saying it's an insinuation which to the Hearers is as good as an Assertion whereas the corruption was that he turn'd a Particular into an Universal Here our Author observes against the Apologist 1. That he proves first it may so happen which is as much to the purpose as for one to say the Church-of-England men are corrupters of God's Word because 't is possible they may be so But the case is far otherwise for if there be no certainty but that the Pope may Canonize a Rebel for a Saint then there is no certainty but that the Saint may be no Saint And then what become of the Devotions of the Supplicants as those to Thomas à Becket at whose Shrines were more Offerings made than to Christ himself 2. He saith it has been done and in the next line comes in with an instance where it had like to have been done The instance was of Maria Visitationis where indeed it was not done but that it was not was more from the King of Spain's Jealousie than the Pope's Sagaciousness who sanctified her by Letters under his own hand Our Author I perceive dares not so much as name this Instance 3. As for the Instance of Thomas à Becket he saith he was Canoniz'd not for Rebellion and because he adhered to the Pope against his Prince but for his Virtuous Life and Martyrdom and the attestation of his Sanctity by undeniable Miracles Not for Rebellion as if that would be exprest in the Reasons for his Canonization I have read it was a Moot question Whether he was damn'd for Treason or Glorified as a Martyr I think it not worth the while to decide it but leave our Chronicles and our Author to struggle about it But it minds me of a story told by Bellarmin of one that was worshipped for a Martyr and yet appear'd afterward and told them he was damn'd 2. They pray to a Crucifix of Wood or Stone as well as to Christ himself and attribute as much satisfaction to it as to the Blood of Christ. Our Author rejoyns that This is every word an Infamous Falshood And continues Though the Vindicator appeals to the Words and Forms of some of our Prayers and then says That if words will make it plain the Preacher was not mistaken yet this is so childish a plea that methinks it ought to be beneath a Divine especially a man of conscience to charge so gross an abomination upon such a frothy pretext And then he gives his reason I must confess that if the Vindicator had only the Words and Forms of their Prayers to plead in Vindication of the Preacher without attending to the sense and reason of the thing that it might be as childish and frothy as he represents it and he would have Deut. 32.1 and the Benedicite used in our Church against him as our Author argues But if he had read on he would have found that it was the words as necessarily including such a sense and that the Apologist did covertly refer him to the Papist Represented and not Misrepresented Our Author now confesses himself to be the same that wrote the Papist Misrepresented and Represented and should be therefore concern'd to have defended it against the forecited Answer In which was shewn 1. That the Cross in the Church of Rome as it's Representative so is Consecrated by an Office on purpose composed for it 2. That at the Consecration of it they pray that the Lord would bless the Wood of the Cross that it may be a saving remedy to Mankind a stability of Faith an increase of good Works and the Redemption of Souls and that Christ would take this Cross into his hands and that all that offer it may by the merit of this Cross be delivered from every Sin they have committed 3. That it 's esteem'd upon Consecration to have those Virtues communicated to it 4. That they adore it even with Latria the Worship they give to God and direct their Prayers to it 5. That those Prayers are without a Figure and in a proper Sense applied to the Material Cross. This the Author of that Book proved 1. as that throughout the Cross is distinguished from Christ because they pray to Christ to bless the Cross and that he would communicate such Virtues to it 2. From their own Authors such as Soto Catharinus and Aquinas 3. From the severe Censures of those who held otherwise as was the case of Johannes Aegidius Canon of Sevil and Imbert of Bourdeaux and the Curate of Pomyrol Our Author talks of a Forehead of these that make up against them it 's a Word I am not us'd to but he must have somewhat like it that allows this Practice to be worse than Heathenish and a gross Abomination and yet lets all this to this day lye unanswer'd and thinks to put us off with the same crude Replies that stand there confuted In Conclusion it appears to be no more true that they are defamed by the method used in the Church of England than that the Church of Rome is the mother-Mother-Church of the Church of England as our Author suggests 3. Making a particular Confession of our Sins to Men instead of keeping up wholesome Discipline is the way to corrupt it and tends to the debauching both Laity and Clergy Here our Author spends what he has to say both against Preacher and Vindicator in shewing special Confession to be allow'd
in the Church of England and in exclaiming against his Adversaries for falling foul upon what he calls the best of Institutions As if either of them were against that which their own Church encourages and which the Preacher himself calls a wholesome Discipline But the beginning of the Paragraph shews what Confession the Preacher thus Censures viz. Auricular Confession as it is practiced in the Church of Rome at this day that Confession which the Apologist elsewhere describes from themselves that requires beforehand a diligent Examination of the Conscience about all and singular mortal Sins even the most Secret with all their circumstances so far as may change the nature of the Sin and then to discover all those they can call to mind to the Priest from whom they expect Absolution and without which Absolution is not to be expected nor can they have any benefit of the Absolution It 's of this the Preacher saith That the Consequence of it is to run an apparent hazard of being undone in many Cases by Knaves for Interest or by Fools out of Levity and Inconstancy and a blabling Humor that lets them into the Secrets of Families c. Besides instead of keeping up a wholesome Discipline it 's the way to corrupt it and tends to the debauching both Laity and Clergy in as many ways as there are Sins to be committed when the Confessor and the Penitent begin to discover and understand one another And this the Apologist confirmed from the Complaints made by good Men of their own Communion from the shameful Cases to be found in their Casuists from the Bulls of Popes Contra solicitantes in Confessione And of which I find a late Instance Tenth Character of a Pulpit-Papist The Churches Interest is the Center of their Religion and their Consciences turn upon the same Pin. Every thing is Pious Conscientious and Meritorious that makes for their Cause What is said as to the first of these by the Apologist That the Churches Interest is the Center of their Religion Our Author has not thought fit to recite and much less to confute As to the latter the Apologist produced a Constitution of the Jesuits but this the Sayer saith is a wrested Interpretation contrary to its plain meaning But why then did not our Author venture to assign this plain meaning of it and to shew the meaning the Apologist thought belong'd to it to be thus wrested Who without doubt would have thought one good Argument of much better Authority than a hundred bare Affirmations tho never so positive But he has two things yet in reserve 1. That after all the Apologist can say He cannot but own it to be a received Maxim among all even the loosest of our Divines and Casuists That no Evil is to be done that God may come of it To speak ingenuously I do not find him so forward to own it but if he did as we cannot think they will interminis run so counter to the Apostle yet the Question is what is Evil and Good and whether that is not Good which makes for their Cause or whether the making for the Cause makes not that which was Evil to be Good. And if so our Author doth but beg the Question 2. He appeals to his Catholicks of this Nation who quitted all rather than do an ill thing take Oaths Tests or go to Church against their Conscience The main part of this lies in the last words against their Conscience for else that many of them did take Oaths go to Church receive the Sacrament is I suppose out of Question Eleventh Character of a Pulpit-Papist This he breaks into four parts 1. He changes Scripture into Legends Hereby the Apologist shew'd was understood either that the Legends are of as good Authority in the Church of Rome as Scripture or that in their publick Offices they used Legends where they should have used the Scripture He shews there is too much occasion given for the former amongst them as when they own in their publick Offices that St. Bridget's Revelations came immediately from God to Her. But here our Author interposes and saith How does the Papist change the Scripture into Legends when he 's commanded by his Church to own the Scripture as the Word of God But if he owns the Scripture as the Word of God because it 's commanded by his Church then wherein is the difference if he be commanded by his Church to believe a Legend to be of Divine Revelation Our Author would have done a kind part if he had set us right in this matter between Divine Revelation and Divine Revelation between the Revelation for Scripture and the Divine Revelation for the Legends But he saith for all this a Person is not alike obliged to assent No! altho the Church requires it But that saith he the Church doth not for tho he may read Legends if he pleases yet he is not bound by his Church or Religion to give assent to or believe any one passage in any one Legend whatsoever If he has no better Authority for the latter Branch than the former for he is not bound to assent than for he may read them if he pleases his Cause is uncapable of his support For how can he be at Liberty whether he will read hear them if he pleases when they are inserted into the Body of their Church-Service and are Lessons chosen out for their Instruction And he can as little say they are not obliged to Assent to them when the Church it self saith in its publick Office They come immediately from God. Is it at last all come to this that when things are instituted by Inspiration of the Holy Ghost as the Orders of St. Benedict and were received from the Holy Ghost as the Rules of those Orders and that the Popes were moved by the Holy Ghost as in ordaining some Festivals and declar'd others to be divinely inspired as St. Brigit and St. Catherine and to come immediately from God as their Offices Is it all I say come to this that he is not bound to give assent to or believe any one Passage in any Legend whatsoever Nor so much as to believe any one to be a Saint their Church has Canonized no not St. Brigit St. Catherine nor even the Great Xaverius For tho some pretended Reformers as he calls them have been so easy and forward it seems as to have judged those things worthy of Credit which he was Canonized for yet no Member of the Church of Rome is bound to assent or believe but he may believe as well as read the Legends of them if he pleases and if he pleases he may forbear and suspend And this our Author doth abundantly confirm by approving what the Apologist produced out of Bellarmin and Canus That all things contained in the Lives of the Saints tho mentioned even in the Canonization depend upon human Testimony as to matters of Fact and consequently are subject to
conclude that this could not be giving leave to sin for so long time to come which so far exceeds the term of mans life But though it gives not leave to sin it 's sure a pardon for sin and he can no more have a pardon for a Thousand years past who has lived but fifty or sixty than have an allowance for a Thousand years to come And the Doctor said not that they grant by Indulgences leave to sin for many Thousand years to come but that they granted Idulgences for many Thousand years to come But what saith our Author to these prodigious numbers of years It 's saith he only the releasing of Penances which being assign'd in proportion to the sins for some sins three years penance for others five might with some careless Christians amount to that degree that for fifty years of life they might possibly have 5000 years penalties due to their sins And we shall add for him the 32000 of Sixtus the 4 th and the ten hundred thousand of John the 22 th Well supposing this account of it to be right and that an Indulgence is only a relaxation of such Penances as are due to the offence Yet what a leave or at least encouragement is here given to sin when a man that has deserved to undergo 5000 or 30000 or ten hundred thousand years of Penance shall by a Bull of a Pope be discharged from all this for saying three short Prayers or five Pater-Nosters five Aves and a Credo But supposing the Sinner is so careless also that after that he has run up the score to so high a sum he has not procured such an Indulgence and that the 5000 and the ten hundred thousand years Penalties remain due where is it that he is to undergo these Penalties And where is it that the Church in his notion appoints assigns and inflicts them After all methinks he had better have said with some of their own Church that the Relaxation doth not avail as far as is promised but it 's so declared that the Faithful might be excited to give and the Church deceives them Thirteenth Character of a Pulpit-Papist This he distributes into nine Particulars 1. If he be false and deceitful to Mankind yet Euge bone serve all is well and he in an instant is thought worthy of a better Kingdom This he saith is absolutely false For this he gives two Reasons 1. That Falshood and deceit are no where recommended or taught by his Church As if his Church would directly establish such Propositions And yet the Council of Constance comes near it when it asserts Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks 2. He saith I am certain no man of what Church soever so guilty can have admittance there but by a sincere repentance and restitution This is the received Doctrine of his Church and I hope in their dealing they practice it as much as any Here he turns off the case in hand from the publick to the private state of affairs and has not one word in vindication of what the Apologist laid to their charge especially in that notorious instance of the Pope's solemn Oration made in the Conclave in commendation of the Assassination of Henry the Third of France As our Author has here broke one sentence of the Preacher's from another and set in the midst what belongs to the Sermon of Alms So he has wholly omitted Assertion 14 th in the Apology viz. If the Pope and his Emissaries say the right hand is the left the Papists are bound to believe it which is there made good by four several Arguments But here our Author is modest and has left it to shift for it self and his Church under the heavy charge of it 2. No man can be a Papist but he whose eyes are blinded by Education or he who puts his own eyes out by Atheism It 's in the Sermon No man Therefore can be a Papist c. which refers to what was there before said and the description the Preacher had given of Popery viz. 1. That the Pope can dispence with the Laws of Nature and against the Old and New Testament 2. That the Word of God is a Nose of Wax a Dumb Judg and dead Ink. 3. That the Pope is another God upon Earth and that if he declares the right hand is the left we ought to believe him And then follows No man therefore can be a Papist but c. The Question here is not about the Lives of Papists as our Author would have it but about the character of Popery And then it remains to be considered whether the Preacher was right in his representation of it and in the Authorities he produces for it But instead of bringing the case to an issue our Author in his Good Advice left out what went before and the Marginal Quotations of what he cited from the Sermon and now has offer'd no manner of Reply to nor so much as taken notice of the Apologist's Argument 3. The Council of Trent expresseth its allowance of picturing the Divinity it self and accordingly the Pictures of the Trinity are ordinarily to be beheld in the Popish Churches This is a new point our Author has substituted perhaps thinking this look's somewhat better than an Answer to that he has omitted but yet I shall take it in my way Here the Preacher 1. Appeals to their Doctrine and for which he quotes the Council of Trent 2. To their practice and use As to the first our Author saith it 's false since the Council delivers just the contrary taking care that if it happens that the Histories of the Holy Scriptures be painted or figured that the people be taught the Divinity is not therefore figur'd or painted as if that could be seen with corporeal eyes or represented in colours Sess. 25. Now here I observe 1. Our Author represents the case as if the Picturing of God and the Trinity in their Churches was much like what Aaron pleads for the Golden Calf I cast it into the fire and there came out this calf as if it was what they find in their Churches have been placed there by they know not whom and are like those that are to be seen it seems in the frontispiece of some Bibles and Common-Prayer-Books of the Church of England that come from an obscure uncertain hand but what they themselves do not regard If it happens c. saith the Council thus far indeed our Author goes with the Council but why did he leave out what immediately follows and why did he not read it as the Council reads it If it happens that sometimes the Histories and Narrations of Scripture be Painted or Figured when that shall be expedient for the unlearned people So that it 's not an accidental thing but designedly done as an Expedient for instructing the unlearned people But however the Preacher saith that of the Council which the Council denies that they picture the Divinity
Heretical Proposition taught by his Bishop These are Cases resolved by them in the Affirmative as the Apologist shew'd in the place quoted by our Author but tho nothing could be objected against those and the like Evidences yet it seems this is a most gross Abuse of Bellarmin an inexcusable Aspersion a Forgery of the Preacher But why all this Because saith he these words are not his Assertion but an Inconvenience he argues from in proof of what he had before asserted that the Pope is Infallible But if it be an Inconvenience it's what he is contented should be taken for an Assertion It 's plainly a case he puts The general Proposition in proof indeed was that the Pope could not err in things of themselves good and evil as it 's a matter of Faith the Catholick Faith teaching Virtue to be good and Vice to be evil The next Proposition in confirmation of it is that the Church is bound to believe according to the Pope's Resolution of the case Vnless she would sin against conscience The next is supposing that the Pope should command Vice and forbid Virtue then saith he the Church is bound to acquiesce in his judgment in all doubtful matters to do what he commands and not do what he forbids and lest perhaps she act against conscience she is bound to believe that to be good which he commands and that evil which he forbids That the Pope cannot err is the Principle he holds to but yet to secure the duty of the people he breaks off the Argument and lets it all issue in the point of the Churches obedience and submission lest they should at last find his Holiness has thus err'd Well saith he however if it should be so yet as he said before in another case it belongs not to Subjects to doubt of these things but simply to obey And how timorous soever our Author is to own it how solicitous to bury it under the rubbish of Abuses Aspersions and Forgeries yet others are not so bashful Even Bellarmin himself elsewhere doth admit it with some little qualification In a good sense saith he Christ gave to Peter the power of making sin not to be a sin and of what was not sin to be sin Bellarmin indeed saw further than our Author he know well that these Metamorphoses had been practised by the Papal Authority and if they were bound to believe that to be good which he commands and approve that which he decrees when what was in it self unlawful was made lawful by his determination there was no disputing Of this we have a notable instance in Pope Martin the Fifth who after mature consultation did dispense with one that had taken his Sister to Wife because of the Scandals that otherwise must have happen'd upon their Separation 7. Their Church-men must live a single life whether honestly or no it makes no matter Our Author after his wonted manner declares this to be utterly false it being no indifferent thing in our Church whether the Clergy live honestly or no. In this Assertion the Apologist observed there were two Points contained 1. That the Clergy in the Church of Rome must and are obliged by the Order of their Church and their own Vow to lead a single life 2. That there is more care taken that they live single than that they live honestly But this saith our Author is to fall much below the Preacher but why so what mighty difference is there betwixt saying as the Preacher that whether they can do it honestly it makes no matter or more care is taken that they live single than that they live honestly For certainly not much matter is made of that which they take no reasonable care in But however he will not allow the proof of it offer'd in the Apology Which saith he is this chiefly because the punishment for a Clergy-man that marries is much greater than for one that keeps his Concubine The matter of fact he allows and indeed it was undeniably prov'd against them But this he saith is not to the purpose it being as if I should say that according to the Principles of the Church of England it matters not whether her Members turn Turks or no And then should bring this for proof because she has severe penalties even of death it self for such as become Papists but none at all for those that turn Turks But this is far from the case for Laws are made according to the state and exigence of Affairs and the Cases that fall out or probably may fall out and the damage done thereby to the Community But where there is no danger or damage in prospect it 's a ridiculous thing to make a Law. The danger here was from the Papists and their practices against the Government which was the reason of those Laws but there is no danger of the Members of its Church turning Turks which is the reason why there is no Law against it And his Argument would be much as if it should be said That according to the Principles of the Greek Church it matters not whether her Members turn Heathens and then should bring this for proof of it because she has severe Penalties even death it self for those that turn Turks for they that so turn are not received into the Church without as openly renouncing as they profest Mahometism which is death but none at all for those that turn Heathens If he had put the case right it should have been thus That by the Laws of England it is death to turn Papist and a Fine of 10 s. to turn Turk in the same circumstances of danger then it had look'd speciously enough that they took more care that they should not turn Papists than Turks And so we have brought the case home For if when a Clergy-man is found married he must be separated or depriv'd but if he keeps a Concubine he is Fin'd but 10 s it 's evident which is the worst crime in the opinion of the Church of Rome Our Author saith This was the chief Argument of the Apologist and if so methinks when he had dismist this by a comparison he might at once have blown off what remains But though he has not thought fit to set the rest before the Reader yet I shall offer them to his Consideration In further confirmation of this Charge the Apologist appeal'd to their Allowances as Priests Marriage is absolutely forbid without any Relaxation or Dispensation but Concubinage has been openly allow'd and licensed it 's further confirmed by their Resolution of the Case when they account Concubinage and Fornication a less sin in a Priest than Marriage These it seems were inconsiderable so neither the Argument nor the Authorities vouch'd for them deserved an Answer And for company our Author has dismist also Assertion 28. viz. The reason why the Clergy are bound to live single is for fear lest having Wives and Children they should give the State security of
their Obedience to their Sovereign I have now done with our Author 's 14 Characters which consist partly of matter of Fact and Observation partly of Doctrine of their own and partly of Inferences from and Arguings upon them In the two former of which which are the proper Subject of Representation I have shew'd there has been nothing charged upon them by the Preachers as to Principle Practice or Fact which they had not good Evidence for and was so far from being a Fiction of their own that they condemn them out of their own mouths As for the latter it belongs not to the Case before us but yet that nothing might be wanting to give our Author satisfaction the Arguments produced by the Preachers against the Church of Rome have been considered and justified So that in Conclusion I may here challenge him to shew that there is any Principle or Doctrine which is not a Principle of theirs or a Practice which is not a Practice or a Consequence which is not truly inferr'd from them I do not think that a Misrepresentation can be justly chargeable upon a mere Mistake no more than it is upon the inconsequence of an Argument But it 's a Wonder to me that amongst the Ten thousand Pulpits as he reckons them and the multitude of Writers in the Church of England and under all the Provocations they have met with and in the heat of Argument there can be nothing material produced against them notwithstanding the utmost diligence could be used and the reading of Volumes of Sermons on purpose to make a Discovery Were they indeed guilty of Misrepresentation and that there was No praying to Images in the Church of Rome No compounding with Heaven for Vnforsaken Sins No worshipping Bread and Wine as God himself No saying Prayers without Attention No Divisions among themselves No renouncing their Senses c. Yet we know where these would be match'd when our Adversaries tell us The Protestants have no God no Faith no Religion but are meer Atheists and worship the Devil as Possevine and Prateolus teach That to run down Popery tho he know nothing of it is to be a true Son of the Church of England That Interest and Passion puts the Preachers upon arguing in Defiance to their own Conscience which our Author it seems knows better than themselves Or as a late Author That Libertinism is the sole Profession and the very soul of all Sectaries that is those that are not in Communion with the Church of Rome That the false Church that is all but themselves and Religion hath no other but vile Hypocrites That it Professeth the broad and large way leading to Destruction granting Libertinism to the highest degree of Wickedness in one kind or another Into which whoever enters for saking the true begins presently to leave all Goodness and becomes an outcast and scum of the Earth as to all Wickedness and Prophaness That it enjoys no true Spirituality but brainsick Phancy and there was never any sound Spiritual Book written by them They have the Lord in their Mouth but their hearts are far from him That by reason of its wicked Obstinacy and Libertinism it brings all the Professors thereof to Disobedience and takes away all neighbourly Love and just Dealing one with another and hereby bringing Ruin and Confusion upon all Commonwealths c. If so much had been said of the Church of Rome what a rout had here been What a mustering up of Misrepresentations Calumnies and Abuses What arguing in Defiance to their own Conscience But I will here excuse the Author of the Mirror for he that can be so ignorant as to tell us that the Creed of Pius 4 th which he at large rehearses was the constant Profession of Faith in the days of Austin the Monk An. 596. and can quote that Monk's Letter to Pope Gregory for it may for ought I know think as he writes and so his Representations of the Sectaries and of the Profession of Pope Gregory's Faith be equally true and what he equally understands But our Author is not alike excusable For whatever he may know concerning the Days of Austin the Monk I know not but what he writes about belongs more to his own and so if he falls in with Misrepresentation his Conscience must be the more concerned And which after all he is so far from making good that he is forced to use all the Shifts that one conscious to himself of infirmity and subtle enough to conceal it can contrive which for a Conclusion to the whole I shall now a little enquire into 1. The first Artifice he uses is Disclaiming and Renouncing after this manner If to be a Papist is to be that which is describ'd in these Characters I declare I am none and that I am so far from undertaking Apologies for men of such Practices and Belief that I here profess a hearty Detestation of all such Engagements If this was so I concluded I had certainly fall'n into the very mouth of Hell-Doctrines I as much abhor as Hell and Damnation it self If this be to be a Papist then certainly to be a Papist is to be the worst of Men. And 't is so far from being a doubt whether he be a Christian that 't is certain he can be none and that if he be bound to believe and live according to the Principles here laid down he can have no right to Salvation Whatever Church would receive him with the Profession of all those scandalous Doctrines the Pulpits charge against us I would be sure to be no Member of it and if there were no other but that Church amongst Christians I would then begin to look towards Turky Nay he advances further Whoever will be a good Papist must instead of assenting to disclaim every point that is here set down by the Pulpits as Articles of his Religion Let us now try our Author in some one of these Scandalous and Abominable Doctrines who comes thus arm'd Cap-a-pie with Detestations Abhorrencies Disclaimings and see whether he be invulnerable What thinks he of the first of those he calls Follies and Abominations viz. praying to Images and attributing Satisfaction and Expiation to a Crucifix of Wood and Stone What doth he think of the Office of Consecration where it 's pray'd that God would bless the Wood of the Cross that it may be a saving Remedy to Mankind a Stability of Faith the Redemption of Souls c How would he behave himself in the Company of Cardinal Capisucci who maintains that the Worship is to the Image How in the presence of the Arch-Bishop of Bourdeaux who defended the Curate's to the Word the Wood against Imbert's to Christ and not to the Wood Could he bear up to them and tell them it 's Infamous that they are no Christians and have no right to Salvation Which doth he think would there be the Misrepresenter our Author that