whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism Iudaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth declar'd for the Popes Supremacy But Iohn Gerson who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope which afterwards moderate men durst not speak but yet some others spake them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Laeteran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an article of Faith But for the present it is a probationary article and according to Bellarmine's expression is fere de fide it is almost an article of Faith they want a little age and then they may goe alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article but it is sine controversia credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted That although the ancient Fathers did give the Communion to Infants yet they did not believe it necessary to salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their Writings can be able to inform himself and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the Decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian Belief But we proceed to other instances Sect. III. THe Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first occasion of the great Change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproach to Christendome it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Priâ—rias Bishop Fisher of Rochester sayes that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences and that they began after the people were a while affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the XII Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the First of England 1300. years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time Indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon Law written by Graetian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of P. Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as antient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now least the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease least they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merit and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of merits or at least of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these the Church hath made her a treasure a kind of poor mans box and out of this a power to take as much as they list to apply to the poor souls in Purgatory who because they did not satisfie for their venial sins or perform all their penances which were imposed or which might have been imposed and which were due to be paid to God for the temporal pains reserved upon them after he had forgiven them the guilt of their deadly sins are forc'd sadly to roar in pains not inferiour to the pains of hell excepting onely that they are not eternal That this is the true state of their Article of Indulgences we appeal to Bellarmine Now concerning their new foundation of Indulgences the first stone of
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The end of all our agonies and affirms That the Holy men of God rest in joy and in never failing hopes and are come to the end of their holy combates S. Iustin Martyr affirms That when the soul is departed from the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserved but the souls of the just into Paradice where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels S. Ambrose saith That Death is a haven of rest and makes not our condition worse but according as it findes every man so it reserves him to the judgement that is to come The same is affirm'd by S. Hilary S. Macarius and divers others they speak but of two states after death of the just and the unjust These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgement of the great day the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of rest S. Gregory Nazianzen expresly affirms that after this life there is no purgation For after Christs ascension into heaven the souls of all Saints are with Christ saith Gennadius and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the Catholick Church In what place soever a man is taken at his death of light or darkness of wickedness or vertue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same Order and in the same degree either in light with the just and with Christ the great King or in darkness with the unjust and with the Prince of darkness said Olimpiodorus And lastly we recite the words of S. Leo one of the Popes of Rome speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord being interrupted by any obstacles falls from the gift of the present Indulgence viz. of Ecclesiastical Absolution and before he arrive at the appointed remedies that is before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfactions ends his temporal life that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd when he is devested of his body he cannot obtain He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory what they paid not here and of being cleansed there who were not clean here And how these words or of any the precedent are reconcileable with the Roman Doctrines of Purgatory hath not yet entred into our imagination To conclude this particular We complain greatly that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false is yet with all the faults of it pass'd into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent But besides what hath been said it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth even so saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours If all the dead that dye in Christ be at rest and are in no more affliction or labours then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory is as false as it is uncomfortable To these words we adde the saying of Christ and we relie upon it He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into judgement but passeth from death unto life If so then not into the judgement of Purgatory If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life then not from death to the terminable pains of a part of Hell They that have eternal life suffer no intermedial punishment judgement or condemnation after death for death and life are the whole progression according to the Doctrine of Christ and Him we chuse to follow Sect. V. THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being Primitive and Apostolick that we know the very time it began to be own'd publiquely for an opinion and the very Council in which it was said to be pass'd into a publick Doctrine and by what arts it was promoted and by what persons it was introduc'd For all the world knows that by their own parties by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not express'd in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of Faith till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third MCC years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest Teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Iohannes de Basselis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the primitive ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgement of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus says that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of faith as Bellarmine confesses and Henriquez affirms that Scotus says it was not ancient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory VII nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English Jesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there
helps for the understanding of the Scriptures and as good testimony of the Doctrine deliver'd from their fore-fathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation and therefore if we find any Doctrine now taught which was not plac'd in their way of Salvation we reject it as being no part of the Christian faith and which ought not to be impos'd upon consciences They were wise unto salvation and fully instructed to every work and therefore the faith which they profess'd and deriv'd from Scripture we profess also and in the same faith we hope to be sav'd even as they But for the new Doctors we understand them not we know them not Our faith is the same from the beginning and cannot become new But because we shall make it to appear that they do greatly innovate in all their points of controversie with us and shew nothing but shadowes instead of substances and little images of things instead of solid arguments we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted and choose this sword of Goliah to combat their errors for non est alter talis It is not easie to finde a better than the Word of God expounded by the prime and best Antiquity The first thing therefore we are to advertise is That the Emissaries of the Roman Church endeavour to perswade the good people of our Dioceses from a Religion that is truly Primitive and Apostolick and divert them to Propositions of their own new and unheard of in the first ages of the Christian Church For the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of faith and therefore unless there can be new Scriptures we can have no new matters of belief no new articles of faith Whatsoever we cannot prove from thence we disclaim it as not deriving from the Fountains of our Saviour We also do believe the Apostles Creed the Nicene with the additions of Constantinople and that which is commonly called the Symbol of S. Athanasius and the four first General Councils are so intirely admitted by us that they together with the plain words of Scripture are made the rule and measure of judging Heresies amongst us and in pursuance of these it is commanded by our Church that the Clergy shall never teach any thing as matter of Faith religiously to be observed but that which is agreeable to the Old and New Testament and collected out of the same Doctrine by the Ancient Fathers and Catholick Bishops of the Church This was undoubtedly the Faith of the Primitive Church they admitted all into their Communion that were of this faith they condemned to Man that did not condemn these they gave Letters communicatory by no other cognisance and all were Brethren who spake this voice Hanc legem sequentes Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti reliquos verò dementes vesanosque judicantes haeretici dogmatis infaemiam sustinere said the Emperors Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius in their Proclamation to the People of C. P. All that believ'd this Doctrine were Christians and Catholicks viz. all they who believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity which indeed was the summe of what was decreed in explication of the Apostles Creed in the four first General Councils And what faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace the surer ligaments of Catholick Communion or the firmer basis of a holy Life and of the hopes of Heaven hereafter than the measures which the Holy Primitive Church did hold and and we after them That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did acknowledg to be the adaequate foundation of their hopes in the matters of belief The way which they thought sufficient to go to Heaven in is the way which we walk what they did not teach we do not publish and impose into this faith entirely and into no other as they did theirs so we baptize our Catechumens The Discriminations of Heresie from Catholick Doctrine which they us'd we use also and we use no other and in short we believe all that Doctrine which the Church of Rome believes except those things which they have superinduc'd upon the Old Religion and in which we shall prove that they haue innovated So that by their confession all the Doctrine which we teach the people as matter of Faith must be confessed to be Ancient Primitive and Apostolick or else theirs is not so for ours is the same and we both have received this Faith from the Fountains of Scripture and Universal Tradition not they from us or we from them but both of us from Christ and his Apostles And therefore there can be no question whether the Faith of the Church of England be Apostolick and Primitive it is so confessedly But the Question is concerning many other particulars which were unknown to the Holy Doctors of the first Ages which were no part of their Faith which were never put into their Creeds which were not determined in any of the four first General Councels rever'd in all Christendom and entertain'd every where with great Religion and veneration even next to the four Gospels and the Apostolical writings Of this sort because the Church of Rome hath introduc'd many and hath adopted them into their late Creed and imposes them upon the people not only without but against the Scriptures and the Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God laying heavie burdens on mens Consciences and making the narrow way to Heaven yet narrower by their own inventions arrogating to themselves a Dominion over our Faith and prescribing a method of Salvation which Christ and his Apostles never taught corrupting the Faith of the Church of God and Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men and lastly having derogated from the Prerogative of Christ who alone is the Author and Finisher of our faith and hath perfected it in the revelations consign'd in the Holy Scriptures therefore it is that we esteem our selves oblig'd to warn the People of their danger and to depart from it and call upon them to stand upon the wayes and ask after the old paths and walk in them lest they partake of that curse which is threatned by God to them who remove the ancient Land-marks which our Fathers in Christ have set for us Now that the Church of Rome cannot pretend that all which she imposes is Primitive and Apostolick appears in this That in the Church of Rome there is pretence made to a power not only of declaring new Articles of Faith but of making new Symbols or Creeds and imposing them as of necessity to Salvation Which thing is evident in the Bull of Pope Leo the Tenth against Martin Luther in which amongst other things he is condemn'd for saying It is certain that it is not in the power
was any substantial change or no. His words are these If it be inquir'd what kinde of conversion it is whether it be formal or substantial or of another kinde I am not able to define it Onely I know that it is not formal because the same accidents remain the same colour and taste To some it seems to be substantial saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance that it is done essentially To which the former authorities seem to consent But to this sentence others oppose these things If the substance of bread and wine be substantially converted into the body and blood of Christ then every day some substance is made the body or blood of Christ which before was not the body and to day something is Christs body which yesterday was not and every day Christs body is increased and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the conception These are his words which we have remark'd not onely for the arguments sake though it be unanswerable but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new not the Doctrine of the Church And this was written but about fifty years before it was said to be decreed in the Lateran Council and therefore it made haste in so short time to pass from a disputable opinion to an Article of faith But even after the Council Durandus as good a Catholick and as famous a Doctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly maintain'd that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd and although he says that by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held yet it is not onely possible it should be so but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christs body and yet the matter of bread remain and if this might be admitted it would salve many difficulties which arise fom saying that the substance of bread does not remain But here his Reason was overcome by Authority and he durst not affirm that of which alone he was able to give as he thought a reasonable account But by this it appears that the opinion was but then in the forge and by all their understanding they could never accord it but still the questions were uncertain according to that old Distich Corpore de Christi lis est de sanguine lis est Déque modo lis est non habitura modum And the opinion was not determin'd in the Lateran as it is now held at Rome but it is also plain that it is a stranger to Antiquity De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio said Alphonsus à Castro There is seldome mention made in the ancient Writers of transubstantiating the Bread into Christs Body We know the modesty and interest of the man he would not have said it had been seldom if he could have found it in any reasonable degree warranted he might have said and justified it There was no mention at all of this Article in the primitive Church and that it was a meer stranger to Antiquity will not be deny'd by any sober person who considers That it was with so much uneasiness entertained even in the corruptest and most degenerous times and argued and unsettled almost 1300 years after Christ. And that it was so will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this question which we finde in the Canon Law For Berengarius was by P. Nicolaus commanded to recant his error in these words and to affirm Verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi sensualiter non solùm in sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri That the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually not onely in sacrament but in truth is handled by the Priests hands and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy France and Germany yet at this day it is renounc'd by the Church of Rome and unless it be well expounded says the Gloss will lead into a heresie greater than what Berengarius was commanded to renounce and no interpretation can make it tolerable but such an one as is in another place of the Canon Law statuimus i.e. abrogamus nothing but a plain denying it in the sense of Pope Nicolas But however this may be it is plain they understood it not as it is now decreed But as it happened to the Pelagians in the beginning of their heresie they spake rudely ignorantly and easily to be reprov'd but being asham'd and disputed into a more sober understanding of their hypothesis spake more warily but yet differently from what they said at first so it was and is in this question at first they understood it not it was too unreasonable in any tolerable sense to make any thing of it but experience and necessity hath brought it to what it is But that this Doctrine was not the Doctrine of the first and best ages of the Church these following testimonies do make evident The words of Tertullian are these The bread being taken and distributed to his Disciples Christ made it his body saying This is my body that is the figure of my body The same is affirmed by Iustin Martyr The bread of the Eucharist was a figure which Christ the Lord commanded to do in remembrance of his passion Origen calls the bread and the chalice the images of the body and blood of Christ and again That bread which is sanctified by the word of God so far as belongs to the matter or substance of it goes into the belly and is cast away in the secession or separation which to affirm of the natural or glorified body of Christ were greatly blasphemous and therefore the body of Christ which the Communicants receive is not the body in a natural sense but in a spiritual which is not capable of any such accident as the elements are Eusebius says that Christ gave to his Disciples the Symbols of Divine Oeconomy commanding the image and type of his own body to be made and that the Apostle received a command according to the constitution of the new Testament to make a memory of this sacrifice upon the Table by the symbols of his body and healthful blood 8. Macarius says that in the Church is offered bread and wine the antitype of his flesh and of his blood and they that partake of the bread that appears do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ. By which words the sense of the above cited Fathers is explicated For when they affirm that in this Sacrament is offered the figure the image the antitype of Christs body and blood although they speak perfectly against Transubstantiation yet they do not deny
if she be an Adulteress though she be yet she may say she is not if in her mind secretly she say not with a purpose to tell you so Cardinal Tolet teaches And if a man swears he will take such a one to his Wife being compelled to swear he may secretly mean if hereafter she do please me And if a man swears to a Thief that he will give him Twenty Crown he may secretly say If I please to do so and then he is not bound And of this Doctrine Vasquez brags as of a rare though new invention saying it is gathered out of St. Austin and Thomas Aquinas who onely found out the way of saying nothing in such cases and questions ask'd by Judges but this invention was drawn out by assiduous disputations * He that promises to say an Ave Mary and swears he will or vows to do it yet sins not mortally though he does not do it said the great Navar and others whom he follows * There is yet a further degree of this iniquity not onely in words but in real actions it is lawful to deceive or rob your Brother when to do so is necessary for the preservation of your fame For no man is bound to restore stollen goods that 't is to cease from doing injury with the peril of his Credit So Navar and Cardinal Cajetan and Tolet teaches who adds also Hoc multi dicunt quorum sententiam potest quis tutâ conscientiâ sequi Many say the same thing whose Doctrine any man may follow with a safe Conscience Nay to save a mans credit an honest man that is asham'd to beg may steal what is necessary for him sayes Diana Now by these Doctrines a man is taught to be an honest Thief and to keep what he is bound to restore and by these we may not only deceive our Brother but the Law and not the Law only but God also even with an Oath if the matter be but small It never makes God angry with you or puts you out of the state of grace But if the matter be great yet to prevent a great trouble to your self you may conceal a truth by saying that which is false according to the general Doctrine of the late Casuists So that a man is bound to keep truth and honesty when it is for his turn but not if it be to his own hinderance and therefore David was not in the right but was something too nice in the resolution of the like case in the fifteenth Psalm Now although we do not affirm that these Particulars are the Doctrine of the whole Church of Rome because little things and of this nature never are considered in their publick Articles of Confession yet a man may do these vile things for so we understand them to be and find justifications and warranty and shall not be affrighted with the terrours of damnation nor the imposition of penances He may for all these things be a good Catholick though it may be not a very good Christian. But since these things are affirm'd by so many the opinion is probable and the practice safe saith Cardinal Tolet. But we shall instance in things of more publick concern Catholick Authority No Contracts Leagues Societies Promises Vows or Oaths are a sufficient security to him that deals with one of the Church of Rome if he shall please to make use of that liberty which may and many times is and alwayes can be granted to him For first it is affirmed and was practis'd by a whole Council of Bishops at Constance that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks and Iohn Hus and Hâ—erom of Prague and Savanarola felt the mischief of violation of publick Faith and the same thing was disputed fiercely at worms in the case of Luther to whom Caesar had given a safe conduct and very many would have had it to be broken but Caesar was a better Christian than the Ecclesiasticks and their Party and more a Gentleman But that no scrupulous Princes may keep their words any more in such cases or think themselves tyed to perform their safe conducts given to Hereticks there is a way found out by a new Catholick Doctrine Becanus shall speak this point instead of the rest There are two distinct Tribunals and the Ecclesiastical is the Superiour and therefore if a Secular Prince gives his Subjects a safe conduct he cannot extend it to the Superiour Tribunal nor by any security given hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their jurisdiction And upon the account of this or the like Doctrine the Pope and the other Ecclesiasticks did prevail at Constance for the burning of their Prisoners to whom safe conduct had been granted But these things are sufficiently known by the complaints of the injur'd persons But not onely to Hereticks but to our Friends also we may break our Promises if the Pope give us leave It is a publick and an avowed Doctrine That if a man have taken an Oath of a thing lawful and honest and in his power yet if it hinders him from doing a greater good the Pope can dispense with his Oath and take off the Obligation This is expresly affirm'd by one of the most moderate of them Canus Bishop of the Canaries But beyond dispute and even without a dispensation they all of them own it That if a man have promised to a woman to marry her and is betrothed to her and hath sworn it yet if he will before the consummation enter into a Monastery his Oath shall not bind him his promise is null but his second promise that shall stand And he that denies this is accursed by the Council of Trent Not only Husbands and Wives espoused may break their Vows and mutual Obligation against the will of one another but in the Church of Rome Children have leave given them to disobey their Parents so they will but turn Friers And this they might do Girls at twelve and Boyes at the age of fourteen years but the Council of Trent enlarged it to sixteen But the thing was taught and decreed by Pope Clement the III. and Thomas Aquinas did so and then it was made lawful by him and his Schollars though it was expresly against the Doctrine and Laws of the preceding ages of the Church as appears in the Capitulars of Charles the Great But thus did the Pharisees teach their Children to cry Corban and neglect their Parents to pretend Religion in prejudice of filial piety In this particular AEâ—odius a French Lawyer an excellently learned man suffered sadly by the loss and forcing of a hopeful Son from him and he complain'd most excellently in a Book written on purpose upon this subject But these mischiefs are Doctrinal and accounted lawful But in the matter of Marriages and Contracts Promises and Vows where a Doctrine fails it can be supplied by the Popes power Which thing is avowed and own'd without a cover For when Pope
alledged can prevail more than all that which already hath been so often urged in these Questions But we are not deterr'd from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the â—ame medicaments are with success applyed to a returning or an abiding Ulcer and the Preachers of Gods Word must for ever be ready to put the People in minde of such things which they already have heard and by the same Scriptures and the same reasons endeavour to destroy their sin or prevent their danger and by the same Word of God to extirpate those errors which have had opportunity in the time of our late Disorders to spring up and grow stroger not when the Keepers of the Field slept but when they were wounded and their hands cut off and their mouths stopp'd least they should continue or proceed to do the Work of God thoroughly A little warm Sun and somâ— indulgent showers of a softer rain have made many weeds of erroneous Doctrine to take root greatly and to spread themselves widely and the Bigots of the Roman Church by their late importune boldness and indiscreet frowardness in making Proselytes have but too manifestly declar'd to all the World that if they were rerum potiti Masters of our affairs they would suffer nothing to grow but their own Coloâ—ynths and Gourds And although the Natural remedy for this were to take away that impunity upon the account of which alone they do encrease yet because we shall never be Authors of such Counsels but confidently rely upon God the Holy Scripture right reason and the most venerable and prime Antiquity which are the proper defensatives of truth for its support and maintenance yet we must not conceal from the People committed to our charges the great evils to which they are tempted by the Roman Emissaries that while the King and the Parliament take care to secure all the publick interests by instruments of their own we also may by the word of our proper Ministery endeavour to stop the progression of such errors which we know to be destructive of Christian Religion and consequently dangerous to the interest of souls In this procedure although we shall say some things which have not been alwayes plac'd before their eyes and others we shall represent with a fittingness to their present necessities and all with Charity too and zeal for their souls yet if we were to say nothing but what hath been often said already we are still doing the work of God and repeating his voice and by the same remedies curing the same diseases and we only wait for the blessing of God prospering that importunity which is our duty according to the advice of Solomon In the Morning sow thy seed and in the Evening with-hold not thy hand for thou knowest not whether shall prosper either this or that or whether they both shall be alike good CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Roman Church in the Controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive Sect. 1. IT was the challenge of S. Augustine to the Donatists who as the Church of Rome does at this day inclos'd the Catholick Church within their own circuits Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands but where Donatus is Coheire Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel it self or out of the Letters of the Apostles Read it thence and we believe it Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith the Old and New Testament the words of Christ and the words of the Apostles For nothing else can be the foundation of our Faith whatsoever came in after these foris est it belongs not unto Christ. To these we also add not as Authors or Finishers but as helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the Sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God in the Ages next after the Apostles Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private opinion even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr but that we all acknowledg that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of Doctrine and sound words which was at first delivered to the Saints and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosom of Christ and seal'd the true faith with their lives and with their deaths and by both gave testimony unto Jesus and had from him the testimony of his Spirit And this method of procedure we now choose not only because to them that know well how to use it to the Sober and the Moderate the Peaceable and the Wise it is the best the most certain visible and tangible most humble and satisfactory but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity Indeed the present Roman Doctrines which are in difference were invisible and unheard of in the first and best Antiquity and with how ill success their quotations are out of the Fathers of the three first Ages every inquiring Man may easily discern But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages where saecular interest did more prevail and the Writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of Controversie and ambiguous senses fitted to their own Times and Questions full of proper Opinions and such variety of Sayings that both Sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring Sayings for themselves respectively Now although things being thus it will be impossible for them to conclude from the Sayings of a number of Fathers that their Doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear Sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alledged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then matter of Faith or a Doctrine of the Church for if it had these had been Hereticks accounted and not have remain'd in the Communion of the Church But although for the reasonableness of the thing we have thought fit to take notice of it yet we shall have no need to make use of it since not only in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubitably more than Conquerours but even in the succeeding Ages we have the advantage both numero pondere mensurâ in number weight and measure We do easily acknowledge that to dispute these questions from the sayings of the Fathers is not the readiest way to make an end of them but therefore we do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the foundation and final resort of all our perswasions and from thence can never be confuted but we also admit the Fathers as admirable
of the Church or Pope to constitute Articles of Faith We need not adde that this power is attributed to the Bishops of Rome by Turrecremata Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona Petrus de Ancorano and the famous Abbot of Panormo that the Pope cannot only make new Creeds but new Articles of Faith That he can make that of necessity to be believ'd which before never was necessary That he is the measure and rule and the very notice of all credibilities That the Canon Law is the Divine Law and what-ever Law the Pope promulges God whose Vicar he is is understood to be the promulger That the souls of men are in the hands of the Pope and that in his arbitration Religion does consist which are the very words of Hostiensis and Ferdinandus ab Inciso who were Casuists and Doctors of Law of great authority amongst them and renown The thing it self is not of dubious disputation amongst them but actually practis'd in the greatest instances as is to be seen in the Bull of Pius the fourth at the end of the Council of Yrent by which all Ecclesiasticks are not only bound to swear to all the Articles of the Council of Trent for the present and for the future but they are put into a new Symbol or Creed and they are corroborated by the same decretory clauses that are us'd in the Creed of Athanasius that this is the true Catholick Faith and that without this no man can be saved Now since it cannot be imagined that this power to which they pretend should never have been reduc'd to act and that it is not credible they should publish so inviduous and ill sounding Doctrine to no purpose and to serve no end it may without further evidence be believed by all discerning persons that they have need of this Doctrine or it would not have been taught and that consequently without more adoe it may be concluded that some of their Articles are parts of this New Faith and that they can therefore in no sense be Apostolical unless their being Roman makes them so To this may be added another consideration not much less material that besides what Eckius told the Elector of Bavaria that the Doctrines of Luther might be overthrown by the Fathers though not by Scripture they have also many gripes of Conscience concerning the Fathers themselves that they are not right on their side and of this they have given but too much demonstration by their Expurgatory Indices The Serpent by being so curious a Defender of his Head shewes where his danger is and by what he can most readily be destroyed But besides their innumerable corruptings of the Fathers Writings their thrusting in that which was spurious and like Pharaoh killing the legitimate Sons of Israel though in this they have done very much of their work and made the Testimonies of the Fathers to be a Record infinitely worse than of themselves uncorrupted they would have been of which divers Learned Persons have made publique complaint and demonstration they have at last fallen to a new trade which hath caus'd more dis-reputation to them than they have gain'd advantage and they have virtually confess'd that in many things the Fathers are against them For first the King of Spain gave a Commission to the Inquisitors to purge all Catholick Authors but with this clause iique ipsi privatim nullisque consciis apud se indicem expurgatorium habebunt quem eundem neque aliis communicabunt neque ejus exemplum ulli dabunt that they should keep the Expurgatory Index privately neither imparting that Index nor giving a Copie of it to any But it happened by the Divine Providence so ordering it that about thirteen years after a Copie of it was gotten and published by Iohannes Pappus and Franciscus Iunius and since it came abroad against their wills they finde it necessary now to own it and they have Printed it themselves Now by these expurgatory Tables what they have done is known to all Learned Men. In S. Chrysostom's Works printed at Basil these words The Church is not built upon the Man but upon the Faith are commanded to be blotted out and these There is no Merit but what is given us by Christ and yet these words are in his Sermon upon Pentecost and the former words are in his first Homily upon that of S. Iohn Ye are my friends c. The like they have done to him in many other places and to S. Ambrose and to S. Austin and to them all insomuch that Ludovicus Saurius the Corrector of the Press at Lyons shewed and complain'd of it to Iunius that he was forc'd to cancellate or blot out many sayings of S. Ambrose in that Edition of his works which was printed at Lyons 1559. So that what they say on occasion of Bertram's book In the old Catholick Writers we suffer very many errors and extenuate and excuse them and finding out some Commentary we fain some convenient sense when they are oppos'd in Disputations they do indeed practise but esteem it not sufficient for the words which make against them they wholly leave out of their Editions Nay they correct the very Tables or Indices made by the Printers or Correctors insomuch that out of one of Frobens Indices they have commanded these words to be blotted The use of Images forbidden The Eucharist no sacrifice but the memory of a sacrifice Works although they do not justifie yet are necessary to Salvation Marriage is granted to all that will not contain Venial sins damne The dead Saints after this life cannot help us Nay out of the Index of S. Austin's Works by Claudius Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur Dele Solus Deus adorandus that God alone is to be worshipped is commanded to be blotted out as being a dangerous Doctrine These instances may serve instead of multitudes which might be brought of their corrupting the witnesses and razing the records of antiquity that the errors and Novelties of the Church of Rome might not be so easily reprov'd Now if the Fathers were not against them what need these arts Why should they use them thus Their own expurgatory indices are infinite testimony against them both that they do so and that they need it But besides these things we have thought it fit to represent in one aspect some of their chief Doctrines of difference from the Church of England and make it evident that they are indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles Sect. II. FIrst we alledge that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in
unclean thing should enter into Heaven if the guilt and the stain be remov'd what uncleanness can there be left behinde Indeed Simon Magus as Epiphanius reports Haeres 20. did teach That after the death of the body there remain'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a purgation of souls But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an authentick Doctor themselves can best tell 3. It relies upon this also That God requires of us a full exchange of Penances and Satisfactions which must regularly be paid here or hereafter even by them who are pardon'd here which if it were true we were all undone 4. That the Death of Christ his Merits and Satisfaction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye nor as it may happen of a long time after All which being Propositions new and uncertain invented by the School Divines and brought ex postfacto to dress this opinion and make it to seem reasonable and being the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace of the righteousness of Faith and the infinite value of Christs Death must needs lay a great prejudice of Novelty upon the Doctrine it self which but by these cannot be supported But to put it past suspition and conjectures Roffensis and Polydore Virgil affirm That whoso searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers shall finde that none or very rarely any one of them ever makes mention of Purgatory and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it But for the Catholick Church it was but lately known to her But before we say any more in this Question we are to premonish That there are Two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity The first is That the Ancient Churches in their Offices and the Fathers in their Writings did teach and practice respectively prayer for the Dead Now because the Church of Rome does so too and more than so relates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory and for the souls there detain'd her Doctors vainly suppose that when ever the H. Fathers speak of prayer for the dead that they conclude for Purgatory which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable For it is true the Fathers did pray for the dead but how That God would shew them mercy and hasten the resurrection and give a blessed sentence in the great day But then it is also to be remembred that they made prayers and offered for those who by the confession of all sides never were in Purgatory euen for the Patriarchs and Prophets for the Apostles and Evangelists for Martyrs and Confessors and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary So we finde it in Epiphanius S. Cyril and in the Canon of the Greeks and so it is acknowledged by their own Durantus and in their own Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of S. Leo Of which because by their latter doctrines they grew asham'd they have chang'd the prayer for him into a prayer to God by the intercession of S. Leo in behalf of themselves so by their new doctrine making him an Intercessor for us who by their old doctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him of which Pope Innocent being asked a reason makes a most pitiful excuse Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed and indeed generally for all it is not now seasonable to discourse but to say this onely that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd the Church of England did never condemn by any express Article but left it in the middle and by her practice declares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead and her interest in the communion of Saints and that the Saints departed are a portion of the Catholick Church parts and members of the Body of Christ but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead infers the belief of Purgatory every man may satisfie himself by seeing the Writings of the Fathers where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place Which thing is so certain that in the very Roman Offices we mean the Vigils said for the dead in which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture speaking of the miseries of this World Repentance and Reconciliation with God the bliss after this life of them that dye in Christ and the resurrection of the Dead and in the Anthemes Versicles and Responses there are prayers made recommending to God the soul of the newly defunct praying he may be freed from Hell and eternal death that in the day of Iudgement he be not judged and condemned according to his sins but that he may appear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection but not one word of Purgatory or its pains The other cause of their mistake is That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of judgement and it is such a fire that destroyes the Doctrine of the intermedial Purgatory We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it and S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion for it was no more so does S. Basil S. Hilary S. Hierome and Lactaâ—tius as their words plainly prove as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis affirming that all men Christ onely excepted shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgement even the B. Virgin her self is to pass thorow this fire There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers which greatly destroyes the Roman Purgatory Sixtus Senensis sayes and he sayes very true that Iustin Martyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthymius and S. Bernard did all affirm that before the day of Judgement the souls of men are kept in secret receptacles reserved unto the sentence of the great day and that before then no man receives according to his works done in this life We do not interpose in this opinion to say that it is true or false probable or improbable for these Fathers intended it not as a matter of faith or necessary belief so far as we finde But we observe from hence that if their opinion be true then the Doctrine of Purgatory is false If it be not true yet the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory which is inconsistent with this so generally receiv'd opinion of the Fathers is at least new no Catholick Doctrine not believ'd in the Primitive Church and therefore the Roman Writers are much troubled to excuse the Fathers in this Article and to reconcile them to some seeming concord with their new Doctrine But besides these things it is certain that the Doctrine of Purgatory before the day of
Judgment in S. Austins time was not the Doctrine of the Church it was not the Catholick Doctrine for himself did doubt of it Whether it be so or not it may be enquir'd and possibly it may be found so and possibly it may never so S. Austin In his time therefore it was no Doctrine of the Church and it continued much longer in uncertainty for in the time of Otho Frisingensis who liv'd in the year 1146. it was gotten no further than to to a Quidam asserunt some do affirm that there is a place of Purgatory after death And although it is not to be denied but that many of the ancient Doctors had strange opinions concerning Purgations and Fires and Intermedial states and common receptacles and liberations of Souls and Spirits after this life yet we can truly affirm it and can never be convinced to erre in this affirmation that there is not any one of the Ancients within five hundred years whose opinion in this Article throughout the Church of Rome at this day follows But the people of the Roman Communion have been principally led into a belief of Purgatory by their fear and by their credulity they have been softned and enticed into this belief by perpetual tales and legends by which they love to be abus'd To this purpose their Priests and Friers have made great use of the apparition of S. Hierom after death to Eusebius commanding him to lay his sack upon the corps of three dead men that they arising from death might confess Purgatory which formerly they had denied The story is written in an Epistle imputed to S. Cyril but the ill luck of it was that S. Hierom out-liv'd S. Cyril and wrote his life and so confuted that story but all is one for that they believe it never the less But there are enough to help it out and if they be not firmly true yet if they be firmly believ'd all is well enough In the Speculum exemplorum it is said That a certain Priest in an extasie saw the soul of Constantinus Turritanus in the eves of his house tormented with frosts and cold rains and afterwards climbing up to heaven upon a shining pillar And a certain Monk saw some souls roasted upon spits like Pigs and some Devils basting them with sealding lard but a while after they were carried to a cool place and so prov'd Purgatory But Bishop Theobald standing upon a piece of ice to cool his feet was nearer Purgatory than he was aware and was convinc'd of it when he heard a poor soul telling him that under that ice he was tormented and that he should be delivered if for thirty days continual he would say for him thirty Masses and some such thing was seen by Conrade and Vdalrie in a Pool of water For the place of Purgatory was not yet resolv'd on till S. Patrick had the key of it delivered to him which when one Nicholas borrowed of him he saw as strange and true things there as ever Virgil dream'd of in his Purgatory or Cicero in his dream of Scipio or Plato in his Gorgias or Phoedo who indeed are the surest Authors to prove Purgatory But because to preach false stories was forbidden by the Council of Trent there are yet remaining more certain arguments even revelations made by Angels and the testimony of S. Odilio himself who heard the Devil complain and he had great reason surely that the souls of dead men were daily snatch'd out of his hands by the Alms and Prayers of the living and the sister of S. Damianus being too much pleas'd with hearing of a Piper told her brother that she was to be tormented for fifteen days in Purgatory We do not think that the Wise men in the Church of Rome believe these Narratives for if they did they were not wise But this we know that by such stories the people were brought into a belief of it and having served their turn of them the Master-builders used them as false archies and centries taking them away when the parts of the building were made firm and stable by Authority But even the better sort of them do believe or else they do worse for they urge and cite the Dialogues of S. Gregory the Oration of S. Iohn Damascen de Defunctis the Sermons of S. Austin upon the feast of the Commemoration of All-souls which nevertheless was instituted after S. Austins death and divers other citations which the Greeks in their Apology call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holds and the Castles the corruptions and insinuations of Heretical persons But in this they are the less to be blam'd because better arguments then they have no men are tied to make use of But against this way of proceeding we think fit to admonish the people of our charges that besides that the Scriptures expresly forbid us to enquire of the dead for truth the Holy Doctors of the Church particularly Tertullian S. Athanasius S. Chrysostome Isidore and Theophylact deny that the souls of the dead ever do appear and bring many reasons to prove that it is unfitting they should saying if they did it would be the cause of many errors and the Devils under that pretence might easily abuse the world with notices and revelations of their own And because Christ would have us content with Moses and the Prophets and especially to hear that Prophet whom the Lord our God hath raised up amongst us our blessed Jesus who never taught any such Doctrine to his Church But because we are now representing the Novelty of this Doctrine and proving that anciently it was not the Doctrine of the Church nor at all esteemed a matter of Faith whether there was or was not any such place or state we adde this That the Greek Church did alwaies dissent from the Latines in this particular since they had forg'd this new Doctrine in the Laboratories of Rome and in the Council of Basil publish'd an Apologie directly disapproving the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory How afterwards they were press'd in the Councel of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half consent put into the Instrument of Union how they were yet constrain'd to it by their Chiefs being obnoxious to the Pope how a while after they dissolv'd that Union and to this day refuse to own this Doctrine are things so notoriously known that they need no further declaration We adde this onely to make the conviction more manifest We have thought fit to annex some few but very clear testimonies of Antiquity expresly destroying the new Doctrine of Purgatory S. Cyprian saith Quando istinc excessum fuerit nullus jam locus poenitentiae est nullus satisfactionis effectus When we are gone from hence there is no place left for repentance and no effect of satisfaction S Dionysius calls the extremity of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
blasphemy a book was written by Iohn Huss about the time of the Council of Constance But these things are too bad and therefore we love not to rake in so filthy Chanells but give onely a generall warning to all our Charges to take heed of such persons who from the proper consequences of their Articles grow too bold and extravagant and of such doctrines from whence these and many other evil Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently do issue As the Tree is such must be the Fruit. But we hope it may be sufficient * to say That what the Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation is absolutely impossible and implies contradictions very many to the belief of which no faith can oblige us and no reason can endure For Christs body being in heaven glorious spiritual and impassible cannot be broken And since by the Roman doctrine nothing is broken but that which cannot be broken that is the colour the taste and other accidents of the elements yet if they could be broken since the accidents of bread and wine are not the substance of Christs body and blood it is certain that on the Altar Christs body naturally and properly cannot be broken * And since they say that every consecrated Wafer is Christs whole body and yet this Wafer is not that Wafer therefore either this or that is not Christs body or else Christ hath two bodies for there are two Wafers * But when Christ instituted the Sacrament and said This is my body which is broken because at that time Christs body was not broken naturally and properly the very words of institution do force us to understand the Sacrament in a sense not natural but spiritual that is truly sacramental * And all this is besides the plain demonstrations of sense which tells us it is bread and it is wine naturally as much after as before consecration * And after all the natural sense is such as our blessed Saviour reprov'd in the men of Capernaum and called them to a spiritual understanding the natural sense being not onely unreasonable and impossible but also to no purpose of the spirit or any ways perfective of the soul as hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in this Article Sect. VI. OUr next instance of the novelty of the Roman Religion in their Articles of division from us is that of the half Communion For they deprive the people of the chalice and dismember the institution of Christ and praevaricate his express law in this particular and recede from the practise of the Apostles and though they confess it was the practise of the primitive Church yet they lay it aside and curse all them that say they do amiss in it that is they curse them who follow Christ and his Apostles and his Church while themselves deny to follow them Now for this we need no other testimony but their own words in the Council of Constance Whereas in certain parts of the World some temerariously presume to affirm that the Christian people ought to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine and do every where communicate the Laity not onely in bread but in wine also Hence it is that the Council decrees and defines against this error that although Christ instituted after supper and administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread and wine yet this notwithstanding And although in the primitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds Here is the acknowledgement both of Christs institution in both kinds and Christs ministring it in both kinds and the practise of the Primitive Church to give it in both kinds yet the conclusion from these premises is We command under the pain of Excommunication that no Priest communicate the people under both kinds of bread and wine The opposition is plain Christs Testament ordains it The Church of Rome forbids it It was the primitive custom to obey Christ in this a later custom is by the Church of Rome introduc'd to the contrary To say that the first practise and institution is necessary to be followed is called Heretical to refuse the later subintroduc'd custom incurres the sentence of Excommunication and this they have pass'd not onely into a Law but into an Article of Faith and if this be not teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and worshipping God in vain with mens traditions then there is and there never was and there can be no such thing in the World So that now the question is not whether this doctrine and practise be an INNOVATION but whether it be not better it should it so Whether it be not better to drink new wine than old Whether it be not better to obey man than Christ who is God blessed for ever Whether a late custom be not to be preferr'd before the antient a custom dissonant from the institution of Christ before that which is wholly consonant to what Christ did and taught This is such a bold affirmative of the Church of Rome that nothing can suffice to rescue us from an amazement in the consideration of it especially since although the Institution it self being the onely warranty and authority for what we do is of it self our rule and precept according to that of the Lawyer Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituuntur docentur homines yet besides this Christ added preceptive words Drink ye all of this he spake it to all that receiv'd who then also represented all them who for ever after were to remember Christs death But concerning the doctrine of Antiquity in this point although the Council of Constance confess the Question yet since that time they have taken on them a new confidence and affirm that the half Communion was always more or less the practice of the most Ancient times We therefore think it fit to produce testimonies concurrent with the saying of the Council of Constance such as are irrefragable and of persons beyond exception Cassander affirms That in the Latine Church for above a thousand years the body of Christ and the blood of Christ were separately given the body apart and the blood apart after the consecration of the mysteries So Aquinas also affirms According to the ancient custom of the Church all men as they communicated in the body so they communicated in the blood which also to this day is kept in some Churches And therefore Paschasius Ratbertus resolves it dogmatically That neither the flesh without the blood nor the blood without the flesh is rightly communicated because the Apostles all of them did drink of the chalice And Salmeron being forc'd by the evidence of the thing ingenuously and openly confesses That it was a general custom to communicate the Laity under both kindes It was so and it was more There was anciently a Law for it Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant
him and this was first boldly maintain'd in the Council of Trent by the Jesuits and it is now the opinion of their Order but it is also that which the Pope challenges in practice when he pretends to a power over all Bishops and that this power is derived to him from Christ when he calls himself the Universal Bishop and the Vicarial head of the Church the Churches Monarch he from whom all Ecclesiastical authority is deriv'd to whose sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be subject Now this is it which as it is productive of infinite mischiefs so it is an Innovation and an absolute deflection from the primitive catholick doctrine and yet is the great ground-work and foundation of their Church This we shall represent in these following Testimonies Pope Eleutherius in an Epistle to the Bishops of France says that Christ committed the universal Church to the Bishops and S. Ambrose saith that the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ and is his substitute But famous are the words of S. Cyprian The Church of Christ is one thorough the whole world divided by him into many members and the Bishoprick is but one diffused in the agreeing plurality of many Bishops And again To every Pastor a portion of the flock is given which let every one of them rule and govern By which words it is evident that the primitive Church understood no praelation of one and subordination of another commanded by Christ or by vertue of their ordination but onely what was for order sake introduc'd by Princes and consent of Prelates And it was to this purpose very full which was said by Pope Symmachus As it is in the Holy Trinity whose power is one and undivided or to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed none is before or after other none is greater or less than another so there is one Bishoprick amongst divers Bishops and therefore why should the Canons of the ancient Bishops be violated by their Successors Now these words being spoken against the invasion of the rights of the Church of Arles by Anastasius and the question being in the exercise of Jurisdiction and about the Institution of Bishops does fully declare that the Bishops of Rome had no Superiority by the Laws of Christ over any Bishop in the Catholick Church and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him than Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocese And therefore all the Church of God when ever they reckon'd the several orders and degrees of Ministery in the Catholick Church reckon the Bishop as the last and supreme beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For as the whole Hierachy ends in Iesus so does every particular one in its one Bishop Beyond the Bishop there is no step till you rest in the great Shepherd and Bishop of Souls Under him every Bishop is supreme in Spirituals and in all power which to any Bishop is given by Christ. S. Ignatius therefore exhorts that all should obey their Bishop and the Bishop obey Christ as Christ obeyed his Father There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine Institution But as Origen teaches The Apostles and they who after them are ordain'd by God that is the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church and the Prophets have the second place The same also is taught by P. Gelasius by S. Hierom and Fulgentius and indeed by all the Fathers who spake any thing in this matter Insomuch that when Bellarmine is in this question press'd out of the book of Nilus by the authority of the Fathers standing against him he answers Papam Patres non habere in Ecclesiâ sed filios omnes The Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church for they are all his sons Now although we suppose this to be greatly sufficient to declare the Doctrine of the primitive Catholick Church concerning the equality of power in all Bishops by Divine right yet the Fathers have also expresly declar'd themselves that one Bishop is not Superior to another and ought not to judge another or force another to obedience They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops or by tyranical power drives his collegues to a necessity of obedience since every Bishop according to the licence of his own liberty and power hath his own choice and cannot be judged by another nor yet himself judge another but let us all expect the judgment of our L. Iesus Christ who only and alone hath the power of setting us in the government of his Church and judging of what we do This was spoken and intended against P. Stephen who did then begin dominari in clero to lord it over Gods heritage and to excommunicate his brethren as Demetrius did in the time of the Apostles themselves but they both found their reprovers Demetrius was chastised by S. John for this usurpation and Stephen by S. Cyprian and this also was approv'd by S. Austin We conclude this particular with the words of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome who because the Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal Bishop said It was a proud title prophane sacrilegious and Antichristian and therefore he little thought that his Successors in the same See should so fiercely challenge that Antichristian title much less did the then Bishop of Rome in those ages challenge it as their own peculiar for they had no mind to be or to be esteemed Antichristian Romano Pontisici oblatum est sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assumpsit His Predecessors it seems had been tempted with an offer of that title but none of them ever assum'd that name of singularity as being against the law of the Gospel and the Canons of the Church Now this being a matter of which Christ spake not one word to S. Peter if it be a matter of faith and salvation as it is now pretended it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent But though he was silent of any intention to do this yet S. Paul was not silent that Christ did otherwise for he hath set in his Church primùm Apostolos first of all Apostles not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles but all the Apostles were first It is also evident that S. Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence but he was as S. Chrysostom truly sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did all things with the common consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by special authority or principality and if he had any such it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him had succeeded him in it rather than the Bishop of Rome and it being certain as the Bishop of Canaries confesses That there is in Scripture no
revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it and we being there told that S. Peter was at Antioch but never that he was at Rome it being confessed by some of their own parties by Cardinal Cusanus Soto Driedo Canus and Segovius that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church nor that Christs institution of this does any other way appear that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the primitive Church but that the Holy Fathers both of Africa and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen when they began to interpose with a presumptive authority in the affairs of other Churches and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Roman Bishop as with a brother not as their superior and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preheminence with the Bishops of Rome and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome and after all this since it is certain that Christ who foreknowes all things did also know that there would be great disputes and challenges of this preheminence did indeed suppress it in his Apostles and said not it should be otherwise in succession and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vicars more than what he commanded concerning all Bishops it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so but that it is more than probable that he never intended any such thing and that the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great Schism and usurp'd a title which is not their due and challeng'd an authority to which they have no right and have set themselves above others who are their equals and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving and have made great preparation for Antichrist if he ever get into that Seat or be in already and made it necessary for all of the Roman Communion to believe and obey him in all things SECT XI THere are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture and the practise of the Catholick Apostolick and primitive Church Such are these The Invocation of Saints The Insufficiency of Scriptures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation their absolving sinners before they have by canonical penences and the fruits of a good life testified their repentance their giving leave to simple Presbyters by Papal dispensation to give confirmation or chrism selling Masses for Ninepences Circumgestation of the Eucharist to be ador'd The dangerous Doctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in collating Sacraments by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he please of his own parish their affirming that the Mass is a proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead Private Masses or the Lords Supper without Communion which is against the doctrine and practise of the ancient Church of Rome it self and contrary to the tradition of the Apostles if we may believe Pope Calixtus and is also forbiden under pain of Excommunication Peract à consecratione omnes communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia When the consecration is finish'd let all communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church for so the Apostles appointed and so the H. Church of Rome does hold The same also was decreed by P. Soter and P. Martin in a Council of Bishops and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Canon Law There are divers others but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted may be sufficient to verifie this charge of Novelty But we have done this the rather because the Roman Emissaries endeavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity and calling their Religion the Old Religion and the Catholick so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth their Religion as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland being neither the Old nor the Catholick Religion but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences But they have taught every Priest that can scarce understand his Breviary of which in Ireland there are but too many and very many of the people to ask where our Religion was before Luther Whereas it appears by the premises that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther than for them to shew theirs before Trent And although they can shew too much practise of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the purest and first ages and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded and where polished and where furnished But when the keepers of the field slept and the Enemy had sown tares and they had choak'd the wheat and almost destroyed it when the world complain'd of the infinite errors in the Church and being oppressed by a violent power durst not complain so much as they had cause and when they who had cause to complain were yet themselves very much abused and did not complain in all they might when divers excellent persons S. Bernard Clemangis Grosthead Marsilius Ocham Alvarus Abbat Ioachim Petrarch Savanarola Valla Erasmus Mantuan Gerson Ferus Cassander Andreas Frisius Modrevius Hermannus Coloniensis Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun Paulus Langius Staphilus Telesphorus de Cusentiâ Doctor Talheymius Francis Zabarel the Cardinal and Pope Adrian himself with many others not to reckon Wicklef Hus Hierome of Prague the Bohemians and the poor men of Lions whom they call'd Hereticks and confuted with fire and sword when almost all Christian Princes did complain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church and of Religion and no remedy could be had but the very intended remedy made things much worse then it was that divers Christian Kingdoms and particularly the Church of England Tum primùm senio docilis tua saecula Roma Erubuit pudet exacti jam temporis odit Praeteritos foedis cum relligionibus annos Being asham'd of the errors superstitions heresies and impieties which had deturpated the face of the Church look'd into the glass of Scripture and pure Antiquity and wash'd away those stains with which time and inadvertency and tyranny had besmear'd her and being thus cleans'd and wash'd is accus'd by the Roman parties of Novelty and condemn'd because she refuses to run into the same excess
are not Venial in their own nature and in their appendant circumstances either the people are cozen'd by this Doctrine into an useless confidence and for all this talking in their Schools they must nevertheless do to Venial sins as they do to Mortal that is mortifie them fight against them repent speedily of them and keep them from running into mischief and then all their kinde Doctrines in this Article signifie no comfort or ease but all danger and difficulty and useless dispute 3 or else if really they mean that this easiness of opinion be made use of then the danger is imminent and carelesness is introduc'd and licentiousness in all little things is easily indulg'd and mens souls are daylie lessen'd without repair and kept from growing towards Christian perfection and from destroying the whole body of sin and in short despising little things they perish by little and little This Doctrine also is worse yet in the handling For it hath infinite influence to the disparagement of holy life not onely by the uncertain but as it must frequently happen by the false determination of innumerable cases of Conscience For it is a great matter both in the doing and the thing done both in the caution and the repentance whether such an action be a venial or a mortal sin If it chance to be mortal and pour Confessor says it is venial your soul is betrayed And it is but a chance what they say in most cases for they call what they please venial and they have no certain rule to answer by which appears too sadly in their innumerable differences which is amongst all their Casuists in saying what is and what is not mortal and of this there needs no greater proof than the reading the little Summaries made by their most leading guides of Consciences Navar Cajetane Tolet Emanuel SÃ and others where one sayes such a thing is mortal and two say it is venial And lest any man should say or think this is no great matter we desire that it be considered that in venial sins there may be very much fantastick pleasure and they that retain them do believe so for they suppose the pleasure is great enough to outweigh the intolerable pains of Purgatory and that it is more eligible to be in Hell a while than to cross their appetites in such small things And howeveâ— it happen in this particular yet because the Doctorâ— differ so infinitely and irreconcileably in saying what is and what is not Venial whoever shall trust to their Doctrine saying that such a sin is Venial and to their Doctrine that says it does not exclude from Gods favour may by these two Propositions be damned before he is aware We omit to insist upon their express contradicting the words of our Blessed Saviour who taught his Church expresly That we must work in the day time for the night cometh and no man worketh Let this be as true as it can in the matter of Repentance and Mortification and working out our pardon for mortal sins yet it is not true in Venial sins if we may believe their great S. Thomas whom also Bellarmine follows in it for he affirms That by the acts of Love and Patience in Purgatory Venial sins are remitted and that the acceptation of those punishments proceeding out of Charity is a virtual kinde of penance But in this particular we follow not S. Thomas nor Bellarmine in the Church of England and Ireland for we believe in Jesus Christ and follow him If men give themselves liberty as long as they are alive to commit one whole kinde of sins and hope to work it out after death by acts of Charity and Repentance which they would not do in their life time either they must take a course to sentence the words of Christ as savouring of heresie or else they will find themselves to have been at first deceiv'd in their Proposition and at last in their expectation Their faith hath fail'd them here and hereafter they will be asham'd of their hope Sect. VII THere is a Proposition which indeed is new but is now the general Doctrine of the Leading Men in the Church of Rome and it is the foundation on which their Doctors of Conscience rely in their decision of all cases in which there is a doubt or question made by themselves and that is That if an Opinion or Speculation be probable it may in practise be safely followed And if it be inquir'd What is sufficient to make an Opinion probable the answer is easie Sufficit opinio alicujus gravis Doctoris aut Bonorum exemplum The opinion of any one grave Doctor is sufficient to make a matter probable nay the example and practise of good men that is men who are so reputed if they have done it you may do so too and be safe This is the great Rule of their Cases of Conscience And now we ought not to be press'd with any ones saying that such an opinion is but the private opinion of one or more of their Doctors For although in matters of Faith this be not sufficient to impute a Doctrine to a whole Church which is but the private opinion of one or more yet because we are now speaking of the infinite danger of souls in that communion and the horrid Propositions by which their Disciples are conducted to the disparagement of good life it is sufficient to alledge the publick and allowed sayings of their Doctors because these sayings are their Rule of living and because the particular Rules of Conscience use not to be Decreed in Councils we must derive them from the places where they grow and where they are to be found But besides you will say That this is but the private opinion of some Doctors and what then Therefore it is not to be called the Doctrine of the Roman Church True we do not say It is an Article of their Faith but a rule of manners This is not indeed in any publick Decree but we say that although it be not yet neither is the contrary And if it be but a private opinion yet is it safe to follow it or is it not safe For that 's the question and therein is the danger If it be safe then this is their Rule A private opinion of any one grave Doctor may be safely followed in the questions of Vertue and Vice But if it be not safe to follow it and that this does not make an opinion probable or the practise safe Who sayes so Does the Church No Does Dr. Cajus or Dr. Sempronius say so Yes But these are not safe to follow for they are but private Doctors Or if it be safe to follow them though they be no more and the opinion no more but probable then I may take the other side and choose which I will and do what I list in most cases and yet be safe by the Doctrine of the Roman Casuists which is the great line and general measure
least become very probable and therefore they may be believ'd and practis'd without danger according to the Doctrine of Probability And thus the most desperate things that ever were said by any though before the declaration of the Church they cannot become Articles of Faith yet besides that they are Doctrines publickly allowed they can also become rules of practise and securities to the conscience of their Disciples To this we may adde that which is usual in the Church of Rome the praxis Ecclesiae the practise of the Church Thus if an Indulgence be granted upon condition to visit such an Altar in a distant Church the Nuns that are shut up and Prisoners that cannot go abroad if they address themselves to an Altar of their own with that intention they shall obtain the Indulgence Id enim confirmat Ecclesiae praxis says Fabius The practise of the Church in this case gives first a probability in Speculation and then a certainty in practise This instance though it be of no concern yet we use it as a particular to shew the principle upon which they go But it is practicable in many things of greatest danger and concern If the question be Whether it be lawfull to worship the Image of the Cross or of Christ with Divine Worship first there is a Doctrine of S. Thomas for it and Vasquez and many others therefore it is probable and therefore is safe in practise sic est Ecclesiae praxis the Church also practises so as appears in their own Offices and S. Thomas makes this use of it Illi exhibemus cultum Latriae in quo ponimus spem salutis sed in cruce Christi ponimus spem salutis Cantat enim Ecclesia O Crux ave spes unica Hoc passionis tempore Auge piis justitiam Reisque dona veniam Ergo Crux Christi est adoranda adoratione Latriae We give Divine Worship says he to that in which we put our hopes of salvation but in the Cross we put our hopes of salvation for so the Church sings it is the practise of the Church Hail O Cross our onely hope in this time of suffering encrease righteousness to the godly and give pardon to the guilty therefore the Cross of Christ is to be ador'd with Divine Adoration By this Principle you may embrace any opinion of their Doctors safely especially if the practise of the Church do intervene and you need not trouble your self with any further inquiry And if an evil custom get amongst men that very custom shall legitimate the action if any of their grave Doctors allow it or good men use it and Christ is not your Rule but the examples of them that live with you or are in your eye and observation that 's your rule We hope we shall not need to say any more in this affair The pointing out this rock may be warning enough to them that would not suffer shipwrack to decline the danger that looks so formidably Sect. VIII AS these evil Doctrines have general influence into evil life so there are some others which if they be pursued to their proper and natural issues that is if they believ'd and practis'd are enemies to the particular and specifick parts of Piety and Religion Thus the very prayers of the Faithful are or may be spoil'd by Doctrines publickly allowed and prevailing in the Roman Church For 1. They teach That prayers themselves ex opere operato or by the natural work it self do prevail For it is not essential to prayer for a man to think particularly of what he sayes it is not necessary to think of the things signified by the words So Suarez teaches Nay it is not necessary to the essence of prayer that he who prays should think de ipsa locutione of the speaking it self And indeed it is necessary that they should all teach so or they cannot tolerably pretend to justifie their prayers in an unknown Tongue But this is indeed their publick Doctrine For prayers in the mouth of the man that says them are like the words of a Charmer they prevail even when they are not understood sayes Salmeron or as Antoninus They are like a precious stone of as much value in the hand of an unskilful man as of a Ieweller And therefore attention to or devotion in our prayers is not necessary For the understanding of which saith Cardinal Tolet when it is said that you must say your prayers or offices attently reverently and devoutly you must know that attention or advertency to your prayers is manifold 1. That you attend to the words so that you speak them not to fast or to begin the next verse of a Psalm before he that recites with you hath done the former verse and this attention is necessary But 2. There is an attention which is by understanding the sense and that is not necessary For if it were very extremely few would do their duty when so very few do at all understand what they say 3. There is an attention relating to the end of prayer that is that he that prays considers that he is present before God and speaks to him and this indeed is very profitable but it is not necessary No not so much So that by this Doctrine no attention is necessary but to attend that the words be all said and said right But even this attention is not necessary that it should be actual but it suffices to be virtual that is that he who says his office intends to do so and do not change his minde although he does not attend And he who does not change his minde that is unless observing himself not to attend he still turn his minde to other things he attends meaning he attends sufficiently and as much as is necessary though indeed speaking naturally and truly he does not attend If any man in the Church of England and Ireland had published such Doctrine as this he should quickly and deservedly have felt the severity of the Ecclesiastical Rod. But in Rome it goes for good Catholick Doctrine Now although upon this account Devotion is it may be good and it is good to attend to the words of our prayer and the sense of them yet that it is not necessary is evidently consequent to this But it is also expresly affirm'd by the same hand There ought to be devotion that our mind be inflam'd with the love of God though if this be wanting without contempt it is no deadly sin Ecclesiae satisfit per opus externum nec aliud jubet saith Reginaldus If ye do the outward work the Church is satisfied neither does she command any thing else Good Doctrine this And it is an excellent Church that commands nothing to him that prays but to say so many words Well! But after all this if Devotion be necessary or not if it be present or not if the minde wander or wander not if you minde what you pray or minde it not
Virgin and by all her names and titles which he must reckon one and forty in number together with her Epithets making so many Crosses and by these he must cast him headlong into Hell But if the Devil be stubborn for some of them are very disobedient there is a fourth and a fifth and a sixth Exorcism and then he conjures the earth the water and the fire to make them of his party and commands them not to harbour such villainous Spirits and commands Hell to hear him and obey his word and conjures at the Spirits in Hell to take that Spirit to themselves for it may be they will understand their duty better than that stubborn Devil that is broke loose from thence But if this chance to fail there is yet left a remedy that will do it He must make the picture of the Devil and write his name over the head of it and conjure the fire to burn it most horribly and hastily and if the picture be upon wood or paper it is ten to one that may be done After all this stir Sprinkle more holy water and take Sulphur Galbanum Assa foetida Aristolochia Rue S. Johns wort all which being distinctly blessed the Exorcist must hold the Devils picture over the fire and adjure the Devil to hear him and then he must not spare him but tell him all his faults and give him all his names and Anathematize him and curse not onely him but Lucifer too and Beelzebub and Satan and Astaroth and Behemot and Beherit and all together for indeed there is not one good natur'd Devil amongst them all and then pray once more and so throw the Devils picture into the fire then insult in a long form of crowing over him which is there set down And now after all if he will not go out there is a seventh Exorcism for him with new Ceremonies He must shew him the consecrated Host in the pixe pointing at it with his finger and then conjure him again and rail at him once more to which purpose there is a very fine form taken out of Prierius and set down in the Flagellum Daemonum and then let the Exorcist pronounce sentence against the Devil and give him his oath and then a commandment to go out of the several parts of his body always taking care that at no hand he remain in the upper parts and then is the Devils Qu. to come out if he have a minde to it for that must be always suppos'd and then follows the thanksgivings This is the manner of their devotion describ'd for the use of their Exorcists in which is such a heap of folly madness superstition blasphemy and ridiculous guises and playings with the Devil that if any man amongst us should use such things he would be in danger of being tried at the next Assizes for a Witch or a Conjurer however certain it is what ever the Devil looses by pretending to obey the Exorcist he gains more by this horrible debauchery of Christianity There needs no confutation of it the impiety is visible and tangible and it is sufficient to have told the story Onely this we say as to the thing it self The casting out of Devils is a miraculous power and given at first for the confirmation of Christian Faith as the gifts of Tongues and Healing were and therefore we have reason to believe that because it is not an ordinary power the ordinary Exorcisms cast out no more Devils than Extreme Unction cures sicknesses We do not envy to any one any grace of God but wish it were more modestly pretended unless it could be more evidently prov'd◠Origen condemned◠this whole procedure of conjuring Devils long since Quaeret aliquis si convenit vel Daemones adjurare Qui aspicit Iesum imperantem Daemonibus sed etiam potestatem dantem Discipulis super omnia daemonia ut infirmitates sanarent dicet quoniam non est secundum Potestatem datam â salvatore adjurare Daemonia Iudaicum enim est If any one askes Whether it be fit to adjure Devils He that beholds Jesus commanding over Devils and also giving power to his Disciples over all unclean spirits and to heal diseases will say that to adjure Devils is not according to the power given by our B. Saviour For it is a Jewish trick and S. Chrysostome spake soberly and truely We poor Wretches cannot drive away the flies much less Devils But then as to the manner of their Conjurations and Exorcisms this we say If these things come from God let them shew their warranty and their books of Precedents If they come not from God they are so like the Inchantments of Balaam the old Heathens and the modern Magicians that their Original is soon discovered But yet from what principle it comes that they have made Exorcists an Ecclesiastical Order with special words and instruments of collation and that the words of Ordination giving them power onely over possessed Christians Catechumens or Baptized should by them be extended and exercis'd upon all Infants as if they were all possessed by the Devil and not onely so but to bewitched Cattel to Mice and Locusts to Milk and Lettice to Houses and Tempests as if their Charms were Prophilactick as well as Therapeutick and could keep as well as drive the Devil out and prevent storms like the old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom Seneca makes mention of these things we cannot guess at any probable principle except they have deriv'd them from the Jewish Cabala or the Exorcisms which it is said Solomon us'd when he had consented to Idolatry But these things are so unlike the wisdom and simplicity the purity and spirituality of Christian devotion are so perfectly of their own devising and wilde imaginations are so full of dirty Superstitions and ignorant fancies that there are not in the world many things whose sufferance and practice can more destroy the Beauty of Holiness or reproach a Church or Society of Christians SECT XI TO put our trust and confidence in God onely and to use Ministeries of his own appointment and sanctification is so essential a duty owing by us to God that whoever trusts in any thing but God is a breaker of the first commandement and he that invents instrumental supports of his own head and puts a subordinate ministerial confidence in them usurps the rights of God and does not pursue the interests of true Religion whose very essence and formality is to glorify God in all his attributes and to do good to man and to advance the honour and Kingdome of Christ. Now how greatly the Church of Rome prevaricates in this great soul of Religion appears by too evident and notorious demonstration For she hath invented Sacramentals of her own without a Divine warrant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Cyril Concerning the holy and Divine mysteries of Faith or Religion we ought to do nothing by chance or of our own heads nothing without
be excused before God by their ignorant pretensions and suppositions we know not but they hope to save themselves harmless by saying that they believe the Bread to be their Saviour and that if they did not believe so they would not do so We believe that they say true but we are afraid that this will no more excuse them then it will excuse those who worship the Sun and Moon and the Queen of Heaven whom they would not worship if they did not believe to have Divinity in them And it may be observed That they are very fond of that persuasion by which they are led into this worship The error might be some excuse if it were probable or if there were much temptation to it But when they choose this persuasion and have nothing for it but a tropical expression of Scripture which rather than not believe in the natural useless and impossible sense they will defie all their own reason and four of the five operations of their soul Seeing Smelling Tasting and Feeling and contradict the plain Doctrine of the Ancient Church before they can consent to believe this error that Bread is changed into God and the Priest can make his Maker We have too much cause to fear that the error is too gross to admit an excuse and it is hard to suppose it invincible and involuntary because it is so hard and so untempting and so unnatural to admit the error We do desire that God may finde an excuse for it and that they would not But this we are most sure of that they might if they pleas'd finde many excuses or rather just causes for not giving Divine honour to the Consecrated Elements because there are so many contingencies in the whole conduct of this affair and we are so uncertain of the Priests intention and we can never be made certain that there is not in the whole order of causes any invalidity in the Consecration and it is so impossible that any man should be sure that Hâ—re and Now and This Bread is Transubstantiated and is really the Natural body of Christ that it were fit to omit the giving Gods due to that which they do not know to be any thing but a piece of bread and it cannot consist with holiness and our duty to God certainly to give Divine Worship to that thing which though their Doctrine were true they cannot know certainly to have a Divine Being SECT XIII AND now we shall plainly represent to our charges how this whole matter stands The case is this The Religion of a Christian consists in Faith and Hope Repentance and Charity Divine Worship and Celebration of the Sacraments and finally in keeping the Commandments of God Now in all these both in Doctrines and practices the Church of Rome does dangerously erre and teaches men so to do They do injury to Faith by creating new Articles and enjoyning them as of necessity to salvation * They spoil their hope by placing it upon Creatures and devices of their own * They greatly sin against Charity by damning all that are not of their opinion in things false or uncertain right or wrong * They break in pieces the salutary Doctrine of Repentance making it to be consistent with a wicked life and little or no amendment * They Worship they know not what and pray to them that hear them not and trust on that which helps them not * And as for the Commandments they leave one of them out of their Catechisms and Manuals and while they contend earnestly against some Opponents for the possibility of keeping them all they do not insist upon the necessity of keeping any in the course of their lives till the danger or article of their death * And concerning the Sacraments they have egregiously prevaricated in two points For not to mention their reckoning of seven Sacraments which we only reckon to be an unnecessary and un-Scholastical Errour they take the one half of the Principal away from the Laity and they institute little Sacraments of their own they invent Rites and annex Spiritual Graces to them whaâ— they please themselves of their own heads without a Divine Warrant or Institution and * At last perswade their people to that which can never be excus'd at least from Material Idolatry If these things can consist with the duty of Christians not only to eat what they worship but to adore those things with Divine Worship which are not God To reconcile a wicked life with certain hopes and expectations of Heaven at last and to place these hopes upon other things than God and to damn all the world that are not Christians at this rate then we have lost the true measures of Christianity and the Doctrine and Discipline of Christ is not a Natural and Rational Religion not a Religion that makes men holy but a Confederacy under the conduct of a Sect and it must rest in Forms and Ceremonies and Devices of Mans Invention And although we do not doubt but that the goodness of God does so prevail over all the follies and malice of mankind that there are in the Roman Communion many very good Christians yet they are not such as they are Papists but by some thing that is higher and before that something that is of an abstract and more sublime consideration And though the good people amongst them are what they are by the grace and goodness of God yet by all or any of these Opinions they are not so But the very best suffer diminution and allay by these things and very many more are wholly subverted and destroyed CHAP. III. The Church of Rome teaches Doctrines which in many things are destructive of Christian Society in general and of Monarchy in special Both which the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland does by Her Doctrines greatly and Christianly support SECT I. THat in the Church of Rome it is publickly taught by their greatest Doctors That it is lawful to lye or deceive the question of the Magistrate to conceal their name and to tell a false one to elude all examinations and make them insignificant and toothless cannot be doubted by any man that knows how the English Priests have behav'd themselves in the times of Queen Elizabeth King Iames and the Blessed Martyr King Charles I. Emonerius wrote in defence of it and Father Barnes who wrote a Book against Lying and Equivocating was suspected for a Heretick and smarted severely under their hands To him that askes you again for what you have paid him already you may safely say you never had any thing of him meaning so as to owe it him now It is the Doctrine of Emanuel SÃ and Sanchez which we understand to be a great lye and a great sin it being at the best a deceiving of the Law that you be not deceiv'd by your Creditor that is a doing evil to prevent one a sin to prevent the losing of your money If a man askes his Wife
yet Bellarmine dares not deny it but makes for it a crude and a cold Apology Now concerning this Article it will not be necessary to declare the Sentence of the Church of England and Ireland because it is notorious to all the World and is expresly oppos'd against this Roman Doctrine by Laws Articles Confessions Homilies the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy the Book of Christian Institution and the many excellent Writings of King Iames of Blessed Memory of our Bishops and other Learned Persons against Bellarmine Parsons Eudaemon Iohannes Creswel and others And nothing is more notorious than that the Church of England is most dutiful most zealous for the right of Kings and within these four and twenty years She hath had many Martyrs and very very many Confessors in this Cause It is true that the Church of Rome does recriminate in this point and charges some Calvinists and Presbyterians with Doctrines which indeed they borrowed from Rome using their Arguments making use of their Expressions and pursuing their Principles But with them in this Article we have nothing to do but to reprove the Men and condemn their Doctrine as we have done all along by private Writings and publick Instruments We conclude these our Reproofs with an Exhoriation to our respective Charges to all that desire to be sav'd in the day of the Lord Iesus that they decline from these horrid Doctrines which in their birth are new in their growth are scandalous in their proper consequents are infinitely dangerous to their Souls and hunt for their precious life But therefore it is highly fit that they also should perceive their own advantages and give God praise that they are immur'd from such infinite dangers by the Holy Precepts and Holy Faith taught and commanded in the Church of England and Ireland in which the Word of God is set before them as a Lanthorn to their feet and a Light unto their eyes and the Sacraments are fully administred according to Christs Institution and Repentance is preach'd according to the measures of the Gospel and Faith in Christ is propounded according to the Rule of the Apostles and the measures of the Churches Apostolical and Obedience to Kings is greatly and sacredly urg'd and the Authority and Order of Bishops is preserv'd against the Usurpation of the Pope and the Invasion of Schismaticks and Aerians new and old and Truth and Faith to all men is kept and preach'd to be necessary and inviolable and the Commandements are expounded with just severity and without scruples and Holiness of Life is urg'd upon all men as indispensably necessary to Salvation and therefore without any allowances tricks and little artifices of escaping from it by easie and imperfect Doctrines and every thing is practis'd which is useful to the saving of our Souls and Christs Merits and Satisfaction are intirely relyed upon for the pardon of our sins and the necessity of Good Works is universally taught and our Prayers are holy unblameable edifying and understood they are according to the measures of the Word of God and the practice of all Saints In this Church the Children are duly carefully and rightly Baptiz'd and the Baptiz'd in their due time are Confirm'd and the Confirm'd are Communicated and Penitents are Absolv'd and the Impenitents punished and discouraged and Holy Marriage in all men is preferr'd before unclean Concubinate in any and Nothing is wanting that God and his Christ hath made necessary to Salvation Behold we set before you Life and Death Blessing and Cursing Safety and Danger Choose which you will but remember that the Prophets who are among you have declar'd to you the way of Salvation Now the Lord give you understanding in all things and reveal even this also unto you Amen FINIS 1 Cor. 6.4 Phil. â— 14 Cont. Hermogen De vera side in Moral â—â—g 72. c. 1. reg 80. c. 22. Epist. Pasch. 2 De incar Christi Lib. 2. cap. de origen error lib. 7. contr Celsum Can comperimus de consecr dist 2. in 1 Cor. 11. Eccles. 11.6 De uniâ— Eccles cap. 6. * Ecclesia ex facris canoniciâ— Scripturiâ— osteudenda est quaque exillis aftendi non potest Ecclesia non est S. Aug. deâ—â—tit Eccles. c. 4. c. 3. Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam ibi deat namus causum nostram * Lib. Cano discipl Eccles. Angliâ— injunct Regiâ— Elis. A. D. 1571. Can. de concionatoribus â—at 3. Calend. Mart. Thâ—ssaâ—onicae a Quod sit metrum regula aâ— scientia credendorum Summae de Eccles. l. 2. c. 203. b Novum Symbolum condere solum ad Papam spectat quia est capuâ— fidei Christians cujus authoritate omnia quae ad filem spectant firmantur roborantur q. 59. a. 1. art 2. sicut potest novum symbolum condere ita potest novos articulos supra aelios multiplicare c Papa potest sacere novos arâ—iâ—ulos fidei id est quod modo credi oporteat cum sic prius non oportereâ— in cap. cum Christ. de hate n. 2. d Papa potest inducere novum articulum fidei in idem e Super 2. Decret de jurejur c. minis n. 1. f Apud Petrum Ciezam â—o 2. instit peruinae cap. â—9 * Iohannes Clemens aliquos folia Theodereti laceravit abjecit in socum in quibus contrae Transubstanâ—iaetionem praeclare disseruit Et cum non itae pridem Originem excuderent totum illud capuâ— sextum Iohannis quod commentabaetur Origenes omiserunt mutilum ediderunt librum propter candem causam * Sixtus Senensis Epist. Dedicat. ad Pium Quint. laudat Pontificem in haec verba Expurgari emaculari curâ—stâ— omnium Catholicorum Scriptorum at praeciput veterum Patrum scriptae Index Expurgator Madrili 1612. in Indiâ—e libror. expurgatorum pag. 39. Gal. 1. 8. Part 2. act 6. c. â— De potest Eccles consiâ— â— De Consiâ— author l. 2. c. 17. Section 1. Sess. 21. cap. 4. Part. 1. Sum. tit 10. c. 3. In art 18. Luther * Intravit ut vulpes regnavit ut leo moriebatur ut canis de eo saepius dictum Tertull. l. ad Martyr c. 1. S. Cyprian lib. 3. Ep. 15. apud Pamelium 11. Concil Nicen. 1. can 12. Conc. Ancyr c. 5. Concil Laodicen c. 2. S. Basil. in Ep. canonicis habentur in Nomocanone Photii can 73. * Communis opittio DD. tam Theologorum quaem Canonicorum quod sunt ex abundantiae meritorum quae ultrae mensuram demeritorum suorum sancti sustinuerunt Christi Sum. Angel v. Indulg 9. * Lib. 1. de indulgent cap. 2. 3. a In 4. l. sent dist 19. q. 2. b Ibid. dist 20. q. 3. Ubi supra In lib. 4. sent Verb. Indulgentia Vt quid non praevides tibâ— in die judicii quando nemo poterit per alium excusari vel defendi sed unusquisque sufficiens onus erit sibi ipsi Th. ae Kempis l. 1. de imit c. 24. a Homil. 1.