Sunday before it and therefore must have been a Minister of the Church of England on the one Sunday and a Member of the Church of Rome on the next during the time betwixt which two Sundays I am certain you are far from being able to have considered and examined the Merits of the two Churches you are not so quick a Man pag. 2. for all your pretended discovering at first sight that all other Communions were evidently confusion But allowing that during this search you onely Ex hypothesi put your self in such a state without leaving actually our Communion till your Method and Reasons were over and satisfactory it was a very odd Method for a Man that had been so long a Minister and was so old a Man and would much handsomer have become you were you coming over from Paganism or Mahometism than from one Church that evidently hath the Catholick Faith to another Whichsoever of the two Senses was that which you designed I am certain that the first was fit onely for a Madman and the other almost as much unbecoming an old Clergy Man who after Threescore as I believe you are falls to abstracting and doubting and supposing as if he had been in a Dream all the rest and best part of his Days since he was in Orders and at last when others being to dote he begins to doubt to search and to make saving discoveries CHAP. IV. The Confusion of his search and the Absurdity of it shewn NOtwithstanding the Inconsistences in this your tale which are so many as would almost ruine any ones having the least value for your Book or for the Reasons and Arguments in it I must follow and see how dexterously you managed or how well you used this your wonderous Method pag. 2 3. Vpon a reserved Principle say you that Christ hath a Church upon earth in my inquiry amongst my Brethren of the Church of England who were as much your Brethren in this state and no more than they are Hobbes's or Spinoza's I gave most attention to those teachers or writers that had most reverence for Church Authority c. I appeal to any Man of sense whether this passage does not favour much more of a Man already a Papist than of a mere Seeker but to pass that Pray Sir what did you want or what was you inquiring for was it for the Catholick Church or for a particular Communion wherein you might be safe if for the Catholick Church you needed not to be curious whom you inquired of among our Teachers and Writers since the meanest of them could readily have told you that the Catholick Church is made up of all the Particular Churches planted in the four quarters of the World holding from Christ the onely Head of her the true Faith and Catholick Vnity so that if you intended to find where she was fixed that so you might in necessity tell her your grievances she is confined to no place pag. 5. being a Diffusive Body throughout the World. If you wanted a Particular Communion a true Member of the Catholick Church wherewith to communicate and upon which to trust your Salvation the Church of England Particular as to place Catholick as to Faith and Doctrine is such so that your inquiry might here have ended since if you were a true Member of Hers you were at the same time as true a Member of the Catholick Church Here I must take occasion to tell you that you seem by your Abstracting your self from your self to have wilder'd your self and thence to have confounded the Notions of the Catholick and Particular Churches while from our Saviour's promise that the Gates of Hell should never prevail against the Catholick Church you argue the Church must be one which no Body denies that it must have one Faith which no Body denies neither and that it must by virtue of Christ's promise perpetually abide in this one Faith nor is this denied any more than the other two by any of our Church and what have you got hence onely that Christ hath and will always have a true Church upon Earth which I know no Body ever denied But here is the grand pinch and what one may easily see you aim at and that is to have this Catholick Church and the Church of Rome to be all one and the same which we shall see how you prove by and by In the mean time I must return to you where I left you quarrelling with our Church-men and see whether I can make an end of the Quarrel You say that you found that those of our Church that had most Reverence for Church Authority meant onely their own c. You had done the World a great kindness if you had told who they were you inquired of and what were the Queries you put to them I hope if you asked after the Catholick Church they did not tell you that the National Church of England was the whole Catholick Church If you asked after a Particular Church surely you cannot blame them for asserting the Authority of their own Church When you put the same Queries to the Romish Teachers or Writers did they reject their own Church's Authority did not they mean their own when they would persuade you to their Communion as much as our Men did that of our Church when you inquired among them where then is the fault what would you have had 'em to doe to please you would you have had them to say that the Church of England is the Catholick Church which no one that hath any sense can say of Her any more than of the Church of Rome would you have had 'em to say that they had a Church indeed but that either she had no Authority or that no Body need to submit to it which none but a mere Ignoramus could say This Sir is perfect Trifling this is to write a Book and yet not to know what one wants or what he would have I wish to God you had reserved when you were abstracting your self a little Logick that a Man might have known what you meant here and where one might have you that so when a Reader thinks by your Words and by Connexion that you are talking of the Catholick Church you may not come off with a Pish the Man understands me not I was speaking of Particular Churches I wish you had licked this your confused piece into a little better Method and had bestowed on it a little thing called Intelligibility but perhaps you thought such a stile fittest for a Man that was going to write about Transubstantiation You are as little pleased with them when you say they held the Scriptures in high esteem you might without a falsity have added in far greater than the Church of Rome does of which you now are though under that Notion they understood no more pag. 3. than what themselves were pleased to allow to be Canonical admitting also some Traditions but taking and refusing as
they saw good c. To be brief with you on this point if you speak here of particular Persons in our Church it is utterly false since they are all obliged to believe that to be the Canon of Scripture which is set down in the Articles of our Church and there is not one Man of our Church that is at liberty to believe which he pleases and to reject which he pleases from being Canonical Scripture to him and for Traditions received in the Church no particular Man hath any more power over them than over the number of the Canonical Books But if you speak of our Church it self here which your words without stretching will not bear it is as false of Her since she believes and delivers those Books onely as Canonical which the Primitive Church believed and delivered down to her as such She rejects none as Apocryphal which were not also rejected as such by the Primitive Church as the Famous and most Learned Bishop Cosin hath most incomparably proved it for her in that his excellent Scholastick History of the Canon of Scripture And for Traditions she rejects none but such as have no evidence nor probability of their ever having been of use in the Primitive Church or such as are of no moment in which case I never saw reason why the National Church of England hath not as much Authority herein to judge of these things as the Church of Rome her self who for example sake hath left off giving the Communion to Infants tho' a Tradition of the Catholick Church So that I cannot for my Life see what you would fain tho' most ridiculously deduce from hence that all with us resolved it self into the Judgment of a Private Spirit pag. 3. and must be I suppose you mean the Private Spirit must be tho' your words are far from bearing it the chief or rather onely support of your Protestant Faith c. Since it is so palpably false as I have just now shewn nothing as to matters of Faith Discipline or Church Communion among us being either left to or guided by or depending upon any Man how great or how learned soever his private Spirit and so ridiculous that I could not forgive it any Man that had not abstracted himself from his reason but to doe you right you have almost a mind to come off it with your Methought and I am content without being angry that it should pass for your thought the abstracted-no-Religion Man's You go on to shew that you could not persuade your self that Scripture alone could be the Judge of Controversies pag. 3. and resolve your doubts when the Private Spirit was made the Judge of Scripture c. Let the private Spirit be excluded will you admit it then will you allow the Representative Church of England to interpret in new Emergencies which fell not within the care of Antiquity and the Four General Councils If you admit this there need be no dispute since long before your doubts the Church of England hath by publick Authority interpreted the Scripture in all matters of Faith and Discipline and tied up all her Members hath in all the points of Controversie betwixt us and Rome determined that the sense of the Scripture is directly against them and for us If you will not admit it I should be glad to see one reason against it that would not as fully fly in the face of the Church of Rome As to the Mischief upon this Principle of the Private Spirit pag. 3 4. the Wars and Murders c. You ought to have remembred that that Principle was not set up by but against the Church of England and that it was not the Church but the direct and sworn Enemies thereof that committed all those outrages you cannot be ignorant that it was She only that suffered during that Rebellion and Schism and therefore it is most unjust in you to insinuate as if She was cause of all that distraction whereas nothing is more apparent than the contrary to it And as to your Tanrum Religio c. I challenge you to shew any one Principle of the Church of England that encourages or does but glance towards Rebellion Sedition or disturbance of either Church or State This I 'll promise you for every one I 'll shew you Ten of your new Church I 'll shew you Councils for it your own most famous of all the European Councils the Fourth of Lateran leading the Van. Your Popes deposing Princes pag. 84. giving away their Kingdoms as they have done ours more than once setting up in Rebellion Son against Father I 'll shew you the Rebellious Holy League in France one King most barbarously Murdered by it a Pope Sixtus Quintus in a set Speech commending the Paricide the Sorbone it self making Rebellious Decrees against the Two Harries of France both Massacred by their Catholick as they call themselves Subjects but enough of this wherein you know or at least should that we have infinitely the advantage of your new Church as to Principles of Loyalty The result it seems of your Inquiry and search among us was that you could not comply with common reason if you did not disclaim the Judgment of your own or any Man 's private Spirit c. pag. 4. I have upon this but one Question to ask you and that is how you came to be a Roman Catholick if you disclaimed your own reason or private Spirit pray who chose your guide or Church for you if you disclaimed every ones else pray tell us how any Body else could doe it for you But notwithstanding this your disclaiming we find you busie enough up and down the Book acting as if you never had done any such thing discovering judging complying contemplating searching and Forty such expressions which used to denote the exercise of a Man's private Judgment and Reason CHAP. V. His Method farther exposed and the ridiculous Fruits of it THE Fruit of all your search hitherto hath been onely to find pag. 4. or at least to mistrust the ground you stood upon somewhat unsure c. What ground it was you then stood upon I cannot guess since before this you had abstracted your self from Religion and supposed your self as of no Religion so most certainly of no Church But all this is assuredly but a figure to bring in the Rock the Rock you think you were got upon when once a Romanist If I might have had a word with you before you had mounted your Rock for now I am afraid there is no speaking with you I would onely have been informed by you whether there is but one Rock and whether I must give (a) Orig. Hom. 1. in Matth. Origen the lie who tells me that all the Apostles were Rocks as well as Peter and what I must say to (b) Prescript c. 32. 36. Edit Franck. 1597. Tertullian and others that tell me other Apostles planted Churches as well as Peter
and Paul at Rome and that I might be as safe in any of them all as in that at Rome since they and Rome had the same Faith as (c) Cont. Haer. l. 1. c. 2 3. Edit Feuard 1625. Irenaeus says delivered to them and had a Ministry settled by Apostles among them I wish I might be so happy as to have a satisfactory Answer to these Queries from you or any one else But for the present you are too busie having got the Text that the Gates of Hell should not prevail which Text by the bye how came you to interpret of a Church since if you disclaim your private Judgment it does for any thing you can know relate to something else You are sure upon it that Christ hath a Church that that Church has but one Faith which I have already told you our Church does not deny And now you wanted nothing to find firm footing sure footing you should have called it for Mr. Serjeant's sake but to discover pag. 4. whether the Church from her Original was the Commissioned Interpreter of the Sacred Writings c. One would expect here in a thing of that moment some well managed Reasons from Scripture Reason and the Consent of Antiquity to prove that the Church of Rome which you cannot deny that you mean here was this Commissioned Interpreter but instead of that you think you do it cleverly enough by insinuating that without it there would be no end of Controversies which is not proving but begging As to the choice of a Hundred Faiths without such an Interpreter which you say you saw you might have if you mean in the Church of England pag. 5. and that you must mean having already set aside all other Communions and being now employed in the examining whether of the Two Churches the Church of England or Rome you might be safe with I am obliged to tell you that there are no fewer than Ninety Nine mistakes in this short Sentence since the Faith of the Church of England is but one and as much one as that of the Church of Rome her self But for all this talk you have not got to your Church yet pag. 5. which must be Visible to wave needless Disputes such the Church of England is as well as the Church of Rome And now you want nothing but a definition of her which you complain you could not get among us and therefore was forced to go to the Books of Catholicks As to the complaint I answer that you needed not to have gone to the Catholicks as you call 'em since the Church of England's definition in her Articles will I think satisfie any reasonable Man while (d) Article 19. it defines the Visible Church of Christ to be a Congregation of Faithfull here Hereticks and Schismaticks are both excluded Men in which the pure Word of God is Preached and the Sacraments be duly Ministred according to Christ's Ordinance and that must be by lawfull Pastors in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same You could not but know of this Definition of the Church of Christ you had done well to have shewn particularly wherein it failed of separating Hereticks or Schismaticks from being either Flock or Shepherds in the Church But no Ignorance is comparable to that which is affected And since you would not be contented with ours I 'll e'en try S. N's and see what reason it has to be prefer'd to that of the whole Church of England The Church of Christ is one Society or company of Men. S. N. Ch. of E. S. N. The Visible Church of Christ is a Congregation Linked and combined together in the same Profession of Christian Faith. Of Faithfull Men. Ch. of E. S. N. Ch. of E. And use of Sacraments under lawfull Pasters And the Sacraments be duly Administred according to Christ's Ordinance Thus far we agree as for S. N's addition of those Pastors also under one Supreme Head Pastor or Conservator pacis veritatis do you or he prove it and then put it into the Definition it s being there now is no proof of the Truth of it However you I perceive were satisfied with it and think this Definition hath brought you to the Rock hath done your business for you I have often heard indeed of Men disputed into a Church of Men cajoled and of others threatned or frighted into a Church but must confess I never heard of any before you definitioned into a Church and truly it looks surprizing that a Man should like a Church for a Definitions sake Suppose your Definition prove false are you resolved to leave that Church and go to another that hath a better Definition If this be your Humour the Sophisters would be too hard for you and lead you into an endless Maze Satisfied however you are at present and so overjoyed at this Definition that you forgot what was necessary for it and that was to prove and to confirm it instead of which you fall into extravagant Praises and a hurry of Words and Ecstasies to no purpose whereas you neglect to prove First that this is a true and regular Definition and Secondly that it does belong to the Church of Rome so called exclusive of all other Had you done this pag. 6. you had acted like a Scholar whereas the other rable of discoveries and abused Psalms prove nothing at all and would far better have become some Woman or Poet-Convert than you who should prove these things and let them which can doe no better admire After your fit of Ecstasies is over you seem something willing to afford us some Testimonies of Antiquity to what purpose I must now inquire that so we may avoid Confusion and I may shorten my Answers But here according to my own design I must take leave of your Method of resolving your self in your doubts being arrived at that which I took leave for order and clearness sake to call the Reasons of your Conversion which convinced you so far as to leave our Communion and to espouse that of Rome I will take leave of it with this Complement that it really is the most admirable one I ever heard of for a Clergy-Man of above Threescore CHAP. VI. His Proofs of a Monarchical Church under one Supreme Head from Scripture Answered THE Fruit of your noble Method and the effect of all your Search hitherto hath been as far as I can perceive that you have met with a Definition that pleases you Now except you take S. N. to be as infallible in making of Definitions as the Pope is said by some and perhaps believed by you to be in making of Canons for the Church and that you ought to submit to his Definition just as you do to the Popes Decrees with all submission without any scruple or examination you know it will be expected from you to prove this his Definition to be true I cannot dare to think you so
particular Governour and here you prove that People must be dutifull to their Bishops pag. 8. Ay but say you St. Ignatius tells us there is but one Altar and one Bishop as also that there ought to be but one Church and one Faith which is in Christ c. and that surely is to the purpose This I utterly deny I grant indeed St. Ignatius in his Epistle to the Philadelphians not as you have mistaken it to the Philippians to which Church he wrote no Epistle tho' some have coined one for him doth speak of one Altar and one Bishop and you had done fairly to have cited the passage at large as you did the other two nothing to the purpose but this is a certain sign that runs almost through your Book that where you onely hint or quote half or put an c. in the middle of a Sentence there all things will not be found fair The passage then is this (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph Edit J. Vossii Be carefull therefore saith he speaking to the Philadelphians to make use of this one Eucharist for there is but one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one Cup to Communicate to us or unite us to his Blood one Altar as but one Bishop with the Presbyters and Deacons my fellow-servants that whatever ye do ye may act according to Gods appointment Now this passage is so far from proving what you would have it that there is but one Supreme Bishop who you say is he of Rome that it asserts the direct contrary for if it proves as you say it does that there is but one Altar and one Bishop I am as certain that it proves that one Bishop to be the Bishop of Philadelphia and that one Altar to be this Bishops since he exhorts these Philadelphians to make use and keep to that Eucharist that was to be received from that one Altar that did belong to that one Bishop and that one Bishop I am sure was the then Bishop of Philadelphia I will not urge upon you any place of Ignatius but will onely say and will be at any time ready to prove that he that cites Ignatius for a defender of a Monarchical Church under one Head on Earth either hath not read Ignatius or does not understand him What you urge from St. Cyprian is to no purpose since every one owns that every Member ought to keep the Vnity of that Church to which he doth belong and that no Man that is disobedient to the Church his Mother will ever have God for his Father Nor your long quotation from St. Irenaeus where your faculty of translating appears to be none of the best pag. 8. This Preaching and this Faith when the Church had heard spread through the whole World she diligently keeps as it were dwelling in one House to wit having one Soul and one Heart c. which give me leave to alter a little to St. Irenaeus his good sense and then you shall have my Answer about it The Catholick Church having received this Preaching and this Faith although she be dispersed over the whole World yet keeps and preserves them as diligently as if she were confined to or did Inhabit a single House and she doth believe them without any difference or disagreement as tho' she had but one Soul and but one Heart and accordingly doth both preach teach and deliver these things these Articles of Faith as if she had but one Mouth c. Of all the passages in Antiquity I wonder what ill Fate put this piece of St. Irenaeus in your way had you considered it well I am sure we should not have met with it in your Book since it does perfectly ruine the whole design of this part of your Book for whereas the benefit you intended from it was to help you to prove that the Church of Christ is Monarchical under a single head there is nothing less here and every thing contrary for as it speaks of the Catholick Church as one through this Vnity of Faith so it proves what we of the Church of England so much contend for that the Particular Churches of Germany Spain France Aegypt and the East of Lybia Jerusalem Rome and the rest do make up this Catholick Church without the least hint of a Head over them all or of any other Vnity than that of Faith the Light that doth like the Sun equally enlighten every where You will say perhaps that the Church of Rome is not expressly mentioned here and that probably it is because all these Particular Churches mentioned are the several parts of her Body which really is the same as the Catholick Church But to spoil this groundless Pretence neque haequae in Medio Mundi sunt constitutae not to insist on it that by the Churches constituted in the middle of the World in this passage She as well as Jerusalem and the Churches betwixt them is certainly intimated I desire you but to peruse the Third Chapter of his Third Book against Heresies Having in the beginning of this Chapter urged against the Hereticks that none of the Apostles delivered to the Bishops their Successours any such things as they impiously taught and that he could shew this from the Successions in all the Churches he thus addresses them b Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine Omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare Successiones Romae fundatae constitutae Ecclesiae Traditionem c. St. Irenaeus l. 3. c. 3. contr Haeres Edit Feuardent 1625. But because it is too tedious in such a Volume as this is to reckon up the Successions of all Churches c. he then reckons up that of the very great and very ancient Church founded at Rome by St. Peter and St. Paul c. If this passage do not prove the Church of Rome to be one of all those Churches and as Particular a Church as any of the rest I will for the future as you did abstract my self and deny my Eyes as well as my Reason What you quote from Clemens of Alexandria and Tertullian two of whose passages are part falsly pag. 9. and part lamely translated are nothing at all to your purpose they only speak of the Catholick Church as one through the Vnity of Faith not a word of the Church of Rome or of her being that one Church under one Head Bishop The same advantage and no more doth that from St. Chrysostom afford you pag. 9. which says The Apostle calls it the Church of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he may shew it may be reduced into one which with your leave I would express thus to shew or having shewed that it ought to be at Vnity c. All which is no more than what the Members of the Church of England have said a Hundred Thousand times that every Church as well as that at Corinth ought to be at Vnity You
might have quoted our Collect for all Conditions of Men O God the Creatour and Preserver of all Mankind p. 9. c. instead of the passage out of Theodoret onely you had a mind to shew your great reading otherwise ours would have served you to all the purposes this can they both saying the same thing that is not one syllable to your intentions p. 10. St. Ambrose's and St. Hierome's are just the same speaking that which none of our Church can deny every member of it doth believe that there is one Catholick and Apostolick Church and at the same time is as ready to profess that he doth no more believe than any of the Primitive Christians ever did that the Church of Rome is that Church or that that one Catholick and Apostolick Church is governed by one Supreme Pastour the Bishop of Rome which was the thing you were to prove but how little you have performed it I dare appeal to any one that would but as he reads consider and compare your quotations and what I have said upon them More Testimonies it seems you could have given us p. 10. but you say it were too tedious either to write or reade c. There is another reason why they would be tedious and that is because if they are no better than these we have had already they would have been nothing to the purpose and to say those Testimonies you have presented us are not the best would be to disparage your prudence and parts which we need not doe One more however you cannot refrain giving us for good omens sake that of Constantine the Great whose Zeal for the Vnity of the Catholick Church and his most earnest endeavours for the peace thereof all know and admire and therefore 't was needless to recite since it hath not one syllable to your business which was not to prove what both sides affirm that there is a Catholick Church but that the Church of Rome is that Catholick Church governed by one Supreme Pastour Quod restat probandum aternùm restabit One thing I must desire of you by reason of these passages that if ever you set up again for a Writer you would either tell us what Editions the Books are of which you quote or name the Books you pick'd 'em out of you cite the 62d Chapter Valesius's Edition says it 's the 64th you quote the 63d and he says it 's the 65th Chapter of Eusebius's 3d Book of the Life of Constantine CHAP. VIII The Ridiculousness of his Attempt against Protestant Communions exposed and an Vnity of Faith among them proved HERE pag. 10. as tho' you had done wonders by your Authorities you not without a secret vain-glory say What would I have once given to have found such an Vnity amongst Protestants to have England Scotland Denmark Zwethland Geneva Zurick c. thus Unius Labii nay to have found but one County in my own dear Countrey or perhaps one single Family so united a Brotherhood c. I wish Sir that it might have been my good fortune to have met you sometime with money in your Pocket in this generous mood I do assure you that I would have been reasonable and for one Guinea would have proved it to you or have forfeited 40 that all these Churches you have reckoned up in the North and Western parts of Europe are as much Vnius Labii as all the Proofs you have tack'd together do either prove or require for to repeat the substance of them there is none of them all doth either prove or offer at it that all the Particular Churches of Christ should have the same Customs Rites Ceremonies and Discipline without any difference one from another That which they prove and indeed there is but one that doth it clearly that from Irenaeus is that the Vnity of the Catholick Church dispersed throughout the world or which is the same thing of all the Particular Churches every where which do make up the Catholick Church was in and from the one Faith which she had from the Apostles and this Faith was that which we call the Apostle's Creed a Summary of which St. Irenaeus having set down in the short Chapter immediately before this out of which you have your quotation begins this Chapter as you have quoted that the Catholick Church having received this Preaching and this Faith to wit included in the Apostle's Creed doth preserve it and teach it inviolably c. and at the end of this same Chapter c Et neque qui valde praevalet in Sermone ex iis qui praesunt Ecclesiis alia quam haec sunt dicet Nemo enim super Magistrum est neque infirmus in dicendo deminorabit Traditionem Cùm enim una eadem fides sit neque is qui multum de ea potest dicere amplius Lampliat neque is qui minus deminorat S. Iraen c. Haer. l. 1. c. 3. Edit Feuard he tells us that the Church was so much Vnius Labii as your phrase is in this Faith that neither He that was more eloquent among the Pastours of the Church will say or teach any things different from these Articles of Faith for no Man is above his Master nor he that is less expert will diminish any thing from this Faith delivered or Tradition For since the Faith is one and the same neither he that can say most about it doth add any thing to it nor he that can say least doth take any thing from it This Faith then to use St. Irenaeus's simile like the Sun Ibidem enlightens all parts of the world shines to them all and doth influence all with her one Faith as with a common heat and makes all that embrace it throughout the world to become the constituent parts of the Catholick Church By this time I do not question but that you think your Guinea might have been in danger since no man that hath common sense can deny that the Churches of England Denmark Swedland and the rest are Vnius Labii in this Faith which is equally embraced and professed by them and therefore hath the same influence over them that it had over the several Churches in St. Irenaeus his time to make them true Members of the Catholick Church So that as all your money would have been lost on this account so your Pity over your own dear Countrey is not onely lost but childish and ridiculous too and would far handsomer have become a Woman that never saw farther than her Psalter than you that pretend to such a large knowledge in Fathers and Divinity But tho' your Pity were lost pag. 10 11. you are resolved your Countrey shall not want your hearty prayers that true Charity may possess their hearts and that there may be a most holy love planted and reigning in their hearts for ever c. I used to think it was the opinion of the Church of Rome and her Party that we
of the Church of England wanted the true Faith if so you are not then so charitable for all your Pretences as you might be and a little petition that true Faith as well as true Charity may possess our hearts would not be so very much or so troublesome for you now you are on your Rock to put up for us But perhaps your opinion is that our Faith is good enough in this Church onely that we are an ill-natured uncharitable Church and therefore want such an Oratour as you to obtain for us the Gift of Charity But do we want Charity so much more than our neighbours at Rome God will one day judge and let the world doe it in the mean time whether we or they want it more they that damn all besides their own Church or we that hold that even they may be saved And for our Faith neither shall we need to flatter our selves by and by we shall be called to account by you about it and proved to our sorrow to want that altogether as much as Charity so that in the mean time how are you the compassionate and charitable Man 'T is no wonder that one that hath made so great a mistake as to say there is no Vnity among the Reformed Communions should make such adoe to make the Church of Rome appear great by reckoning up all the Vniversities Bishopricks c. that own and submit to the Pope's Jurisdiction I have not so much time to trifle away as to examine whether your Muster be right all that it proves is that a great many Churches that by the Rules of Christianity and by the ancient Laws of the Catholick Church were free and independent do now labour willingly or unwillingly I do not pretend to know under the Vsurpation of the Church of Rome and her Vniversal Bishop which Title Gregory the Great himself a Bishop of that See thought Antichristian When you reckon Sicily and its Bishops you ought to have remembred that they have a Supreme Head of their own the King of Spain who is therefore once a year excommunicated by the other Supreme Head at Rome but for quietness sake as constantly the next day absolved who acts as supremely and Independently there as the Pope himself does in Rome or any part of Italy But this perchance you did not know and therefore 't would be very unreasonable to expect a true account of it from you CHAP. IX A Digression wherein is proved that the Church of Rome is a particular Church and that the Vnity among the Primitive Churches was in Faith onely YOUR next design if I understand you right is to prove the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome But before I undertake to talk with you about that I will take leave to make a Digression the Design of which shall be to shew you that I may not be onely employed in pulling down what you build how much you have been mistaken about your Notion of the Catholick Church and how miserably that Definition of S. N. or rather the Romish Missionaries have imposed upon you I will contract it as much as I can and care not how short I am so that I be but clear and intelligible The things therefore I propose to make appear are these First That the Church of Rome in the Primitive times was looked upon to be as particular a Church as any other then in being Secondly That as an Vnity in Faith was always required in every Particular Church to make it a true branch of the Catholick Church so there were in those Primitive times always found and always allowed of differences as to Practices Ceremonies Discipline and such things between the several particular Churches without any breach of Catholick Peace and Vnity 1. The first of these I am almost as much ashamed to attempt as to prove that I had a Mother it is so plain and visible through all Antiquity that I admire any Man that owns his Reason can in the least question the Church of Rome's being as Particular a Church as any of its neighbours such I am sure St. Paul thought it to be when he wrote his Epistle from Corinth to that Church and such St. Clemens knew it certainly to be when he writes in the name of the Church settled at Rome the famous Epistle to the Church of Corinth the Epistle St. Ignatius wrote to it just before his Martyrdom there does equally prove it with the other two and not one syllable is there to be met with in these three best Monuments of Antiquity as far as I can see that does at all advance her above the common level of the other her sister Churches or in the least hint her any ways being the Mistress or Mother of them all as the late and our modern Wise-men are pleased to say she is but for proving it are willing to be excused I question not but what I have cited out of St. Irenaeus proves the sentiment of him and his time to have been that she was a particular Church among the rest in the world he was certainly of this opinion S. Iren. con Haer. l. 3. c. 3. when telling the Hereticks that it would be too tedious to reckon up the Successions of ALL the CHURCHES he puts down that of Rome which he could not have done had not she been one of those All he there mentions I will but produce one more upon this too evident a point Tertullian d Edant ergo Origines Ecclesiarum suarum evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per Successiones ab initio decurrentem ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis viris c. habuerit auctorem antecessorem Hoc enim modo Ecclesiae Apostolicae census suos deferunt sicut Smyrnaeorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Joanne conlocatum refert Sicut Romanorum Clementem à Petro ordinatum edit proinde utique ceterae exhibent c. Tertull. de Praescript c. 32. Edit Franck. 1597. who challenging the Hereticks to shew the Original of their Churches the Succession of their Bishops in a direct line from either an Apostle or an Apostolical Person that always kept within the Vnity of the Church tells them the Apostolical Churches could doe this for example the Church of Smyrna that had Polycarp placed there for their first Bishop by St. John the Church of Rome that had Clemens ordained by St. Peter and for the rest of those Churches that they did the same 2. I 'll pass now to the second point to shew That as an Vnity in Faith was always required in every Particular Church to make it a true part of the Catholick Church so there were in those primitive times always found and always allowed of Differences as to Practice and Ceremonies Discipline and such things between the several particular Churches without any breach of Catholick Peace and Unity As to the Vnity by Faith I need not much if at all insist upon the proof of it since we both make it necessary to the being a Member of the Catholick Church
S. Irenaeus cont Haer. l. 1. c. 3. St. Irenaeus in the Chapter you and I quoted doth sufficiently prove that it was the Faith received from the Apostles that made the Church one that it was that which enlightened and therefore saved every particular Church as well as particular Person No Man speaks more of the beauty and necessity of Vnity and yet that He meant it onely as to an Vnity of Faith is very apparent from that famous Epistle to Victor Bishop of Rome who had most imprudently and irregularly excommunicated the Asiatick Churches for not keeping Easter at the same time He and most other Christians did In this Epistle he tells Victor that before his time All Churches tho' several of 'em differing in this thing of the time of observing Easter preserved Catholick Peace and did communicate one with another notwithstanding such a difference Neque enim de Die viz. celebr Pasch solum controversia est sed etiam de formâ ipâ—a Jejunii Quidam enim existimant unico die sibi esse jejunandum alii duobus alii pluribus nihilominus tamen omnes isti pacem inter se retinuerunt nos invicem retinemus Ita Jejuniorum Diversitas Consensionem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fidei commendat apud Euseb Hist Eccl l. 5. c. 24. Ed. Vales. He gives him the Instance in this same Ep. of St. Polycarp and Anicetus who differing and resolved so to continue in this point did most lovingly communicate together at Rome it self Anicetus as a particular mark of Honour and Brotherly Love permitting St. Polycarp to Consecrate the Eucharist in his Church and stead and did as lovingly part He further informs him that it was not about the time of observing Easter onely that there were Differences between particular Churches he mentions the much greater variety in the great duty of Fasting that some fasted but one Day some two others more yet did however preserve Peace and Vnity with all that differed from them and so he says they still did continue to do in his time and concludes this Narrative thus That the Diversity of their Fasts did commend the Unity of their Faith than which I could never desire a more evident proof for what I have affirmed that different Customs were found and allowed of in the different particular Churches without breach of Catholick Vnity and Communion Tertullian is as express in both points of the Vnity of Faith and diversity of Discipline and Customs that tho' the first is necessary to all Churches yet that the other is lawfull and practised in different Communions e Regula quidem Fidei una omnino est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum Hac Lege Pidei manante cetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis Tertul. de Virgin velandis c. 1. Edit Franck. The Rule of Faith says he is altogether one immoveable and uncapable of any Reformation or Alteration after which he sets down an Abridgment as Irenaeus had done above of the Apostles Creed and then proceeds hac Lege c. This Law or Rule of Faith continuing firm the other matters of Discipline and Manners do admit of Correction or Amendment These two eminent Writers are so clear and convincing in this matter that I 'll wave the producing any more Authorities to this purpose besides that of the very eminent and famous Firmilian Bishop of the Cappadocian Caesarea f Eos autem qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sunt ab origine tradita frustra Apostolorum auctoritatem praetendere scire quis etiam inde potest quod circa celebrandos dies Paschae circa multa alia divinae rei Sacramenta videat esse apud illos aliquas diversitates nec observari illic omnia aequaliter quae Hierosolymis observantur Secundum quod in caeteris quoque plurimis Provinciis multa pro locorum nominum l. hominum diversitate variantur nec tamen propter hoc ab Ecclesiae Catholicae pace atque unitate aliquando discessum est Firmiliani Epistola Cypriano inter Epist Cypriani 75. p. 220. Edit Oxon. who in an Epistle to St. Cyprian acquaints the World that they of the Romish Church did not observe in all things what had been delivered from the beginning I pray then what 's become of your Palladium Tradition and that they did to no purpose pretend the Authority of the Apostles he instances about the Observation of Easter and lays further to their charge some differences about many other divine affairs and administrations and says that they do not observe the same Customs that are at Jerusalem This he mentions not to blame them for them but to reprove their Pride and their disturbing the Peace and Vnity of the Catholick Church by breaking Communion with other Churches upon such accounts for in the next words to these I cite himself mentions that in very many other Provinces Cum una sit Fides cur funt Ecclesiarum diversae consuetudines c. many things were varied according to the diversity of places and names men however that the Peace and Vnity of the Catholick Church was not hereby broken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. Interrogatio Augustini ad Gregor M. CHAP. X. An inquiry into RomanVnity under their Dictator HAving now discharged my self of my digression and satisfactorily I hope proved that which I undertook in it I do now pass to your Muster of all those places and persons under the Pope the Unity of which your assurance is doth hence proceed p. 11. because they submit themselves to the Judgment and Regulation of one Dictator who conserves the ancient Decrees of General Councils deposited with him by the whole Church from whom if any dissent or walk irregularly he is severed and cut off from the rest of the Members c. That the submission of all those Churches you mention to the Dictator at Rome is the cause of that Vnity you say is among them no Body does deny any more than that all the Philosophers among the Heathens would have been as much at Vnity had they made Aristippus or Pyrrho their Vniversal Dictator and resolved never to think speak or write besides what he was pleased to command or teach them The Question betwixt us is whether Christ did leave his Church in a Monarchical State under the sole ordering of St. Peter at first to be continued after his decease under the successive Bishops of Rome and this is the thing to be proved as for what you talk about the Roman Dictators keeping and managing the Canons of General Councils I question not before we part upon this head to prove your Reasons for it either false or ridiculous But before we go any further is the Church of Rome really at that Vnity
that one might expect from its having such an Vniversal Dictator over it I trow not for did you never hear of that long bandying which perhaps is not ended about the Immaculate Conception nor of the violent Feuds betwixt the Jansenists and Molinists which for all the Popes determination continue to this Day Is that whole Community agreed about the Infallibility How is it then that some are for the Personal Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome as such some that He is so onely in Cathedra some that onely a General Council is such Are they agreed about his Jurisdiction How is it then that some put him under and others above a General Council Is his Supremacy determined wherein it doth consist Whence is it then that the Clergy of France so lately made Determinations for the Limitation of it 1682. and to deny his Deposing Power or Medling in Temporals And the Clergy of Hungary under the Arch-Bishop of Gran did 1684 Condemn the Determinations of France to omit the Inquisition of Toledo doing the same thing against them What was the reason that the Pope who is Dictator and might with a word as such silence these Quarrels suffers these contrary Determinations but that he hath wit enough to know that he is not so much a Dictator as Mr. Sclater makes him in France and that his Bulls would signifie no more there about these things than they did about the Regale Are not the Professed Members of that Communion for all their Dictator still quarrelling and bandying one against another witness the Satyrs and virulent Libels betwixt the Jesuites and the Carmelites to pass by the more personal ones betwixt Maimbourgh and Schelstreat betwixt Alexander Natalis and D'enghien betwixt Arnauld and Malebranch I will but ask you one question why all F. Alexandre Noel's Books wherein he hath done all he can to vindicate their Religion were all condemned to the Fire not excepting one by this Pope's Breve in Eighty Four. I doubt we shall find that Doctors differ about the deposing Power and the Popes Supremacy in the bosome of the Church of Rome it self and that the French did not submit quietly to the Condemnation of their Determinations by the Clergy of Hungary These things perchance are most of 'em news to you and therefore you cannot be blamed for thinking or writing that they are at Vnity under their Dictator at Rome because you knew no better but if you be angry and say you did know them I desire to know how you could say that the Members of that Church do submit to that Dictator and are at Vnity under him whereas the Instances I have given are more than enough to convince that what you have written is but a Dream and your own confident mistake CHAP. II. Arguments from the Three first Centuries and the beginning of the Fourth for St. Peter's Supremacy answered TO leave this and proceed in your Book your business being as I told you above to prove that Christ left his Church in a Monarchical State under the sole ordering of St. Peter at first to be continued after his decease under the successive Bishops of Rome It is strange to see how confusedly you go about it but much stranger that you should begin with St. Dennis and not with the Scripture But I am afraid this Book it self as well as the private Spirit that used to sense it are now distasted by you alike and that it is look'd upon as a far more dangerous than usefull Book and so fittest to be set aside where there is no absolute necessity of bringing it upon the Stage For your Testimony from St. Dennis you know my mind already pag. 11. and we shall have occasion by and by to talk a little more about him pag. 11. St. Irenaeus his Testimony had come in I think a little better under your last Head among your Testimonies for the Vnity of the Catholick Church But how it proves St. Peters Supremacy I cannot devise except you can prove that St. Peter and St. Paul were but One Individual and make them two into one Man as p. 76. you have made Scotus Erigena into two Nor is there a word here about Supremacy all that Irenaeus saith is g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Romae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iren. c. Haer. l. 3. c. 3. Edit Feuard that St. Peter and St. Paul by their joint endeavours having founded that Church made Linus Bishop there c. which place seems to if it really do not exclude St. Peters being Bishop there himself at all so far is it from proving his Supremacy But if it will not serve for this purpose le ts see what it will do for to prove the Catholick Church to be Monarchical and no other than the Church of Rome You found say you Irenaeus I 'll venture to put in saying for without it or such a word I must confess that I cannot make English out of your Period that it was of necessity that every Church should agree with the Church of Rome c. Your translation here I cannot admit for convenire ad hanc Ecclesiam is surely to come up to this Church the reason of which St. Irenaeus makes the potentior Principalitas which I wonder you should omit in your Translation the more powerfull Principality the Supreme Civil Government Rome then being the Imperial City of the World and the Seat of the Senate and chief Judicatures which must of necessity bring People Christians as well as others thither from all parts and therefore make the Church of Rome a most visible and eminent Church and so the fittest for St. Irenaeus his design against the Hereticks when he had obliged himself to reckon up the Succession of one among the several Apostolical Churches of the World. I am not ignorant your now party are very earnest upon this place and very desirous to have it believed that by potentior Principalitas here is meant the Dignity and Jurisdiction of the Church at Rome over all other Churches and that therefore they should resort to her as to their Head and Mistress But not to insist on the Inconsistency of such a sense of these words with all the accounts we have of this and the rest of the Apostolical Churches from the purest Antiquity which I could easily shew had I room here I onely ask them what every Church was to go thither for Was it for the Catholick Faith that St. h Traditionem igitur Apostoloru◠in toto mundo manifestatam in Omni Ecclesiâ adest perspicere omnibus qui c. Iren. con Haer. l. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus assures us they every one had at home the Apostles after their Churches planted delivering to them the true Faith which then was kept as he assures us inviolably by them and therefore no need to go to Rome for it Was it for Discipline There was as little need for their going about this as for the other
Rome was from the beginning reckoned a particular Church I think is as plain as that Rome is in Italy I have proved it so fully above that I almost loath such a ridiculous subject of discourse pag. 17. And your Authorities from Pacian and Cyril of Jerusalem are not one jot to your purpose if you intend them to confirm that the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church all that they say or prove being that Catholick is the Sirname of true Christians and that every one should enquire for and unite with the Catholick Church into whatsoever place he comes Now what is this to the Church of Rome here is no mention of her here not a syllable to determine that she is the Catholick Church to unite with which these two Fathers are carefull to advise These things you tell us gave you some small encouragement to betake your self to that Communion that was both Christian and Catholick c. for which very reason you needed not have left the Communion of the Church of England which is both Christian and Catholick You ought to dislike Papist upon the same ground you dislike Protestant and if Christian was too large for you you needed not to leave the Church of England to be both Catholick and Christian the Church of England denominates her self from no particular Persons good or bad but is a True Church having lawfull Pastors and a Catholick Faith. You next say you cannot imagine why Protestants should so decline the Title of Catholick you mean or suffer it with so much silence to be laid aside unless it be pag. 18. because it imports a Faith spread throughout the World which they very well know would be utterly impossible to prove their Protestant Faith ever was c. Whether this passage is more ridiculous or false I must own that upon the sudden I cannot tell if you mean here as you ought the Church of England as you must to be consistent with your self having a good while ago cast off all the other Reformed Communions nothing can be more false and ridiculous since twice a Day we use it constantly in our Service and surely you will not be so extravagantly unreasonable to say we do not Mean or Pray for our selves when we Pray for the Good Estate of the Catholick Church So that our decling the Title and suffering it with so much silence to he laid aside must be put to the account of the grosser sort of Untruths And we need not wonder that you would offer a false reason for a false thing our Faith and the Faith of all the Reformed Churches having been already proved to be Catholick and therefore your utterly impossible to prove it to be a Faith spread throughout the World must be put up on the same account Nor is there ever a Member of the Church of England of any Learning that I ever met with or heard of that either declined the Title of a Reformed Catholick or was not ready onely to profess but also to prove that by being a Son of the Church of England he was a Member of a Catholick Church As to what you add about the other Adjunct in our ours I say of the Church of England as well as yours at Rome Creed Apostolical that you saw less reason for their claim to that and to give them their due they were more modest than much to insist upon it c. This Sentence is Brass every bit of it for if you mean the Church of England here I am astonished to think you should have so little Conscience or so little Modesty to publish such a gross untruth in the face of a Church that is so far from not insisting on the Title of Apostolical that it denounces every person excommunicate that shall dare to say the Church g Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the Church of England by Law established under the Kings Majesty is not a TRUE and an APOSTOLICAL CHURCH teaching and maintaining the DOCTRINE of the APOSTLES let him be Excommunicated â—pso facto and not restored but onely by the Arch-Bishop after his Repentance and publick Revocation of this his WICKED ERROUR Can. 3. of the Synod in 1603. of England is not an Apostolical Church and calls such an affirmation an impious Errour But if you are resolved to carry things at this rate by brazening us down 't is to no purpose to contend with you I must needs tell you that you might as well have published to the World that the Church of England hath no Creed in her publick Service nor believes a Trinity nor hath any Bishops to preside ovâ—â— her as this of her neither having nor pretending to Apostolical Faith and Succession If you include also the rest of the Reformed Churches you might easily know that there is no thing they so much insist upon as the proving their Faith and Practices to be purely Apostolical and therefore their Churches to be such so that neither are they so modest as not to insist on their being Apostolical as to the want of Succession among them that you object against 'em and they do not deny you your self have furnished them with an answer to your Party from St. Ambrose's words Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri Fidem non habent de Poenit. l. 1. c. 6. that they enjoy not the inheritance or Succession of Peter who have not the Faith of Peter But here you have a mind to make the Church of England to be of your opinion that is that the foreign Reformed Churches have no true Ministers because those that come out of France with the Title of Ministers are not allowed to exercise their Ministry before they receive the Orders of the Church of England pag. 19. c. It is true they are not allowed to have a Cure of Souls here without the taking of Episcopal Orders because it is expressly provided by Act of Parliament among us that no one shall have such a Cure of Souls without Episcopal Orders which Act you know was fully designed against our home Dissenters who had opportunities of Episcopal Orders at home not against them who could not have them at home with whom also we had nothing to do But since no exception was made in the Act for them the Church cannot dispense with an Act of Parliament in their favour However that she allows theirs to be true tho' imperfect Churches is hence plain because her Members in their Travels communicate with those Churches which thing she would never permit had they no Ministry it was the Practice of our Exiles in France during the long Rebellion and Dr. R. Watson hath lately put forth the most Learned and most Religious Bishop Cozin who was one of those noble exiled Confessors his Defence of their communicating there with Geneva rather than Rome So that your Argument fails you also here CHAP. XV. More of his foul Aspersions on the Church of England exposed and
if there were Errours fit to be thrown out of our Church you your self I am sure your Learned Men will grant that no Ordination can prejudice or hinder such a Rejection of Errours That there were such Errours crept in which ought to be cast out and were at our Reformation is what our Church-Men a Hundred times over have invincibly proved As to the Rule you bring from St. Ambrose that they enjoy not the Inheritance of Peter pag. 20. who receive not the Faith of Peter we are very ready to join issue with you or any of your Church upon it and I question not before you and I part on this subject to ruine the Papal and Roman Succession by your own Rule to wit by proving that they have receded from the Faith of Peter and the whole Primitive Church We readily own that a true and Apostolical Mission pag. 20. Commission and Ordination are considerable particulars and are as ready any time to assert that our Church hath them and to prove it against you at any time if you have a mind to undertake this point against her CHAP. XVI The Doctrine of the Church of England concerning the Eucharist put down Mr. Scl. 's Reasons from Scripture for Transubstantiation answered HAving traced you hitherto and found all your Attempts vain and your Reasons to no purpose which you took so much pains to scrape together to have proved that our Saviour Christ left his Catholick Church in a Monarchical State under a Particular Vicegerent and that that Vicegerent was the Bishop of Rome and his Church the Catholick Church And having shewn all your Attacks against and Remarks upon the Church of England to be very vain extremely abusive and extravagantly ridiculous I have now onely your last your great Reason to examine wherein you make an effort to prove that her Faith concerning the Eucharist is contrary to that of the Catholick Church If you could have proved this I must confess your forsaking our Communion would have been much more reasonable and therefore I question not but that as you have mustered up abundance of Authorities so you have done all you can to make them speak and declare against us but to how little purpose you have made all this noise and ado about this point also is what I shall quickly see Before I enter on your particular proofs I have a fresh complaint to make that you have not used herein that Ingenuity that would have become a Scholar one might very rationally have expected that as your Intentions were to prove against the Church of England that her Faith was as to the Eucharist false and corrupt so you would have set down what that her Faith is This would have looked like fair and ingenuous dealing first to have put down her Faith about the Eucharist and then to have shewn how contrary it was to Scripture and to the unanimous Consent of Antiquity If you reply to this my Complaint that her Faith is so well known that you needed not put it down together but that you have occasionally done it up and down these Authorities I must tell you that by the account you give of it occasionally one would be persuaded that it is far from being so well known I am sure that slender account or rather hints that you so often intersperse about it are utterly false and very foolish so that if any one should take an account of our Churches Faith from you and whom can they better take it from than one that was so lately a Minister among us they must believe that we hold the Eucharist to be mere figures mere representations and bare signs for that is the most you allow us to make of it that I can meet with in your Book all which how far it is from Truth I shall quickly shew you Well then since you had not the Ingenuity to put down an Account of the Church of England's Faith about the Eucharist I must that so I may the better examine the Proofs you bring and any one may compare the Authorities you quote and our Faith together and thereby more impartially judge and more readily discover whether Antiquity fairly laid down speak for or against us Concerning this Sacrament the Church of England in her 28th Article of Religion delivers her Opinion thus The Supper of the Lord is not onely a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death Insomuch that to such as rightly 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 Blessing is a partaking of the Bloud of Christ After which having declared her self against Transubstantiation as repugnant to plain Scripture and to the nature of a Sacrament and against any Corporal Presence of Christ's Natural Flesh and Bloud in the Declaration about kneeling at the end of our Communion-Service in our Liturgy she goes on in this Article to declare that The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Supper onely after an heavenly and spiritual manner and that the Mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith which last expressions exclude the wicked from partaking of Christ's Body and allow them barely the Sign or outward part of the Eucharist In the Publick Catechism in the Liturgy having taught her Catechumens that there are two things in each of the Sacraments the outward Sign and the inward spiritual Grace she teaches them to answer that the outward part of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is Bread and Wine and that the inward part or thing signified is the Body and Bloud of Christ which are verily and indeed taken and received by the Faithfull in the Lord's Supper These passages are sufficient to shew that our Church holds a real but not carnal a Spiritual and Heavenly but not Corporal Participation of Christ's Body and Bloud which tho' locally and naturally in Heaven is yet after a Mystical and Supernatural way communicated to the Faithfull not by the mouth of the Body but by that of Faith. Thus much for her Sentiment concerning this Sacrament pag. 20. now I must try your Reasons against it You tell us that you had been a long time greatly concerned for the Interpretation of but five small words of our Saviour c. The result of your concern I suppose was that those five words I doubt we shall find more than five or double five concerned in this business are to be taken in a literal sense and that which you offer for proof of it is this First Because this Sacrament was his last Will and Testament which ought not to be worded obscurely or doubtfully to prevent quarrels and divisions Secondly Because this Will is repeated by so many of his Apostles without the least variation or caution against the
another place that our Lord gave to his Disciples at his Last Supper the Figure of his sacred Body and Blood. CHAP. XXV Some Corollaries against Transubstantiation HAving hitherto sufficiently answered all your pretended Proofs for Transubstantiation and shewn in part the Sense and Arguments of the Fathers against it instead of wearying my self or rather our Reader with any more of your Authors which you very irregularly place and which you your self will grant to be produced to no purpose if the former Primitive Fathers were of a contrary Faith about the Eucharist I shall here adjoyn a few Corollaries to vindicate the Faith of the Catholick and Apostolical Church of England against Transubstantiation and will make it apparently clear that her Doctrine and Faith herein is both Primitive and Orthodox and exactly the same with that of the Fathers of the Catholick Church My first Corollary shall be 1 Coroll That the Fathers gave such Titles to the Consecrated Elements of Bread and Wine as utterly exclude a Transubstantiation It was sufficiently common with them to call the Elements a Tertullian con Marcion l. 4. c. 40. Beda Comment in 3. Psalm the Figure b August de Doctr. Christi c. 7. Origen Dialog cont Marcion p. 116. Edit Wets the Sign c Basil Anaphora Cyril Hierosol Col. 4. Cat. Mys the Type d Greg. Naz. Orat. 118. Macarius Hom. 27. the antitype e August in Gratiano the Similitude f Theodoret. Dialog 2. and the Symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ g Tom. 6. Concil Edit Cossart and a whole Oecumenical Council of 338 Bishops at Constantinople A. D. 754. declare them to be the true and onely Image of our Saviour's Body and Blood. These Expressions and the like I argue to be utterly inconsistent with the Elements being Transubstantiated into the very Body and Blood of Christ since it is impossible any thing can be the Figure of a thing and the thing it self or the thing it self and yet but the figure of it he that will affirm this may without an absurdity say that the Sign of the King at a Tavern door is the King himself that the Picture of the Ship in St. Paul's Church-yard is as real a true Ship as any on the River and that the Image of the King in the Exchange is really King James 2d in his very Person In short if any thing be the Figure it cannot be the thing if it be the thing it self it cannot be the Figure of it since nothing can be the Figure of it self And therefore if Christ's Natural Body be really on the Altar that which is there cannot be the Figure of it But if as the Fathers almost unanimously speak that which is there be the Figure the Sign of it then consequently our Saviour's Natural Body it self is not This is so evident See Tertullian's 4th Book against Marcion ch 40th I think I need not say any more upon this Point I might very easily else have shewn that the Strength of one of Tertullian's Arguments for our Saviour his having a true substantial Body against Marcion depended wholly on the Eucharist its being the FIGURE of his Body but I will wave it and conclude this Corollary with that of Facundus h Et potest Sacramentum Adoptionis Adoptio nuncupari Sicut Sacramentum Corporis Sanguinis ejus quod est in Pane Poculo consecrato Corpus ejus Sanguinem dicimus Non quod propriè Corpus ejus sit Panis Poculum Sanguis Sed quod in se Mysterium Corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant Hinc ipse Dominus benedictum Panem Calicem quem Discipulis tradidit Corpus Sanguinem suum Vocavit Facund Herm. pro Defens 3. Capit. Con. Chalced. Lib. 9. c. 5. p. 404 405. Edit Sirmond 1629. Bishop of Hermiana in Africa the Sacrament of Adoption may be called by the name of Adoption as we call the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ the consecrated Elements of Bread and Wine his Body and his Blood not that the Bread is properly his Body or the Cup his Blood but because they contain the Mystery of his Body and Blood upon which very account it is that when our Lord delivered the consecrated Bread and Cup to his Disciples he called them his Body and his Blood. One thing I must not forget here that tho' these Fathers and the Church of England with them look upon the consecrated Elements as Signs and Figures onely yet they and we believe that by the Institution of Christ they are the Means of conveying all the Virtue and Benefits of our Saviour's crucifyed Body of communicating the Blood and Body of Christ unto every worthy Communicant This I could not omit to let you see the silliness of your foolish Cant up and down of meer Signs of what meer figures c. such Expressions were designed against the Church of England or what do they in your Book against her if they were I must tell you that they are sottishly ridiculous and most intolerable from a man who was I am sorry I can say it a Minister of the Church of England and therefore must so often have seen her Articles and so often have used her Communion-Service My Second Corollary is 2. Coroll That such things are attributed to the Sacramental Body and Blood of Christ by the Primitive Fathers as do altogether exclude their being transubstantiated into the Natural Body and Blood of Christ I instance in that of the Sacramental Body and Blood of Christ their being said to Nourish our Bodies That the consecrated Elements do nourish our Bodies is very apparent from a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Apolog 2. St. Justin Martyr's saying that our flesh and blood are nourished by the consecrated Elements being changed into our Substance From b Quando ergo Calix Panis percipiunt â—erbum Dei fit Eucharistia Sanguinis Corporis Christi ex quibus augetur consistit Carnis nostrae Substantia S. Iren. c. Haer. l. 5. c. 18. Irenaeus and c Caro Corpore Sanguine Christi vescitur ut Anima de Deo saginetur Tert. de Resurrect c. 8. Tertullian that our Flesh is fed and nourished with the Body and Blood of Christ From d Ille Cibus qui sanctificatur per Verbum Dei perque obsecrationem juxta id quod babet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum ejicitur Orig. in 15 Matt. p. 27. Origen that the Eucharist as to its Material Part undergoes the common course of our common repasts From e Quia sicut visibilis Panis Vini substantia exteriorem nutrit inebriat hominem ita Verbum Dei qui est Panis Vivus participatione sui Fidelium recreat mentes Isidor Hispal apud Rathramni Lib. de Corp. Sang. D. p. 120. Edit Paris Boileau 1686. Isidore of Sevil that the Substance of the Visible Bread
to make Bertram a good Catholick that is in your stile a true man for Transubstantiation at last when hitherto their Church had damned this Writer to the Pit of Hell and Mr. Sclater himself hath very chronologically put him among the followers of Berengarius who first disturbed the long peace p. 76. p. 75. and as long continued Faith of the Catholick Church of Transubstantiation This strange attempt was accompanied with Arts and Tricks as strange and unusual with all honest men that is with a violent perverting of the Authors sense and an unjust and most foolish Turn of the whole design of Bertram †In his â—emarks upon Bertram p. 207 208 c. Printed at the end of his Translation Paris 1686. This Gentle man makes Bertram to write his Book against some that held our Saviour's Natural Body was received in the Eucharist without any Vail or Figure that is to put it into downright English with the very same dimensions Skin Hair Flesh Head Feet and Armes that he had on the Cross But is it probable there ever were any such men No it is so far from it that it is impossible there ever could since this Opinion must be grounded upon their seeing it so which I am sure never was never could be this Gentleman thinks the very †Praes p. 21. knowing what stercoranism means is enough to confute it but is it not far stronger against this fancy of his for I dare not call it any mens Opinion since I am very well satisfied there never could be any men that held such a thing It is pleasant however to see how the Dean goes about to prove that there was such an Opinion and such men against against which our Author did write this Tract he tells us that one Abbaudus and one Gaultier Prior of St. Victor held that our Saviour's Natural Body was palpable and sensible in the Eucharist but since these men by his own Confession lived two or three hundred years at soonest after Bertram it is but a very odd way of proving that there were such men in or before Bertram's time because there were about three hundred years after Such proof is fitter for Children than Deans of Cathedrals to use and ought no more to pass from him p. 213 214. than if it came from them but to help himself and his ridiculous Authorities he tells us that it is not probable that they two were the first Authors of this Opinion now for brevity sake to set this aside which is pitiful begging and not proving were these two men after all the Abbaudus and Gualtier of this Opinion that our Saviour's Body is received in the Eucharist without any Vail or Figure This is so very false that I wonder how any man that hath common sense or any learning could have the face to assert it * Cogitavetam illis aliqua respondere qui dicunt ipsum Corpus non frangi sed in Albedine ejus Rotunditate aliquid factitari sed recogitans ineptum esse in Evangelio Christi de Albedine Rotunditate dispâ—tare c. Abbaudus p. 211. sensualiter non solum Sacramento sed etiam veriâ—ate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fideliâ—m dentibus attèri Ecce Catholiâ—â— Eides Istâ— autem Scholasticus sic exponit vere quidem ait est sed in Sacramento tantum Gaultier p. 212. in the Remarks they say indeed that the Natural Body of Christ is palpable and sensible in the Eucharist but that they do not mean sensible to the Eye or visible is hence apparent because they talk of the Whiteness and and the Roundness which certainly are that which you call the vails of our Saviour's Body and all the intent of their Arguments was to prove that tho' our Saviour's Body was hid under the Accidents of Whiteness Roundness c. yet that it is palpable and subject to be broke since Whiteness and Roundness which are meer Accidents could not be broken or parted asunder So that now we find by this Dean's help at last that Rathramn's or Bertram's Book was writ against no body and about nothing since it is impossible there ever were such Persons or such an Opinion for any body to write against Certainly this Gentleman thought all the world asleep besides their own Party or he could never have had the courage to have writ such stuff and tho' I do not wonder at the French King 's giving his Royal Privilege to this Book and calling the Translator his dearly beloved because I suppose he does not desire to be thought to have read or examined the Book yet I am perfectly amazed to find the Approbation of the Sorbonne to this most ridiculous nonsensical Piece and can give my self no other reason for it than that those People are resolved to approve and license any thing against us tho' it be at the same time as much against common sense and reason I hope some one will do what I cannot have room or leasure to do here that is take this Dean Boileau's Translation and Remarks to task the very foundation of which I have perfectly ruined in that little I have said here But to return My fourth Corollary is 4 Coroll That the Illustrations and Comparisons by which the Fathers used to prove a Change in the Elements do prove their Opinions to have been opposite to Transubstantiation I will here instance in the several Comparisons (1) Greg. Nyssen Orat. in Bapt. Christi of the Water in Baptism (2) Ambros de Sacram l. 4. c. 4. of the Person baptized (3) Cyrit Hier. Catech. Mystag 3. of the Oyl in Chrism (4) Greg. Nyssen supra of the Ordained Person (5) Idem Ibidem and of the Altar These the Fathers made use of to prove such a change in the Elements of Bread and Wine Now there is no man of any learning or sense will say they taught any Transubstantiation of the Water of the Person baptized of the Oyl of the Stones of the Altar or of the Person ordained and therefore neither any Transubstantiation of the Elements of Bread and Wine They compare these several changes together and make them to be parallel and equal So that it is evident they meant an equal change in them and no Transubstantiation of one of them more than of the rest And farther all the change they attribute to any of these things the Water the Oyl the Baptized person c. is not at all as to their substance by removing it away but as to the Virtue Quality Office and Vse of them by the Accession or Influence of the Spirit of God as I have particularly shewed above in Gregory Nyssen Cyril of Hierusalem and St. Ambrose so that I may hence conclude that as the Primitive Fathers taught no substantial change of any of those things mentioned in order to the Effects they are dedicated to so they taught none of the Bread