would lye upon those who had tryed them by those Rules 4. If Revelations made to two several Persons do contradict each other that there is great Reason to suspect both For although saith Cardinal Bona it be possible that one may be true and the other false and the Devil may endeavour to take away the Authority of the True by the false yet for the most part they are both suspected and doubtful And before he saith that it is reasonable to believe those Women Saints were deceived in supposing their own Fancies to be divine Revelations who have published Revelations contradicting each other Which it is plain he intended for the famous case of the Revelations of S. Brigitt and S. Katharin which contradicted each other expresly about the immaculate conception and which I had produced as a plain instance of a false pretence to Inspiration in the Roman Church it being impossible God should contradict himself Mr. Cressy in answer to this first confesses that the publick Office of their Church testifies that each of them were favoured with Divine Revelations and then produces the Testimony of S. Antonin that those things may be supposed by the Persons themselves to be divine Revelations which are but humane dreams Thirdly He cites Cardinal Baronius who seems to reject the Revelations on both sides And yet he by no means will allow the honour of their Church to be concerned herein which hath approved them both as Persons truly Inspired when Mr. Cressy confesses they did not testifie their Revelations by Miracles and that without it Divine Revelation cannot be known I would not desire a greater advantage from an Adversary than Mr. Cressy here gives me against himself For by his own confession then their Church approves those to have had divine Revelations which never gave the proper evidence of it viz. Miracles and such whose Revelations are questioned by the Wisest men among them And what is all this but to give Countenance for all that the Church can know to a meer pretence to Inspiration which is the highest Fanaticism in the World And if as he saith notwithstanding the Councils approbation there is scarce a Catholick alive that thinks he hath an obligation to believe either of them this makes as much to my purpose as I desire for if they have no obligation to believe them they may without sin believe them not to be divine Revelations and since they are given out to be such and approved by their Church all such Persons may without sin charge them with the highest Fanaticism in a false pretence to Divine Revelation And why then should I be so much blamed for doing that which Persons in their own Church may do without sin But I see Mr. Cressy is not acquainted with the common Doctrine of their own Divines about the obligation that lyes upon Persons to believe Private Revelations For they agree 1. That those Persons to whom those Revelations are made are bound to believe them before any approbation of the Church For say they the primary Reason of assenting to a Divine Revelation is from the Divine Veracity to which it is wholly accidental whether it be publick or private and the Churches proposition is only the common external condition of applying the object of Faith to us but there may be as great an obligation to believe a private Revelation supposing only sufficient motives to the mind of the Person that this Revelation comes from God This is the opinion of Vega Catharinus Suarez Lugo Ysambertus and as they tell us of most of their modern Divines Indeed they mention Cajetan Sotus Canus and some others as of another opinion but Suarez saith they seem to differ only in words because they will not have that assent called Catholick Faith which the other are willing to yield to them and call it Theological Faith but do make it as certain and infallible as the other Which they prove not only from the obligation to faith in the private Revelations mentioned in Scripture but from invincible Reason because the ground of the assent of faith is not the publickness of the Revelation but the Divine Authority and Veracity which being supposed must equally oblige whether the Revelation be private or publick And if there be sufficient motives to believe a private Revelation to deny an obligation to believe it is a contempt of Divine Authority and to suppose there cannot be sufficient motives is to say that God cannot do as much by himself as he can by the Church The force of which Reason I do not see how it is possible for those to avoid who assert that God doth still communicate private Revelations to mens Minds 2. That supposing these Revelations to be proposed by the Church all others are bound to believe them to be divine Revelations For then they have the same reason which they have to believe any Revelation All the difficulty now is to understand what a sufficient proposal by the Church in this case is Suarez saith that although private Revelations be chiefly intended for the persons to whom they are made yet a sufficient proposal of them being made to others there doth arise from thence an obligation to believe them For which saith he The general Rule is the approbation of the Church as appears by the Lateran Council under Leo 10. which forbad the Preaching private Revelations without the examination and approbation of the Church and then saith Suarez the believing them becomes a part of Catholick Faith Now I desire to know how it is possible for their Church to shew greater care in the examination and approbation of any private Revevelations than it did in those of S. Brigitt they being frequently examined by the publick Authority of their Church and after such examination declared by the Pope to have come from the spirit of God and at last approved say their own writers at the General Council of Basil. How could they possibly express greater approbation of any controverted Book in the Bible But if after all this these Revelations may pass among them for Dreams and Fancies and no men are obliged to believe them let them clear their Church from Fanaticism if they can For either those Revelations were from God or not if not then they were Fanatical illusions approved by their Church if they were then since they were approved by those whom they are bound to believe with what face can Mr. Cressy say that there is scarce a Catholick alive that thinks he has an obligation to believe them which I do the more wonder at since they believe things as absurd already and with as little reason as any thing in S. Brigitts Revelations And therefore the Person of Honour had great Reason to say that Mr. Cressy hath in truth not answered the Weight of my Instance from the Revelations of S. Brigitt and S. Catharine 5. They confess that some persons are very
at all in the Christian Doctrine 2. The way and manner how it came into the Christian Church and hath obtained so much favour in it 1. That it hath no Foundation at all in the Christian Doctrine It is the great excellency of the Christian Religion that it gives us such incomparable directions in order to the compleat Felicity of our immortal souls That it hath not only discovered more plainly and fully the blessed state of another life but teaches men the most effectual way to prepare their minds for it viz. by sincere repentance by inward purity by subduing our passions and due government of our actions according to the Rules of temperance and justice by dependence on Divine Providence as to the affairs of this world by patience under afflictions by doing good to others although our enemies and perâ—ecutors by deep humility and mean thoughts of our selves by a large charity thinking as well of as doing well to others by valuing the concernments of another life above the advantages of this which is called self-denyal and to that degree that when our Religion calls for it we should willingly part with our lives for the sake of it This as far as I can understand it is the summary comprehension of a Christians Duty in order to his happiness and by patient continuance in Well-doing he may with reason hope for the enjoyment of that Blessed State which is reserved to another life The which being made known to the world by the Doctrine of Christ therefore Faith in our Lord Iesus Christ is made so necessary a part of a Christians Duty and because we want divine supplyes and assistance to enable us to do our duty therefore we are so much commanded to be frequent and â—ervent in prayer and many promises and encouragements are given to the due performance of it from Gods readiness to hear the prayers of the Righteous and to grant the requests they make to him All this is not only excellent in it self and most reasonable to be done but very easie to understand but not a word in all this tending to any immediate Union with God in the pure fund of the Spirit or such a State of Contemplation wherein the operations of the soul are suspended nothing of passive unions and visions and raptures as such things which every Christian who looks for perfection may hope for It is true we are often commanded to love God with all our hearts but withal we are told we must not fancy this love to be a meer languishing passion towards an infinite object which we therefore love because we do not understand but see him only in profound darkness and clasp about him with the closest embraces being united to him in the most immediate manner and being melted in the fruition of him Which are luscious Metaphors brought into the Christian Doctrine from that antient Family of Love I mean the School of Plato as I shall shew afterwards But the love of Christians towards God is no fond amorous passion but a due apprehension and esteem of the divine excellencies a hearty sense of all his Kindness to us and a constant readiness of mind to do his Will for this is the Love of God to keep his Commandments And if any man say I love God and hateth his Brother he is a lyar for he that loveth not his Brother whom he hath seen how can he love God whom he hath not seen No man hath seen God at any time If we love one another God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us Thus the beloved Disciple who understood the greatest mysteries of Divine Love hath expressed them to us and thus the beloved Son of God hath declared what he means by the Love he expects from his Disciples If ye love me keep my commandments And ye are my Friends if ye do whatsoever I command you Here is nothing of an abstracted life or internal and external solitude or self-annihilation in order to an immediate active union with God in the supream point of the Spirit nothing of blind elevations of the Will without the use of Reason and Discourse ingulfing it more and more profoundly in God all these Mystical Notions and expressions had another spring and more impure Fountain than the Christian Doctrine § 5. Not so say O. N. and Mr. Cressy for if they may be believed there is ground in Scripture for all the most lofty mystical expressions If so I must retract what I have said but I never knew any men that needed more an infallible Interpreter of Scripture than they do they make such lamentable expositions of it if they can but hit upon a word or a phrase to their purpose away they run with that and never consider the design or importance of it What work doth O. N. make with his Cor altum and Regnum Dei intra vos whereas the first signifies nothing but due consideration nor the other any thing but that the Kingdom of the Messias was then come among them And what are these to Mystical Divinity And Mr. Cressy 's accedite ad Deum illuminamini is altogether to as much purpose for is there no instruction to be had from God or his Law short of passive unions no enlightning our minds but by immediate inspirations But Mr. Cressy thinks he hath done the business and quite stopped my mouth with S. Paul 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who being in a wonderful Extasie saw and heard God only knows what which although he was willing to communicate yet he had not the power to do it But as the Person of Honour hath already very well told Mr. Cressy What is this to those who go about to express what neither themselves nor any else can understand If they pretend to the same extasies why do they not imitate his Modesty Why do they go about to help S. Paul to words to do it by if himself declared it could not be done by words To which Mr. Cressy answers as much as was to be answered which is just nothing But his Author O. N. brings the same place and not only that but all those which mention the Revelations of the Prophets or Apostles To what purpose Do I deny any Divine Revelations Do I give the least intimation that I questioned whether there were any true inspirations in the Writers of Holy Scriptures God forbid But how doth it follow if God did inspire men to declare his Will to mankind therefore all the pretences to Revelations and Inspirations in the Roman Church are true If S. Paul had once a true Rapture therefore all S. Teresa 's were such and not the effects of a vehement Imagination Let us observe the difference not only in the value and excellency and judgement of the Persons but in the very manner of relating them Her life written by her self to which O. N. appeals in this matter as
mentioned by O. N. which they have not been before-hand with him in producing to the very same purpose I cannot then find out the difference between the highest of our Enthusiasts and theirs and the very same pleas which serve for the one will justifie the other also What have they ever pretended to but to understand celestial secrets divine mysteries or future events by immediate Revelation Now all these things are owned defended and justified by the Roman Church and yet they not lyable to the charge of Fanaticism § 7. No saith O. N. Enthusiasm or Fanaticism doth not lye in speaking things hard to be understood nor yet the pretending high and mysterious effects Visions Revelations c. for all these we believe may be and are often wrought in Gods Saints by the Holy Spirit and his special presence in their souls and that we say in a much higher and more admirable way than any of Satans infatuations can imitate or ascend to but Fanaticism is a false pretence of these or the like when having no just ground to be credited they pretend to them So that the main point is yielded up to the Fanaticks viz. Visions and immediate Revelations and unaccountable Impulses from the Spirit of God all the dispute is whether the Popish Enthusiasts or those among us are only pretenders If O. N. were to convince a Quaker who pretends to such an immediate impulse of the Spirit this must be his method of proceeding with him Friend I perceive thou talkest much of the Spirit of God moving thee and revealing the hidden mysteries of his Kingdom to thee but thy pretence is vain and thou art deceived by thy own fancy if not by an evil Spirit No saith the Quaker I know I am not for I have the testimony of the Spirit within me that I am not deceived but thou art deceived and lyest against the Holy Ghost and blasphemest the Spirit of God working in his Saints Not I saith O. N. I grant that the Holy Ghost doth work in his Saints such supernatural elevations whereby they understand divine Mysteries and have Visions and Raptures and Revelations more than any of you but all ours are true and yours are false Thou lying Prophet replyes the Quaker Gods speaks truth by thee as he did once by Balaams Ass and Caiaphas but thou through the Wickedness of thy heart dost condemn the Generation of his Saints among us as hypocrites and wouldst have the Spirit of God dwell only among you that are the Sons of Mystical Babylon and partake of all her defilements that are the seed of the Beast and the false Prophet that commit adultery with Images and set up the Man of Sin in his Throne that have covered the face of the earth with your abominations and still go about to deceive the Nations You have the Spirit of God among you You pretend to the seeing hidden Mysteries and immediate Revelations and Mystical Unions with God! No yours are the Mysteries of Iniquity the Revelations of Antichrist and unions only with Mystical Babylon You have the Spirit of God among you No yours is the Spirit of Enchantment and Divination the Spirit of lying and deceit the Spirit of Antichrist and not of God I say again saith O. N. that we have the Spirit and you have not And I say by the Spirit that you have not saith the Quaker And is not this a fair conclusion of this Dispute Hath not O. N. extreamly got the better of the Quaker But O. N. pleads yet farther that they make use of Notes and Rules of discerning of the pretences to Inspiration which I shall consider afterwards but that which O. N. and Mr. Cressy do most insist upon is this that if such pretenders to Inspirations do speak or do any thing against the Catholick Church as they call it then their pretences are to be rejected as Satanical illusions Very good This is a way to preserve themselves but what is this to the preventing the delusions of such fanatick pretenders to Inspirations who may be grosly deceived and yet never speak or do any thing against their Church but it seems the least touch that way presently marrs all If Mother Teresa had but chanced to let fall a word against the Power of Holy Water in driving away Devils or chanced in one of her Visions to have seen Bread upon the Altar after consecration away with her a meer hypocrite and Impostor one deluded by the Devil and it had been well if after all her Visions and Raptures she had escaped the Inquisition For can it possibly be so certain that she had Divine Visions as that Holy Water drives away Devils or that she had Mystical Unions as that no bread remained upon the Altar after consecration No no. If melancholy Women once offer to meddle in those matters they must then be told of their weakness of Iudgement and strength of Imagination and delusions of the Devil but if they admire every superstitious foolery and see strange effects of Holy Water and in some Visions can discern the very flesh and blood of Christ in the Eâ—charist then O heavenly Visions O Divine Saint Then her Confessor must sooth and flatter her and suffer her to be deceived by her own imagination at least if not by something worse So that this whole business of Visions and Revelations among them is managed by Politick Rules if they can serve to strengthen their interest they are encouraged if not the persons are presently discountenanced and if they persist in their pretences in great hazard of the Inquisition But may not weak and Melancholy Persons be deceived in judging the effects of a strong Imagination to be the Inspirations of the Spirit of God What then say they these do no hâ—rt to the World But is it no injury to their souls to suffer them to be so deluded Is it no dishonour to Christian Religion to make the Perfection of the Devotion of it to consist in such strange unaccountable Unions and Raptures which take away the use of all Reason and Discourse Is it nothing to have Persons Canonized for Saints and admired and worshipped chiefly for the sake of these things In which case not only the particular persons while they lived were suffered to be abused but the whole Christian World as much as lyes in them is imposed upon and the effects of a strong Imagination and Mystical Unions are recommended as the perfection of the Christian State § 8. But whatever Rules they go by I shall now shew that such kind of Ecstasies and Revelations as the Mystical Divinity pretends to have been condemned by the Christian Church in former Ages which will yet farther discover how far it is from being a part of the Cristian doctrine â—o far is it from being the perfection of a Christian State And the Instance I shall produce will be such a one wherein the judgement of the whole Christian Church was seen viz. in
the ecstatical Visions and Raptures and Revelations which Montanus and his followers pretended to Baronius proves from the testimonies of Philastrius Epiphanius Theodoret and others that Montanus and his companions were good Catholicks and great practisers of fasting and mortifications and were in great esteem in the Church for a more than ordinary degree of sanctity when they wee in this reputation they pretended to have extraordinary Visions and Ecstasies wherein they suffered such violences as Mother Teresa describes and were under such a force upon their minds as they thought divine which deprived them of the present use of ratiocination in which state they said they had many Revelations from God Now here we have the very case of Mystical Unions and we all know that this Spirit of Montanus was rejected in the Christian Church as a Fanatick Enthusiastical Spirit but it will be worth our while to shew that it was upon this very ground because the Montanists pretended to such Ecstasies and Revelations from God which deprived men of the use of their Reason Claudius Apollinaris Bishop of Hierapolis apprehending the dangerous consequences of these Enthusiastical pretences to Ecstasies and Revelations goes to Ancyra in Galatia to give himself full satisfaction as to the nature of them and being returned he writes this account to his friend Marcellus that Montanus was wont to fall into sudden transports and ecstasies in which he became Enthusiastical and uttered strange things and prophesie which saith he is a thing contrary to the constant tradition and practice of the Christian Church the same he saith of the two female Enthusiasts Prisca and Maximilla and all the account he gives of their separation from the communion of the Church was because the Christian Church all over the world refused to give any entertainment to their Enthusiastical Spirit and that the Churches of Asia having met together and examined this Spirit they condemned it as impious whereupon they were cast out of the Church upon which Maximilla cryed out I am driven away as a Wolf from the Sheep but I am no Wolf but the Word and the Spirit and the Power Miltiades as appears by Eusebius writ a Book against the Montanists on this subject that God did not communicate Revelations in Ecstasies wherein he shewed that Montanus was wont to fall into his Ecstasies which ended in an involuntary Madness and then proves that none of the Prophets either of the Old or New Testament ever prophesied in Ecstasies or when they had no use of their Reason But no one speaks more punctually to this business than Epiphanius who layes down this as a general Rule that whatever Prophets spake they delivered with the clear use of their Reason and Understanding and afterwards saith that the Montanists were very much deceived in pretending to such Visions and Revelations because God had sealed up his Church and put an end to those extraordinary Gifts While there was any need of Prophets holy men of God were sent by him with a true Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with great steadiness of mind and a clear understanding and afterwards makes this the characteristical difference of a true and false Prophet that a true Prophet speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a great consistency of ratiocination and consequence Thus Moses thus Isaiah saith he thus all the Prophets Do not you see saith he that these are the words of men that understood themselves and not of men that were ecstatical but these pretenders to Visions and Revelations speak dark and perplexed and obscure things viz. much like to Mystical Divinity which neither they understood themselves nor those that hear them As any one may see in him by the fragments he hath preserved both of Montanus and Maximilla But they pleaded Scripture too for their Ecstasies and Raptures viz. Genâ— 2. 21. Gods sending upon Adam a deep sleep which was rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which Epiphanius answers that that was only a binding of his senses by natural rest and not any force upon the mind but they had another place too as impertinent as this but as impertinent as it is it is the very same phrase that my Adversaries produce Ego dixi in â—xcessu meo which Epiphanius proves cannot be understood of any such Ecstasie as the Montanists pleaded for and in Truth he needed not take much pains to do it But they could not follow the Montanists exactly unless they abused Scripture too to justifie their Visions and Ecstasies So one Ferdinandus de Diano a Venetian Divine writing a Book purposely in Vindication of these things on the occasion of the Ecstasies and Visions of a Certain Nun which were sent to Paul the fifth and which were taken by her Confessor for fourteen years together makes use of the very same phrases of Scripture as the Montanists did but exceeds them in impertinency for to prove Raptures he produces all the places where the word raptus is used raptus est nè malitia mutaret intellectum ejus Sap. 4. Mens illius ad diversa rapitur Job 26. rapiemur cum illis in nubibus 1 Thess. 4. but above all commend me to Holofernes his Rapture to prove the Raptures of the Popish Saints Holophernis oculi à sandalibus Iudith rapti sunt ejus cor sensus cum illis rapta sunt Jud. 16. Can any man be so hard hearted to withstand such manifest proofs as these are But to return to Epiphanius we are not to understand saith he any Rapture or Ecstasie of the Prophets so as to suppose them to be deprived of the use of their reason and them So he shews that S. Peter in his Ecstasie had still the free exercise of his Reason which he absolutely affirms of every Prophet both of the Old and New Testament What would Epiphanius have thought then of the glorious frenzies and heavenly follies of M. Teresa in which she spake she knew not what What of the Mystical Unions wherein the operations of the understanding are suspended What of all the holy Violences she underwent wherein both understanding and memory were distracted No doubt he would have declared them all to be downright Montanism and condemned by the whole Christian Church Neither were these the only Persons who delivered the sense of the Church in this matter but S. Hierom saith the same thing The Prophet saith he speaks not in an Ecstasie as Montanus and Prisca and Maximilla fondly imagine but what he prophesies is the Book of the Vision of one who understands all he sayes So of the Prophet Habakkuk he understands what he sees contrary to the perverse doctrine of Montanus and speaks not as a fool nor gives as distracted women do a sound without any signification Whence it comes that the Apostle commands that if any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by the first should hold his peace for saith he presently after
this one stroke he endeavours to expell all the flock of phantasms from his conception of God Was not this O. N. very hard put to it to bring these passages to prove Mystical Divinity To as little purpose doth he produce that ejaculation Age Domine fac excita revoca nos accende ac rape c. for may not men pray for the exciting assisting and comforting Grace of God without supposing Ecstasies and Raptures and immediate Revelations But he was yet farther of when he brought that place to prove these extraordinary favours from God Lux es tu permanens quam de omnibus consulebam c. which if he had looked on the beginning of the Chapter he would have found to be an Address to Truth Ubi non mecum ambulasti veritas docens quid caveam quid appetam c. And doth O. N. think that there is such a Mystical Union between the Soul and Truth as to deprive men of the use of their Reason and Understanding but I am tired with these impertinencies yet we must have more of them For because S. Austin in describing the depth of his meditation concerning God and himself doth mention that by the eye of his mind he saw an immutable light very far above it and by this reflection he became as certain of what he only understood as if he had heard it in his heart therefore this place serves to prove no less than the fund of the soul and Gods internal speech to the soul and what not I expect next that De's Cartes his Method and Metaphysical Meditations should be brought to justifie Mystical Divinity â—or they altogether serve as well for it And cannot S. Austin express the profound meditation which he and his Mother Monica had concerning the blessed state of souls in Heaven and the ardent desire they had of being there and the Ioy they found in the thoughts of it without falling into the unintelligible Canting of the Mystical Divines God forbid that I should ever call the Discourses or Desires or joyful thoughts of the happiness of Heaven by the name of Canting that were indeed to be impious and prophane but what is all this to a perfect and immediate union with God in the pure fund of the Spirit in this present state a Union which supposes a cessation of Reason and Discourse No such thing was in the least thought of by S. Austin who was too great a Philosopher to suppose Contemplation in this life without any act of Reasoning or Discourse In his Book de quantitate animae he describes the several steps of the soul and the highest of all he places in the contemplation of God as the Supream Truth and declares that he could not express the Ioyes which did attend the fruition of the true and chief Good But great and â—â—â—nparable minds have expressed these â—â—ings as far as they thought them fit to be expressed which we believe to have seen and still to see those things By which it is plain he speaks of the Ioys â—f another World and not of any Mystical and passive Unions in this and afterwards he speaks of the imperfection of this contemplation here and that therefore death will be desirable because those things will then be taken away which now hinder the whole Soul from fixing upon whole Truth In his Book de Moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae he speaks of the Egyptian Hermites spending their life in contemplation without mentioning any Raptures and Ecstasies they had and although he doth plead for their life supposing the usefulness of their prayers to others yet he doth not dissemble that their manner of living was displeasing to some and afterwards saith himself that the Vertue of those who conversed with mankind deserved greater admiration and praise such as the Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Christian Church But although S. Austin doth not yet O. N. saith that Cassian doth mention the frequent raptures and ecstasies of these Egyptian Hermits but of all sorts of persons those who lead an Eremitical life are least fit to be produced because all those who have written on this subject in the Roman Church do say that the illusions of the Devil may be so like divine Raptures that there is a necessity of a great deal of Judgement and Skill to be able to put a difference between them and that none ought to be allowed but such as have been approved by discreet Persons but in the case of these Hermites we may have just reason upon their own Rules to suspect them having been never brought under a sufficient Rule of tryal If Persons may be deceived themselves in judging natural distempers and Satanical illusions for divine raptures and visions then we have no reason to rely on the single Testimonies of such Eremitical Persons who have no witnesses of their actions What know we what sort of Persons Abbot Iohn and Abbot Isaac were in the Deserts of Aegypt we have only their single Testimonies in Cassian and his single word that they said such things to him § 9. But to take off the force of these and such like Instances I shall consider the Rules laid down by their own Writers concerning these things and from thence shew what grounds we have not to rely on the Instances produced by them concerning Visions and Raptures and Ecstasies and Revelations 1. They consess that the natural force and power of Imagination will in some tempers produce all the same symptoms and appearances both to themselves and others which there are in supernatural elevations So Cardinal Bona who very lately and with the best Judgement hath collected the Rules of their Writers upon this subject freely acknowledgeth not only that Ecstasies may be caused by natural diseases of which Galen gives an instance in a Schoolfellow of his and Fernelius and Sennertus many others but by the meer force of Imagination by which the animal spirits flowing in greater quantities to the brain do thereby hinder the external operations of the senses so that the person under it continues without sense or motion and in that condition fancies an extraordinary presence of that object which the imagination was fixed upon And the more intense this imagination is the greater flux of Spirits is made to the brain and so the Ecstasie continues so much the longer especially where the Spirits are more thick and melancholy and consequently not so easily dissipated So Paulus Zacchias saith that we are not to conclude an ecstasie to be supernatural because it ariseth from the contemplation of supernatural things for the Imagination being fixed upon divine things will have the same effects that it would have upon other things Thence saith he such persons do really think as much as men do in dreams that they are present at that time with Angels or Saints and have conferences with them or that they see and enjoy God or imagine themselves to be
Monks with a Superiour over them which Gregory mentions long before he takes notice of any Rule made by him and Angâ—lus de Nâ—ce the present or late Abbâ—t of Cassino consesies that he did not make his Rule till a little before his death and that at the beginning he had not the least thought of making any Rules for the Order of Monks but being grown old by lâ—ng experience and observation and comparing of former Rules he drew up those which go under his name which received no Authority from him that made them but depended upon the free consent of those who submitted themselves unto them and therefore he compares them to the Laâ—s of Solon or the Decemviri than which nothing can be said more dâ—structive to the pictence of divine inspiration for supposing these Rules were dictated by the Holy Ghost their obligatory power would not depend upon the consent of persons but the Divine Authority of him that delivered them Holsienius thinks that S. Benedict made his Rule only for his own Monastery at Cassâ—â—o never intending it for any universal Rule but whether he did or no it was very little known for some time after his death for in an antient Copy of it in the Vatican Library there is a short preface before it wherein we find that it is called latens â—pus a work that lay hid and that it was first brought to light by Simplicius which is said likewise by Sigebert Simplicius discipulus ejus latens Magistri opus publicavit If this Rule came by divine inspiration as the Pope and Mr. Crâ—ssy say what they believe I know not how came it to be concealed by Benâ—dict himself was that a thing befitting an inspiâ—ed person to wrap up such a divine Talent in a napkin and to hide it under ground Angelus de Nuce a man much concerned to find out the truth in these things saith that S. Benedict delivered his Rulâ— but a few Months before his death to S. Maurus then going into France and that before this there is not a word said of it and that there were no copies then extant at all of it that being the Original given to S. Maurus written with his own hand This Simplicius accompanied Maurus into France and there stayed till his death and two years after which was in all forty three years and then he together with Faustus returned to their Brethren in Italy â—nd then he made known the Benedictin Rule which had been hitherto concealed So that in the space of forty three years after Benedicts death there was nothing like an acknowledgement made even in the parts of Italy of any such Rule at all as the Bâ—nedictin much less that it came by divine inspiration § 10. But to shew the universal reception of this Rule Mr. Cressy produces the confirmation of it extant in the Monastery of Sublac by Gregory wherein he mentions not only his reading but confirming it in a holy Synod and commands the observation of it through several parts of Italy and wheresoever the Latin Tongue is spoken and that whosoever shall come to the Grace of coâ—version should most diligently observe it even to the end of the World This I confess is to the purpose and so much that I think all that are not of the Benedictin Order in the Roman Church are concerned to answer it But we need not take much pains to discover the fraud of this for Gallonius in his Vindication of Baronius against the Bendictins hath given several proofs of the forgery of it not only by the falseness of the date by comparing it with Gregories Epistles but because therein Iohannes Albanensis Episcopus subscribes whereas in the true Copies of the Roman Synod at that time it is Homobonus Albanensis and because the custom of publishing decrees by the Bishop who was the Bibliothecarius was much later than that time for Gregory made Use only of his Notary for for that purpose And this is so much more probable to be a meer forgery of the Monks since that hath been alwayes their particular knack in what concerns the honour of their Order as the same Aâ—thor hath shewed in many examples relating to our present purpose For he hath fully proved several of the pretended priviledges of the Benâ—dictins to be gross forgeries as likewise the ample Donations of Gordianus and Tertullus and the confirmation of the Letter by Iustinian the Bull of Pope Zacharie and his Epistle to Petronax the Epistle of Gregory to Bonitus and that they had rased several words out of a Bull of Bâ—niface the fourth on purpose that Gregory the Great might appear to have been of the Benedictin Order as he makes it evident by comparing several Copies of the said Bull. Have we not then great reason to trust these men in what concerns the honour of their Order who make no conscience of forging donations or priviledges or decrees that make for them or of rasing out what makes against them and this conâ—eâ—ed by men of their own Church and the â—acts so notorious that Gallonius saith Cardinal Baronius was ashamed of themâ— they were such gross impostures and he adâ—s himself that had it not been for their vehement provocations he would not have eâ—posed such things to the World The like impostures to these have been discovered by others of the Roman Church who were men of more integrity than either to deâ—end or desâ—emble the shameless forgeries of the Monks as any one may easily satisfie himself by the very many Discourses published by Ioh. Launoy to that purpose But I need not go from my present business the same Gallâ—nius hath proved the Epistle of the Abbâ—t of S. Hâ—noratus to Simplicius Aâ—bot of Cassinum to be of the same stamp whereâ—n it is said that all the Monasteries of Iâ—â—ly had then embraced the Benedictin Rule of which whosoever was the Author Gallâ—nius saith he deserved to be punished as one Ciâ—â—arellus at Rome was who was hanged and his body burned for forging old Writings it is pitty that all who have been equally guilty there have not suffered in the same kind We do not find then any evidence great enough to shew that the Benedictin Rule was either delivered at first as from divine Inspiration or believed to be so in those parts of Italy where it was first known or that those of the Monastick Order did think themselves obliged to embrace it S. Benedict a little before his death sent Maurus and his companions into France to propagate his Rule there and because Mr. Cressy quotes a Synod about A. D. 874. acknowledging S. Benedict to be inspired by the Holy Ghost I â—hall briefly give an account of the entertainment the Benedictin Rule met with in those parts Before the coming of Maurus into France there were several Monastick Rules â—ell known there the Rule of S. Basil and the Egyptian Rules are mentioned by their eldest Historians
was in defence of these Which I shall the rather do since I find his Life very lately published in French with a high character of him and dedicated to the King of France but especially because I find that those among us of that Religion who disown Gregory the sevenths principles are willing to believe him a Martyr upon other grounds viz. that his quarrel with the King was upon the account of the antient Municipal Laws of England which had a respect to the immunities of Clergie-men I shall therefore prove 1. That the matters in Dispute between the King and Becket were the very same that Gregory the seventh and his successors contended about with Christian Princes 2. That the pleas made use of by Becket and his party were no other than those which Gregory the seventh and his successors used so that they had no relation at all to the Municipal Laws but to the controversie then on Foot between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power In both which I hope to make some passages clearer than they have yet been having had the advantage of perusing several MSS. relating to this matter and especially that Volume of Epistles which Baronius accounts an unvaluable Treasure and as far as I can perceive the Cotton MS. is more compleat than the Vatican which Baronius made use of 1. For the matters in Dispute between them The whole controversie might be reduced to two heads 1. Whether Ecclesiastical Persons were unaccountable to the Civil Power for any misdemeanours committed by them 2. Whether the Pope had the Soveraign Power over Princes and all under them so that he might contradict the Kings Laws and Customs and command his Subjects against his consent to come to him and whether the Kings Subjects in such cases were not bound to obey the Pope let the King command what he please These in truth were the points in debate and the most weighty particulars in the Customs of Clarendon were but as so many branches of these In that Copy of them which is extant in the Cotton MS. and was drawn up by the Kings own Order the occasion of them is set down to have been the differences which had happened between the Clergie and the Kings Iustices and the Barons of the Kingdom about the Customs and Dignities of the Crown the most considerable of those which the Pope condemned were concerning 1. The Tryal of Titles of Advowsons and Presentations in the Kings Courts 2. The Tryal of Clergie-men before the Kings Iudges and the Churches not defending them after conviction or confession 3. That neither Archbishops Bishops or others should go out of the Kingdom without the Kings consent and giving security to the King that in going staying or returning they will do nothing to the prejudice either of the King or Kingdom 4. The profits of Ecclesiastical Courts upon absolutions for they demanded not barely personal security of all excommunicated persons to stand to the Churches judgements but Vadium ad remanens as the Law term was then which implyes real security or so much money laid down which was to come to the Court if they did not perform the conditions expressed For it was one of the things the Kings Ambassadour complained of to his Mother the Empress that the matters in controversie were not things of advantage to mens souls but to their own purses and that the Faults of Offenders were not punished in the Ecclesiastical Courts by the injoyning of Penance but by the giving of money And the Empress her self in her discourse with Nicholas de Monte the Archbishops Friend insisted on these pecuniary mulcts for sins as one of the great occasions of the troubles which made people suspect this pretence of Ecclesiastical Liberty to be only a cloak for their own profits But however the good Pope whether he understood this Vadium ad remanens or no at all adventures condemned it For what should the Court of Rome do without exchanging Money for Sins 5. That no Person who held of the King in capite or belonged to him should be excommunicated or have his Land interdicted without making the King acquainted with it or his Iustice in his absence 6. That in matters of Appeal they were to proceed from the Arch-deacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Arch-bishop and from thence to the King and not to proceed further without his express leave These were the main things in dispute and what do they all amount to but the very same Rights of the Crown which the Kings predecessors did insist upon and what could be the sense of Becket in opposing them but that Clergie-men were not accountable for their Faults to the Civil Power and in case of the Popes command whether upon appeal or otherwise Bishops and others were to go to his Court in spight of the King as Anselm and Theobald had done before It is agreed by Baronius himself that the quarrel brake out upon the Arch-bishops denying to deliver up the Clergie-man that was accused and convicted of Murder after Ecclesiastical Censure to the Secular Power which the King earnestly desired and Becket as peremptorily denyed And upon what principle could this be done but the highest pretence of Ecclesiastical Liberty that ever Gregory the seventh or any other asserted And it is plain by this that the King did not deny the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction nor hindered the proper Censures of the Church upon offenders but the Question was meerly this Whether Ecclesiastical persons having committed crimes against the publick peace were only to be punished with Ecclesiastical Censures and never to be delivered over to Civil Iustice Which was the main hinge of the Cause and which Becket stood to to the last And that this was the true State of the Controversie appears by the representation made of it to Alexander the third by the whole Clergie of the Province of Canterbury who confess that the peace of the Kingdom was very much disturbed by the insolence and crimes of some of the Clergie for upon the account of this exemption any Villains were safe if they could but get into any kind of Orders the King for the safety of his people pressed the Bishops after their Censures to give such guilty persons up to the Laws because bare degrading was by no means sufficient punishment for wilful murder which was all the Church censures reached to This all the Bishops at first opposed as derogatory to the Churches Liberty but afterwards Becket excepted the rest saw a necessity of yielding at present for as they confess themselves this liberty was extended even to a Lector or Acolythus and the Empress Matildis said that the Bishops gave orders very loosely without titles by which we may easily imagine what a miserable state the whole Kingdom might be in if these things were suffered So that we see the plea insisted upon at the beginning of the quarrell was that no persons in any Ecclesiastical
declared by the Laws to be the True which is established by them Now if a party appears active and dangerous whose Principles are destructive to the Religion established by Law I appeal to any man of common sense whether it be sufficient ground for the Toleration of it that one objection is taken off when the other remains in its fuil force That which is then to be considered in this case is whether such a party which is dangerous without Toleration will grow less dangerous by it which I think needs no great consideration and it will require as little to shew the danger that will come to the Established Religion by a Toleration of Popery not only by the diligence industry and number of the Priests who will be glad to make new Converts to gain new Residences they being at present so much over-stocked besides their desires to approve themselves to the Court of Rome for preferments by their activity and telling brave stories beyond Seas of their exploits against hereticks as a late Miles Gloriosus among them hath done how many Legions of Hereticks they have blown away by the Power of Principles and Demonstrations but by the obligation that lyes upon them that receive preferments from Rome to persecute Hereticks Schismaticks and Rebels to the Pope to their uttermost which is expressed in the Oath they take to the Pope as appears by the Pontifical so that these men must either be perjured or persecute when it lyes in their Power And can any Nation in the World think it Wise or Safe to give Toleration to Wolfs among Sheep to those that have solemnly sworn to persecute to their power all that own the Established Religion and that look upon all such as in a damned condition that do not submit to their Church Till they abate of their monstrous uncharitableness till they renounce their Oaths to the Pope till they can give good security of their quiet behaviour in not seducing others what pretence can there be for their being allowed a free exercise of their Religion supposing they should take the Oath of Allegiance But as to their dignified Clergy I mean such of his Majesties Subjects whom the Pope hath taken upon him to make Bishops without his consent which was not suffered by some Princes even in times of Popery it ought farther to be considered what security any following Oath can give as to those that have taken a former Oath of Allegiance to the Pope as I have already proved it to be as much as King Iohn's was upon the Resignation of his Crown nay yet farther they are bound now by that Oath to defend all those Provisions and Reservations and Apostolical Mandates which were accounted the intolerable grievances of this Nation long before the Reformation But why may they not enjoy equal liberty with the Sectaries I am not pleading the Sectaries Cause neither would others plead it now but for a farther end nor would I extenuate the guilt of their Separation but they are blind that do not see the difference between the parties if not as to number yet as to interest forreign dependence and danger to the Church of England for surely a man is not in so much danger of being stung to death by Gnats as being poisoned by Vipers I mean in respect of the avowed principle of Persecuting all dissenters in the Roman Church which it were easie to manifest not only from our domestick story and the entertainment in Queen Maries dayes and from the History of the Inquisition abroad but from the Cabal at the Council of Trent between the Popes Legats and the Embassadours of Catholick Princes about the utter extirpation of the Protestant Religion and the defigns that were carried on in prosecution of this in most parts of Europe especially in Germany Flanders and France but I shall not meddle with the secret Intrigues but the open and avowed principles In France Claudius de Sainctes published a Book against Toleration A. D. 1561. wherein he pleads with all his strength for the utter extirpation of Protestants the like did Iacobus Pamelius in Flanders and both of them answer all the common and popular arguments now brought for Toleration the same did Scioppius in Germany and we all know what the dreadful consequences were in all those places But this is a subject too large to enter upon now For my part I am no Friend to Sanguinary Laws on the account of Religion and if the Wisdom of our Law-makers should think fit to change that popular way of publick suffering which the sufferers would have still believed to be for Religion into a more effectual course of suppressing the growth of a party so dangerous to our established Religion I should more rejoice it may be therein than those who are more concerned in it Provided that the pretence of making new Laws more accommodate to our present State be not carried on meerly with the design of leaving our Church without any security by Law at all against so violent and dangerous a party for it is a much easier matter to repeal old Laws than to make new ones And if the objection against the old Laws be that they are not executed it ought to be considered whether the same objection will not lye against others unless they be such Laws as will execute themselves and we have little Reason to believe that they who bid difiance to our present Laws and make sport with Proclamations will be perswaded by gentler means to obey others And is such an affront to Laws a sufficient Motive to Lenity And we have good ground to think that that they look upon all our Laws whatever they be as things of no force at all upon their Consciences as being null in themselves because they are contrary to the Popes Authority and the Constitutions of their Church And I believe if our modern Papists were pressed home the generality of those who are obnoxious to the Poenal Laws would not acknowledge those Ancient Rights of the Crown which were challenged by William the Conquerour William Rufus Henry the first Henry the second before his submission to the Pope and afterwards by Edward the first and Edward the third viz. No exercise of any forreign jurisdiction here without the Kings consent no liberty of going out of the Kingdom though upon the Popes Command without the Kings leave and while they allow this Power to the Pope to command his Majesties Subjects they make him Soveraign over them and make them more fearful of disclaiming his Power No Decrees of Popes or Bulls to be received without the Kings approbation No Bishops to be made by Papal Provisions out of the plenitude of his Power c. Those who will not reject these which were challenged by the Kings of England long before the Reformation as their ancient and undoubted Rights with what face can they plead for the Repeal of the Poenal Laws when the ancient Law of