being rationally and Christianly principled and nothing averse to Piety till coming to the later Proposition That it became the wisedom and goodness of Christ to appoint a visible Judge Infallible upon Earth to determine Controversies He replied mildly we had reason to go warily in censuring the wisedom and goodness of God if this or that thing seeming to us expedient were not done in the government of the World for who can pretend to know the depth of the wisedom and knowledg of God Rom. 11.33 to search into his judgments and find out his ways This most rational advertisement took deep root in my heart ever thirsty of reason and open to receive it Neither did the modesty of the Proposer diminish but rather augment the weight of it It was in truth the first shock that touched me to the quick striking upon the very root of that Engine of Infallibility I leaned upon Reflecting upon the matter in my solitudes I perceived the weakness of the ground I built upon I saw that in like manner we may say it belongeth to the goodness wisedom and power of God not to permit that his Holy Law should be transgressed by vile creatures and his supreme dread Majesty offended by despicable vermine Nor that Pastors of Souls especially the Roman Pope deemed a Vice-God upon Earth should fall into errours and scandalize with wicked life the people And alas it is but too well known he permits this Shall we therefore waver in the Opinion of his goodness power and wisedom God forbid Why then should we think it a failure in his providence or goodness if besides Holy Scriptures abounding in all light and Heavenly Doctrine to such as are not wilfully blind he did not appoint some visible Judge universal for our direction St. Paul saying 2 Tim. 3.16.17 that Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works That Foundation alledging the necessity of a Judge visible universal and Infallible being thus weakned I proceeded to examine what right the Pope or Church of Rome could pretend to such infallibility the support of all their Incredible Doctrine And first the very inconstancy of their pretence to this priviledge and great dissention of their Authors in asserting it was to me a main reason of suspecting the truth of all and a concluding argument that they cannot be certain of having it Vide Bel l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 2. For some will have the Pope himself alone as Pope or as teaching from his chair to have this Infallibility of Doctrine Others will not allow it him but in conjunction with a Council either general or particular of Cardinals and Divines Others only attribute it to him in a General Council Others neither separately nor conjunctly and will only allow the Church Universal to be Infallible And finally others of the most Learned affirm even the Church Universal S. Tho. Turre â—â—â—mata Alphonâ—us a Cactâ—o apud Candi 4 〈◊〉 c. 4 concl 2. to be capable of a Material Errour by Probable Ignorance though not of a Formal and Heretical one which in substance is to allow the Church no more Infallibility than Origen Tertullian or any other particular true Christian Believer hath though subject to errors which Opinion if extended to make the Universal Church fallible even in Points Essential to saluation is false And upon so great an uncertainty of their Infallibility they will have us to build a certain Infallible Belief of all they please to teach us which is to build a house incapable of falling upon a sandy and ruinous Foundation Now for their grounds for this pretended Infallibility what is their warrant for it Divine Scripture they say for who but God could give such a Priviledge and what warrant have they for believing he Scripture saying so to be Divine and Infallible The Infallible Testimony of the Church say they again their own Roman Church they mean So they believe the Scripture is Infallible because the Roman Church doth testifie it and this Church to be Infallible because the Scriptures Testimony is for it A circle in reasoning which Logicians would hiss out of their Schools Neither may Becan's escape avail him that they deal with Christians who believe the Scripture for no Christian but such as they will make blind can believe that there is any Scripture favouring their case in this particular without clipping or corrupting it to serve their purpose For example Their main pillar for this Infallibility fetcht out of the 24th chapter of St. John John 14.16 I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever even the Spirit of truth Their own Disciples who ordinarily know no more of Scriptures than what they are pleased to shew to them for their several purposes may think that Text to be pertinent for their pretentions But who will take the liberty to read the Context before and after will clearly find out that the very same Text destroyeth their whole design and taketh away all certainty of the Holy Ghost his assistance for rendring their Decrees Infallible The Text restored to its integrity saith thus in their own Bible If ye love me keep my commandments Mundus id est remanens amator mundi cum quo nurquam est amor Dei Gloss interlin Non habent spirituales oculos quibus Spiritum sanctum videant muâ—â—i amaâ—â—res Gloss ordinaria and I will ask my Father and he shall give you another Paraclete that he may abide with you for ever even the Spirit of Truth whom the World cannot receive By the first words you may see this to be a conditional promise limited to such as love God and keep his Commandments by the later words you see worldly and sinful men expresly excluded from receiving that gracious assistance of the Spirit of Truth therefore to be sure that the Pope and his Council have the assistance of the Spirit of Truth we must be sure that they love God and keep his Commandments but of this we cannot have security their own Histories relating and the world knowing enormous vices in them What they alledge out of St. Paul writing to Timothy Tim. 3.15 that the Church is the pillar and ground of Truth we freely admit it as due to the Universal Church not to any particular but less to one found guilty of so many and great errours such as the Romish is whose ambition in claiming and appropriating to it self all the commendations delivered of the Church Universal is no less reprehensible than as if the Scribes and Pharisees persecuting our Saviour should appropriate to their Synagogue all the praises given to Moses and Aaron Would not you wonder that their chief Champion Cardinal Bellarmine Bellar de sum Pâ—n l. 4 c 2. should bring for proof of the Pope's Infallibility that in the Old Law
nature of Bread and Wine And truly an Image and similitude of the Body and Bloud of Christ is celebrated in the Action of the mysteries I am to suppose it will be replyed for some exception must be conceived against evidences so clear and executive that these testimonies of the Fathers are not to be seen thus in their more corrected editions which I have reason to believe having seen the venerable writings of the most ancient and grave Fathers of the Church both Greek and Latine defaced with large blots wheresoever they were found opposite to the present Tenents and practice of the Roman Church according to the direction of the Roman Expurgatory They pretend that Protestants have inserted into the Books of the Fathers those clauses favouring their own Doctrine But who can believe that so many weighty Volumes making up great Libraries should be newly printed to receive those supplies that so many clear sentences concording with the context should be so artificially conveyed into the very heart and marrow of the Homilies of the Fathers The contrary is the more credible to me I having seen very ancient Libraries which never came under the hands of a Protestant expurged of such clauses and sentences according to the Rule of the Roman Expurgatory Besides this Scot. in 4. dis 11. q. 3. Ocham ib. q. 6. Biel lect 40 in Canon Missae Râ—ffens c. 1. o. 1. controv captiv Balil Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester Bassolis Caietan Melchior Canus and others many eminent Schoolmen have affirmed that the doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible And certainly it was no Article of Faith before the Lateran Council declared it for such 1200. years after Christ as Scotus and others do affirm And even after this declaration several of their chief Teachers continued affirming that Article not to be contained in Scripture Bassolis Caiâ—tan apâ—d Suar. to 3 Disp 46. sec 3. Caâ—us loâ— com l. 3. sun 2. especially â—assolis Caietan Melchior Canus and so they coined it of their own heads for they could not declare it to be revealed if it was not in Scripture Their doctrine of Transubstantiation and Corporal Presence of our Saviour in the Sacrament of the Altar being thus ill grounded consider how desperate is their resolution in giving to the consecrated wafer the Worship of Divinity nay greater than ever they give to the true undoubted God as is well known to such as have seen the sumptuous pomp of Spain and other Popish Countries in adoring the Consecrated Host Even standing to their own principles they can never be absolutely certain of Christ's Corporal Presence under those Forms of Bread That depending as themselves teach from the intention of the Priest consecrating and his due Ordination and this later again depending from the intention of the Bishop that ordained him and his legal Ordination and so upward of endless requisites impossible to be known certainly upon any occasion as Bellarmine Vega and all their Writers commonly do confess Bellar. li. 3. de justif c. 8. What blindness therefore is it to give Divine Worship to a thing they know not certainly to be more than a piece of bread Vega lib. 9. de justif c. 17. Some pressed with this Argument did answer that they were free from Idolatry in their practice herein because they believe that host to be God But upon this account the Egyptians worshipping the Sun for God and the Israelites adoring the Golden Calf believing it was the true God that brought them out of Egypt and the grossest Idolaters that ever were may plead for excuse from Idolatry alledging unwilful mistake To this again some of them reply that they do not barely suppose Christ to be really present under the Form of bread but that they know and believe it upon the same ground and motives upon which they believe that Christ is God and consequently to be adored Whereby certainly they give great advantage to the enemies of Christ's Divinity seeing they make the truth of these two things equal that is Bellar. de Christo l. 1. c. 4. the Divinity of Christ and Transubstantiation And of the untruth of this bold Assertion I will take learned Bellarmine for judge who when he proves the Divinity of Christ goes through nine several classes of Arguments of which six are wholly out of Scripture with uncontrollable strength and admirable clearness But being to prove Transubstantiation out of Scripture his only argument is from those words of our Saviour Matth. De Sacr. Euchar. l. 3. c. 19. 26. Take eat this is my body And finding that proof not clear enough appeals to the Authority of Councils and Fathers concluding the chapter thus Though in the words of the Lord there may be some obscurity or ambiguity that is taken away by the Councils and Fathers of the Church and so passes to that kind of proof But whatsoever be of Scripture for Transubstantiation it is intolerable boldness to say there is the same reason for the adoration of the Host as for Christ's Divinity it self whereas for the one we have a plain command in Scripture and for the other nothing like it St. Paul tells that all the Angels are commanded to worship the Son of God Heb. 1.6 and that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in Heaven Phi. 2.10 in Earth and under the Earth And St. John telleth from his Master's mouth that the Heavenly Father commanded that all men should honour the Son even as they do the Father Jo. 5.23 But where is the least intimation given that we are to worship Christ in the Sacramental Bread supposing him present there If you answer the general command extendeth to him where ever he is present I say you may upon that account as well worship him in the Sun and in the Moon and in any other bread for in all he is present as God I will conclude this Point with answering the argument I saw taken for the most weighty against our Doctrine hitherto declared of taking the Sacrament of the Altar for a commemoration of our Saviour and spiritual partaking of his blessed Body and Bloud for the food of our souls to life everlasting without any real transmutation of the substances That if the Jews did take his words in this sense they could not in reason strive among themselves saying John 5.52 How can this man give us his flesh to eat nor his Disciples say This is an hard saying who can hear it And Christ replying did not reprehend their misunderstanding his words but repeated his former doctrine saying Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man ye have no life in you This argument I once over-valued but considering it better I look upon it as a tacit censure of Christ's reply for non pertinent to satisfie the Objection of his Hearers Shall we pretend to understand their meaning better than Christ
and in the same breath they disclaim greater Antiquity and more warrantable Authority of the Church acknowledging that Christ did institute and the Primitive Church did practise the giving of the Sacrament under both kinds to all the people How inconsequent is errour This onely instance may assure us that the Romish Religion as it stands now did not proceed intirely from Christ and his Apostles If we object that the detracting of the Cup is the bereaving the faithful people of their spiritual food to life everlasting by not permitting them to partake of the bloud of Christ he affirming Jo 6.5 3. that except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you The Council tells us We must firmly believe and no way doubt that the entire body and bloud of our Saviour is contained as well under the Form of bread as under the Form of wine But we have shewed before how little ground we have for a firm belief of their doctrine in this point How great reason to doubt it nay to be assured of the contrary and that Christ is present and taken in the Eucharist onely in a spiritual and Sacramental way that being so in bereaving the Faithful of the Cup they bereave them of the whole Sacrament For their own Divines do agree in affirming that the consecrated Forms of Bread and Wine are essential Constitutes of this Sacrament Suar. in 3 p disp 42 sec 1 conc 3 any they alone are the Sacrament properly as Suarez declares relating a great number of other Divines for the same doctrine Therefore taking no Wine they take no Sacrament taking no Sacrament they have no life in them as our Saviour declared and so bereaving them of the Sacramental wine they bereave them of the life of their souls and is not this to use cruelty to souls Purgatory and Indul. gences As for the sixth Article concerning Purgatory I do not find their Learned men so confident as the Vulgar in fixing a determinate place for it in the bowels of the Earth with those frightful qualities their Legends do specifie Being contented to conclude from some places of Scripture and by conjecture that after this Life there must be some place to expiate or purge souls from Venial fins or satisfie for the Temporal penalty due to Great ones without determining whether that place be over or under or in the Earth or whether the pain be heat or cold or darkness or tempest c. And as the Conclusion is obscure so is the inference of it from the premisses laid The chief place out of the Old Testament is the case of Judas Macchabeus sending money to Jerusalem that sacrifices should be made for his souldiers defunct and the gloss annexed that therefore it is a holy consideration to pray for the dead c. But though the Book relating thiscase were canonical and of certain authority which is not allowed yet the conclusion pretended from it for the doctrine of Purgatory is not of force For Prayers for the dead may be made and were made to different purposes 2 Mach. 12.43 than that of drawing them out of Purgatory First Suar to 1. in 3. P. disp 10. Sec. 4. because many learned Writers of the Romish party do teach that God as a good Paymaster doth oftentimes give before-hand the reward of services to be done in the future and therefore being long-sighted and always present to all the spaces of Eternity may see now and listen to prayers that will be made in any Age after And fore-seeing that godly persons shall pray in the future for the assistance of his Grace to one dying now may yield it accordingly This doctrine I have seen practised in a Letter written to my self by one of the learnedest men in Spain wherein speaking of the death of his Mother he prayed to God that he might have assisted her in the later hour for dying penitent If this go well Prayers may be commendable for the Dead to different purposes from that of drawing them out of Purgatory And if the case related of the Macchabees be true it is more likely the prayers made for the slain should have proceeded in the manner fore-said than for bringing them out of Purgatory Whereas in the same place is related that those men were found to have committed a mortal sin which is not pretended to be pardoned in Purgatory under the coats of every one that was slain 2 Mac. 12 V. 40 they found things consecrated to the Idols of the Jamnites which is forbidden to the Jews by the Law And though Bellarmine pretends the sin of those men should be venial through ignorance it is but a bare conjecture and not agreeable to the context shewing that deed to have drawn upon them God's vengeance then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain Their death might have been their temporal punishment and final penitence might have freed them from the eternal as Bellarmine confesseth relating for it the Psalm 78. Ps 78.34 Cùm occideret eos quaerebant eum revertebantur when he slew them then they sought him and they returned and enquired early after God But not to rely upon the fore-mentioned consideration of some particular Writers if we find in some of the Ancients prayers to be made for the dead it was to other ends than to draw them out of this supposed Purgatory First to praise God for giving them a happy end in his holy Faith and rest from their labours as appeareth by those words of the Revelations used by the Ancient Church in the Office of the dead Rev 14 13. Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the spirit that they may rest from their labours Secondly that we should comfort each other in the death of our Friends reflecting upon the hope of meeting them in Heavenly glory according to those comfortable words of St. Paul in his first Epistle to the Thessalonians 1 Thss 4.13 accustomed to be read in the same Office of the dead I would not have you to be ignorant brethren concerning them which areasleep that ye sorrow not even as others which have no hope c. third ly for our spiritual instruction whether considering the good example of our faithful Brethren preceding whether reflecting upon our mortality at the sight of death All this may be seen by the practice of the primitive Christians as it is declared by the Authour of the Commentaries upon Job inserted among the Works of Origen li. 3 comment in Job by these words We observe the memorials of the Saints and devoutly keep the remembrance of our parents or friends which dye in the Faith as well rejoycing for their refreshing as requesting also for our selves a godly consummation of the Faith Thus therefore do we celebrate the death not the day of the birth because they which dye shall